Towards an intersectional model of desistance for black offenders

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Glynn

Purpose – Desistance is increasingly conceptualised as a theoretical construct which is used to explain how offenders orient themselves away from committing crimes. Previous studies suggest that successful desistance occurs due to one or a number of factors. These factors include things such as: faith (Giordano et al., 2007); a rite of passage (Maruna, 2010); gender (Giordano et al., 2002); psychosocial processes (Healey, 2010); personal and social circumstances which are space and place specific (Flynn, 2010); ethnicity and faith (Calverley, 2013); race and racialisation (Glynn, 2014). However, to date there has been little work undertaken to examine how notions of “intersectionality” may be a more appropriate theoretical lens through which to locate and contextualise the understandings of desistance when looking at marginalised populations such as black offenders. Intersectionality is an understanding of human beings as shaped by the interaction of different social locations. These interactions occur within a context of connected systems and structure of power. Through such processes independent forms of privilege and oppression are created. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – The paper concludes with a perspective that envisions moving towards an “intersectional model of desistance for marginalised groups such as black offenders”. Findings – It is the author’s view that the development of a intersectional model of desistance for black offenders may begin a dialogue that further pushes the study of re-entry and desistance into an area that transcends the criminal justice system and locates itself firmly within the civil and human rights of black offenders, and indeed, offenders as a whole. It is hoped that by using intersectional approaches when conducting inquiries we will be able to lead towards eradicating multiple oppressions faced by so many sections of the offender populations and the communities they come from. Research limitations/implications – This paper is positional inasmuch as it attempts to establish some, principled arguments to advance the study of desistance. Therefore, a testing of the views expressed in the paper is required. Practical implications – It is the author’s contention that for those black offenders who desire to quit crime, there needs to be networks and activities that not only support their desire to desist, but a radical reframing of how interlocking oppressions that render them subordinate must become a key driver for the desistance project. How can/do black offenders acquire and tell their own authentic narrative when it has been shaped by a history of oppression? It is therefore right to assume that meaningful reintegration of black offenders back into communities requires a deeper commitment to culturally competent rehabilitative processes, that could lead towards a culture of desistance. Social implications – An “Intersectional Model of Desistance” also needs to challenge some white criminologists’ claims by validating the black contribution to criminological theorising. This position should embrace and include perspectives which unify theoretical positions that validate interlocking oppressions; racism, poverty, ethno-cultural group membership, etc., where the broader distribution of opportunities across society, and the ability to recognise them as such as opportunities for black men to desist are taken into consideration. As part of a process of rehabilitation, black offenders need to be engaged with intersectional institutional processes and practices that will lead to a challenge of their criminal values and behaviour, designed to increase their capacity to consider desistance. It is hoped that by using intersectional approaches when conducting inquiries we will be able to eradicate multiple oppressions faced by so many sections of the offender populations and the communities they come from. Originality/value – Understanding how the experiences of black offenders, are impacted by examining interlocking oppressions of criminal justice processes; police, courts, incarceration, probation, etc., would critically assess how these intersections enhances or impedes the desistance trajectories of black offenders, in relation to offenders as a whole. As much of black offender lived reality centres on having to contend, not just with criminal justice process, but the additional oppression of racialisation, the outcomes become more heavily context dependent and driven.

Prejudice ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 135-154
Author(s):  
Endre Begby

This chapter addresses recent concerns about “algorithmic bias,” specifically in the context of the criminal justice process. Starting from a recent controversy about the use of “automated risk assessment tools” in criminal sentencing and parole hearings, where evidence suggests that such tools effectively discriminate against minority defendants, this chapter argues that the problem here has nothing in particular to do with algorithm-assisted reasoning, nor is it in any clear sense a case of epistemic bias. Rather, given the data set that we are given to work with, there is reason to think that no improvement to our epistemic routines would deliver significantly better results. Instead, the bias is effectively encoded into the data set itself, via a long history of institutionalized racism. This suggests a different diagnosis of the problem: in deeply divided societies, there may just be no way to simultaneously satisfy our moral ideals and our epistemic ideals.


2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-64
Author(s):  
Irene Afful ◽  
Alexander Williams

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore crisis management in terms of the spiritual aspects of victim recovery. The paper focuses, in particular, on victims of serious crime. Design/methodology/approach – The paper reviews the available literature on crisis management, serious crime, spirituality and pastoral support to determine their impact on trauma recovery. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted with a number of police chaplains and a hospital chaplain, in addition to police family liaison officers and witness care officers, who have in-depth involvement with victims of serious crime, to explore the support available and identify gaps against existing theory. Findings – Spiritual/pastoral support is available to police officers in the form of police chaplains. Their support is reported to be valuable in the crisis recovery process. Hospital patients report such support as integral to mental and emotional well-being and recovery. Victims of serious crime are not offered such pastoral services through the criminal justice system, though other more practical needs are provided for. This gap could have implications for the effectiveness of the criminal justice process. Research limitations/implications – The research is an exploratory study and seeks to open up debate in this arena. The research is localised to a specific region and may not generalise nationally/internationally. Practical implications – The paper evaluates the role and import of spiritual support in trauma recovery, makes a number of recommendations to plug the gap in current provision to victims of serious crime and suggests directions for further research in this area. Social implications – There are limited social implications. Originality/value – There has been very limited research conducted in this specific area and this paper seeks to redress this gap and suggests opportunities for further research to enhance victim crisis recovery and participation in the criminal justice process.


1984 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 568-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen Steinberg

Despite the general assumption that the gates of the American criminal justice process have always been guarded by public prosecutors, an examination of the case law and social history of criminal prosecution suggests a much more complex transformation of American criminal justice from an eighteenth and early ninteenth century system dominated by private prosecution. In Philadelphia, this system of private prosecution kept most of the power over the disposition of a criminal case in the hands of the private litigants and petty magistrates, generated a highly articulated legal culture, and resulted in relatively few jury trials. The assumption of power by the district attorney during the last third of the nineteenth century emerged from the internal contradictions of this system, but it amounted to a transformation from one form of nontrial descretionary justice to another.


2020 ◽  
pp. 293-314
Author(s):  
Alexandra L. Cox ◽  
Reginald Dwayne Betts

In the US criminal justice system, sentencing determinations are frequently divorced from the social history of the individual accused of a crime and are rarely informed by our empirical knowledge about what forces may lead an individual to desist from offending. Yet, this knowledge can help drive key decisions to grant mercy to individuals at all stages of the criminal justice process, from plea to parole. This chapter argues that comprehensive life histories about individuals accused of crimes can shape sentencing practices in a way that facilitates the achievement of social justice through the attention to the ultimate reintegration of the person at the heart of the sentence.


2002 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Duff

On 1 April 1996, a rather odd provision was introduced into the Scottish criminal justice process, namely a duty on both prosecution and defence to try to agree uncontroversial evidence in advance of criminal trial.1 As far as the writer is aware, such a provision is unique, although the philosophy underlying its introduction is not totally alien to inquisitorial systems of criminal justice.2 What is particularly peculiar about this duty is that there is no sanction for a failure, however unreasonable, to agree uncontroversial evidence.3 The lack of a sanction resulted from a concern that the creation of any penalty would impinge unjustifiably upon the rights of the accused. The intention in this article is to explore in detail the relationship between the duty to agree uncontroversial evidence and the position of the accused, and to suggest that the imposition of a sanction for a breach of this duty is not as problematic as was thought by those responsible for the legislation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document