Using positive criminological theory (Good Lives Mode, Restorative Justice, Therapeutic Community Model, and Desistance), critically discuss the mechanisms that explain individuals’ movement away from crime.

Essay Vignettes and essay guidance

Select only one story (below) for the assignment. Essay structure and guidance can be found at the end of this document.

Essay question (2500 words): Using positive criminological theory (Good Lives Mode, Restorative Justice, Therapeutic Community Model, and Desistance), critically discuss the mechanisms that explain individuals’ movement away from crime.

Make sure that you Compare the utility of the theories used (Good Lives Mode, Restorative Justice, or the Therapeutic Community Model) to risk-based approaches (such as the Risk-Needs-Responsivity Model, Stigmatising approaches, or other labelling/retributive approaches).

You do not need to utilise all theories on the module.

Vignette 1.

Mark is a 35-year-old man who has spent a significant portion of his life incarcerated due to repeated involvement in child sexual offending. His offending began at age 19, when he was first convicted of sexual abuse. After his conviction, Mark spent several years in prison, where he underwent therapy and participated in rehabilitation programs. At age 28, he was convicted again for similar offences. This time, he was placed in a Therapeutic Community (TC) for 20 months, a rehabilitation programme designed to support long-term behavioural change and reintegration into society.

Mark had a challenging childhood, marked by neglect and emotional abuse, which deeply impacted his sense of self-worth. He grew up in an environment where his emotional needs were unmet, and he often felt powerless. These early experiences contributed to Mark developing maladaptive coping mechanisms, including criminal behaviour. His first criminal offence was an attempt to regain control and power in his otherwise powerless life.

During his time in the TC, Mark participated in group therapy, peer support sessions, and engaged with a therapeutic community where members held each other accountable. Although his time in the TC was relatively short (20 months), it was pivotal for Mark’s journey of desistance.

Mark’s journey toward desistance did not happen overnight, but it was shaped by several key experiences during his time in the TC. Initially, Mark struggled with accepting responsibility for his actions and was unsure if true change was possible. However, over the course of his 20 months in the TC, he began to shift his mindset. The TC emphasised personal reflection and self-responsibility, which helped Mark to confront the underlying causes of his offending. He began to question the identity he had built around his criminal actions and started to see himself as more than his past.

A crucial turning point came when Mark participated in group therapy sessions, where he could hear the stories of others who had also committed serious offences. Through these sessions, Mark began to realize that many people, including himself, had experienced deep emotional trauma in their lives. This shared vulnerability allowed Mark to open up about his own past and recognise the emotional void he had been attempting to fill through offending.

Mark’s participation in the democratic principles of the TC—where decisions were made collaboratively, and all members had a voice—was another transformative element. This approach helped him experience a sense of agency and control over his own life decisions, which contrasted with the powerlessness he felt during his childhood and his criminal actions. These democratic experiences allowed Mark to rebuild his sense of self-worth and recognise that he had the capacity to live a life free from crime.

Upon his release after 1.5 years in the TC, Mark faced the challenge of reintegrating into society. His criminal history made it difficult to find stable employment and reconnect with family and friends. However, Mark was determined to continue his journey of desistance. With the support of his probation officer, he managed to find a job at a community-based organisation that worked with victims of child abuse. In this role, Mark assisted with administrative tasks and helped organise workshops for families affected by abuse, providing resources and support for survivors. He never worked face to face with the victims and his office was in fact in a different location to operations. The role not only helped him feel a sense of purpose, but it also gave him a way to make amends for his past, he started to feel good about himself although he was not quite sure why that was the case.

He then took on a mentorship role within the community, where he offered support to others who were facing similar challenges. By helping others who had experienced trauma and adversity, Mark felt that he could make amends for his past actions and contribute positively to society.

However, Mark still faced ongoing risks associated with his past behaviour. He was tempted to reconnect with old criminal peers, which could potentially jeopardize his progress. These dynamic risks posed a challenge, but Mark took steps to avoid old environments and made a conscious effort to limit his contact with individuals who might encourage him to return to criminal behaviour. He continued to rely on his support group and probation officer for guidance, regularly reflecting on his progress and setting new personal goals.

Mark’s ongoing desistance process involved continued social support, particularly from his peer support group and the community where he volunteered. The support Mark received, combined with his own internal motivation to change, enabled him to reduce the influence of dynamic risks and continue his path toward a crime-free life.

Vignette 2.

James, a career criminal in his early 30s, had spent the majority of his life engaging in robberies, ranging from bank heists to street-level muggings. The thrill of the crime, combined with the financial rewards, kept him entrenched in criminality. Throughout his criminal career, James was primarily driven by a desire for power, control, and material gain, often resorting to violence to achieve these ends. His social circle was made up of other criminals, which further reinforced his belief that crime was the only means of survival.

However, after a particularly brutal robbery, James was arrested and sentenced to a lengthy prison term. During his time in prison, James hit what could be described as his lowest point. He received the devastating news that his younger brother, who had been struggling with addiction, had passed away from an overdose. James had been unable to see or speak to him for months due to his imprisonment. The death of his brother was a wake-up call, forcing James to confront the emotional toll his lifestyle had taken on both him and his family. The realisation that his actions had distanced him from his loved ones left him filled with guilt and regret.

This loss triggered a shift in James. He began to realise that his criminal lifestyle, built on the pursuit of power and control, had isolated him from meaningful relationships and caused him immense personal pain. The death of his brother made him reflect on how his choices had led him to a life of destruction and left him with little connection to others.

One significant turning point came when James was assigned a probation officer, Mark, who treated him with respect and compassion. Mark`s approach was a stark contrast to the dismissive and authoritarian figures James had previously encountered in the system. Mark saw James as someone capable of change, not just a criminal. Their conversations helped James reflect on the choices he had made and the harm his actions had caused. This allowed him to acknowledge the deeper emotional struggles that had driven him to commit crime.

While still in prison, James was encouraged to participate in a restorative justice programme. Initially hesitant, he gradually began to understand the impact his crimes had on others. During restorative justice meetings, James listened to victims speak about the harm they had suffered. He started to recognise that his need for power and control had been a way to mask his own feelings of inadequacy and vulnerability, and that his actions had lasting effects beyond the immediate material gains.

After serving 18 months, James was released on parole. With the support of Mark and his probation team, James found a job as a community outreach worker for a local charity focused on helping at-risk youth avoid criminal behaviour. This role provided him with a sense of purpose that he had never experienced before. Through mentoring young people, James began to realise the importance of giving back to society, using his experiences to prevent others from making the same mistakes he had made. The job allowed him to feel more competent and responsible, meeting needs he had tried to fulfil through crime in the past.

Importantly, upon his release, James made a point of cutting ties with his old criminal associates. He communicated openly with them, explaining that he was no longer part of that life. He had nothing to offer them anymore, as he had found a new path focused on prosocial goals. James made it clear that he was no longer interested in the material rewards of crime, and that his commitment was now to positive change and giving back to his community. While some of his old associates dismissed him, others respected his decision and even expressed admiration for his determination to change. This act of distancing himself from his former life marked a critical point in his desistance journey.

In his work with at-risk youth, James shared his own life experiences, using his past mistakes to help guide others away from crime. As he mentored the young people, James could empathise with their struggles and provide them with a sense of hope. By showing them that change was possible, he was able to help them avoid the destructive paths he had once walked. His own recovery, combined with his deep understanding of the challenges they faced, made him an effective mentor and advocate for change.

The restorative justice process and his work at the charity played a crucial role in James` journey of transformation. He took responsibility for his past actions and focused on making amends—not just through his work, but by living a life that no longer depended on crime. His relationship with Mark became a symbol of the support and empathy he had been missing in his life. For the first time, he was able to connect with others in a way that wasn’t based on fear, manipulation, or criminal gain, but on mutual respect and shared values.

Essay Structure (guidance).

1. Introduction (250 words)

Introduce the topic: Briefly explain the focus of the essay, highlighting the use of positive criminological theories (such as the Good Lives Model, Restorative Justice, Therapeutic Community Model, and Desistance).

Introduce the chosen case study (either Mark or James) that will be used throughout the essay. Highlighting the key issues that will be explored.

State the aim of the essay (i.e., to explore and critically analyse the mechanisms that explain desistance from crime using the positive criminological theories mentioned, comparing them to risk-based approaches).

Briefly outline how the essay will be structured (theories will be applied to the case study).

2. Main Body (2000 words)

Describe the theory used by reference to appropriate citation. First, describe the theory you are using, outlining its key concepts and main ideas. Then, apply the theory to specific examples from the case study, explaining how it helps to understand the individual`s behaviour or change.

For example, if the individual in your case study was driven by a need for control or relatedness, explain how this can be seen in their criminal behaviour.

Evaluate the usefulness of the theory. This means that you should not only explain how well the chosen theory helps to explain what happened in your case study but also draw on existing literature to assess how effective or useful that approach has been found by other researchers.

If you choose to use more than one theory, move on to the second theory, following a similar structure. You can also link your discussion to the concept of Desistance to make broader connections (no needs to include long definitions of the concept).

3. Conclusion (250 words)

Reiterate the main points of the essay.

FAQ:

What is meant by "positive criminological theory"?

Positive criminological theories focus on how individuals can move away from crime by addressing their needs in prosocial ways, rather than just managing risk factors. The theories we are discussing (e.g., Good Lives Model, Restorative Justice, Therapeutic Community Model) aim to explain how offenders can reintegrate into society and live fulfilling lives without resorting to criminal behaviour.

Can I use more than one theory in my essay?

Yes, you can choose to use more than one theory to explain desistance in your chosen case study. If you do, ensure that each theory is clearly described and applied to the case study. You should also critically evaluate each theory’s effectiveness in explaining the individual`s movement away from crime. Ideally you compare its usefulness to Risk Based Approaches (such as the RNR)

Do I have to use all the theories mentioned in the guidance?

No, you don’t need to use all of them. You can focus on one or two theories (e.g., Good Lives Model or Restorative Justice). Select the theory or theories that you believe are most relevant to your case study and that best explain the individual’s movement away from crime.

What is the Desistance Paradigm and why should I include it in my essay?

The Desistance Paradigm focuses on how individuals stop committing crimes over time. It emphasises factors like identity change, prosocial relationships, and personal growth. You can link the concept of desistance to any of the theories you choose to use in your essay, as it helps provide a broader understanding of the process of moving away from crime.

Do I need to include a specific case study, or can I choose my own?

The case study should be one of the two provided examples (e.g., James, the career criminal). You should use the provided case studies to illustrate your application of the theory, but you can feel free to choose a different case if it is relevant to the theory.

How many references should I use? 

I am not able to provide a specific number but there is an expectation that you will engage with independent research and utilise a range of peer-reviewed academic journals and books some of which are more recent to showcase understanding of contemporary theory and application of knowledge.

Should I reference in Harvard or APA

I am fine with either of these as long as you utilise it consistently across the essay

Can I write in first person?

You may well do that, but I am not sure how well it works when describing theory. It could work in the introduction/conclusion