The word “desistance” means the act or process of ceasing, especially from criminal or antisocial behavior (Dictionary.com). This word is unique because it encompasses not only the legal side but also the personal journey individuals go through to move away from their past behaviors, shed the patterns and choices that once defined them, and embrace a transformative process toward growth, accountability, and reintegration into society.

I reached out to Professor Kazemian, who is very knowledgeable about this topic, and asked her some related questions. Please note that the answers are written in my words; they are not direct quotes from the interview.

Q. How do monetary sanctions, such as court fines and fees, impact an individual’s ability to desist from crime, particularly when those sanctions perpetuate financial instability?

Monetary sanctions, even in seemingly small amounts, can profoundly impact an individual’s ability to desist from crime, especially for those already facing financial hardship. For individuals living paycheck to paycheck, these sanctions may represent an overwhelming burden, making basic necessities like food, housing, and transportation harder to secure. This financial strain often leads to a cycle of punishment that disproportionately penalizes individuals for their poverty rather than their actions.

Being unable to pay these fines can escalate into compounded penalties, including additional fees, warrants, and even incarceration. Such outcomes only deepen financial instability and perpetuate involvement with the criminal justice system. The psychological toll of these sanctions, coupled with systemic barriers to financial recovery, often leaves individuals with limited opportunities to reintegrate successfully into society, increasing their likelihood of reoffending.

Financial instability may punish individuals toward unlawful activities as a means of survival. Moreover, the criminal justice process itself can exacerbate these pressures. For instance, individuals who cannot afford bail often face pretrial detention, which research shows correlated with negative outcomes, such as higher rates of conviction for more severe crimes and longer prison terms. Repeating incarceration creates an environment where social networks are disrupted, housing is lost, and employment opportunities become even scarcer, further entrenching individuals in cycles of poverty and crime.

Q. What role do in-prison programs, such as education, literacy, and mental health programs, play in the desistance process?

In-prison programs play a critical role in facilitating desistance from crime by addressing root causes that contribute to criminal behavior and recidivism. These programs provide individuals with opportunities to acquire skills, develop self-awareness, and heal from trauma, providing them with the tools they need to successfully reintegrate into society.

Education and literacy programs offer tangible benefits, such as improving employability, which directly mitigates financial pressures that might lead to reoffending. Research consistently shows that incarcerated individuals who engage in educational programs are significantly less likely to return to prison than those who do not. Furthermore, mental health programs are essential for addressing deep-seated issues such as trauma - whether stemming from childhood or experienced within the prison environment. Effective mental health interventions provide coping mechanisms, emotional stability, and pathways to recovery, all of which are crucial for long-term desistance.

However, systemic challenges undermine the effectiveness of these programs. Overcrowding in prisons creates competition for limited resources, leaving many individuals without access to these vital services. Additionally, prisons often prioritize processing individuals for minor offenses over addressing the broader, systemic factors contributing to incarceration. This lack of focus on rehabilitation aggravates preexisting traumas and prevents meaningful participation in programs that could enable desistance.

Q. What role do stable relationships, such as family or mentorship, play in supporting desistance?

Stable relationships provide emotional support, motivation, and tangible resources. According to the social bonding theory, strong social bonds—such as those formed within families, friendships, and religious institutions—create commitments and attachments that discourage criminal behavior. These relationships serve as anchors, offering individuals a sense of purpose and belonging that promotes their reintegration into society.

Family relationships are particularly significant. For many, the presence of a spouse or children acts as a powerful motivator for change, especially when individuals feel a sense of responsibility toward their loved ones. Women who give birth often form strong emotional attachments to their children, which can create a strong commitment to change and reduce the likelihood of reoffending. Similarly, marriage and stable partnerships can provide structure and emotional grounding, though they are not without challenges; marriage problems can sometimes counteract the positive effects if not addressed.

Mentorship also plays a key role, especially when individuals lack familial support. A mentor can serve as a role model, helping guide someone through the challenges of reintegration by fostering accountability, providing guidance, and encouraging personal growth.

That said, the effectiveness of these relationships is contingent on the individual’s willingness and commitment to change. External support, while crucial, cannot solely drive desistance if the person does not actively engage in the process. While some individuals may find the strength to change independently, the stability and encouragement provided by meaningful relationships can significantly bolster their efforts to desist from crime and build a new life.