Embed Doc
Copy Link
Readcast
Collections

CommentGo Back

Download

0091-4169/09/9904-1103T

OURNAL OF

RIMINAL

RIMINOLOGY

Printed in U.S.A.

1103

CRIMINOLOGY

DESISTANCE AND THE “FEARED SELF”:TOWARD AN IDENTITY THEORY OFCRIMINAL DESISTANCE

RAY PATERNOSTER

∗

& SHAWN BUSHWAY

This Article develops both a framework for a theory of desistance fromcrime and an analytical strategy with which to examine desistance. Withrespect to the former, an identity theory of the desistance from crime that ismore cognitive and individualistic than some and more forward-lookingthan others is sketched out. This framework contributes to and complements existing theoretical arguments by building upon the work of others through integrating several diverse bodies of work that range fromsocial psychology to collective movements in sociology. In this framework,offenders have “working selves” as criminal offenders with a set of preferences and social networks consistent with that self. In addition to theworking self, or the self in the present, there is a future, or possible, self that consists both of desires as to what the person wishes or hopes tobecome (the positive possible self) and anxiety over what they fear they maybecome (the feared self). Persons are committed to their working self untilthey determine that the cost of this commitment is greater than the benefits. A perception that one may in fact turn out to become the feared self, a perception assisted by the linking of life failures, or what has been called the “crystallization of discontent,” provides the initial motivation to changethe self. This initial motivation brings with it a change in preferences and social networks that stabilize the newly emerging self. This identity theoryof desistance can be empirically developed by thinking about it in terms of astructural break in an individual-level time series of offending. This theory

∗

Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Maryland Population Research Center,University of Maryland.

School of Criminal Justice, State University of New York, University at Albany.

1104

PATERNOSTER & BUSHWAY

[Vol. 99

and the process of desistance itself can be profitably examined byexamining such time series of offending over a long time period at theindividual level.

NTRODUCTION

Traditionally, criminological theorists have presumed that what theyneeded to explain was initiation into, and persistence in, criminal behavior.The central question, then, was, “Why do people start offending, and whydo they continue offending?” Interest in the “career criminal” in the early1980s changed all this as criminologists became concerned aboutdimensions of offending other than onset and persistence, such as theduration of offending over time, escalation from less serious to moreserious offending, and the eventual termination of or desistance from crime.Once they recognized that desistance from crime might be an important anddistinct dimension of the criminal career, criminologists scrambled forpossible theoretical explanations that ranged from simple extensions of oldtheories

to new theories specifically designed to explain desistance.

See generally

OBERT

GNEW

RIMINALS

FFEND

ENERAL

HEORY OF

RIME AND

ELINQUENCY

(2005); R

ONALD

KERS

OCIAL

EARNING AND

OCIAL

TRUCTURE

ENERAL

HEORY OF

RIME AND

EVIANCE

(1998).

See generally

OHN

AUB

OBERT

AMPSON

HARED

EGINNINGS

IVERGENT

IVES

ELINQUENT

OYS TO

70 (2003); S

HADD

ARUNA

AKING

OOD

CONVICTS

EFORM AND

UILD

HEIR

IVES

(2001); Stephen Farrall,

On the Existential Aspects of Desistance from Crime

, 28 S

YMBOLIC

NTERACTION

367 (2005); Peggy C.Giordano, Stephen A. Cernkovich & Jennifer L. Rudolph,

Gender, Crime, and Desistance:Toward a Theory of Cognitive Transformation

, 107 A

. 990 (2002) [hereinafterGiordano et al.,

Gender, Crime, and Desistance

]; Peggy C. Giordano, Stephen A.Cernkovich & Ryan D. Schroeder,

Emotions and Crime Over the Life Course: A Neo- Median Perspective on Criminal Continuity and Change

, 112 A

1603 (2007)[hereinafter Giordano et al.,

Emotions and Crime

]. This does not, of course, mean thatdesistance from crime was neither noticed nor explained prior to the advent of the criminalcareer debate. Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, for example, may have been the first toempirically document the general decline in criminal conduct over the life course.

See

HELDON

LEANOR

LUECK

ELINQUENCY AND

RIME

(1974);

HELDON

LEANOR

LUECK

ELINQUENTS AND

ONDELINQUENTS IN

ERSPECTIVE

(1968);

HELDON

LEANOR

LUECK

NRAVELING

UVENILE

ELINQUENCY

(1950); S

HELDON

LEANOR

LUECK

RIMINAL

AREERS IN

ETROSPECT

(1943). While not developing a “theory” as to whydesistance occurred, the Gluecks did suggest it was due to a process of gradual maturation.Similarly, David Matza observed that over time most delinquents “mature out” of offending.

See

AVID

ATZA

ELINQUENCY AND

RIFT

(1964). Finally, Travis Hirschi used thedecline in offending beginning in late adolescence as a vehicle to criticize strain and culturaldeviance theories of crime as well as to promote his own social control theory, which hethought could adequately account for desistance.

See

RAVIS

IRSCHI

AUSES OF

ELINQUENCY

(1969).

2009]

DESISTANCE AND THE “FEARED SELF”

1105In this Article, we present an identity theory of desistance that buildsupon and complements the work of these other theories

by integrating adiverse body of literature in social psychology, behavioral economics, andcollective movements in sociology. We draw upon a distinction between,on the one hand, one’s current or working identity and, on the other, thekind of person that one wishes to be—and, more importantly, not be—inthe future: one’s

possible self

Offenders have working identities aspersons who, among other things, have and will commit criminal acts. Thisworking identity remains a locus of commitment as long as it is thought tobe successful or, more specifically, as long as, on average, it nets morebenefits than costs. Gradually, however, the working identity of “criminaloffender” becomes less and less satisfying. The process is a measured oneand only occurs when perceived failures and dissatisfactions withindifferent domains of life become connected and when current failuresbecome linked with anticipated future failures. These failures include asense that being an offender is no longer financially beneficial, that it is toodangerous, that the perceived costs of imprisonment loom more likely andgreater, and that the costs to one’s social relationships are too dear.When these life dissatisfactions become linked to one’s criminalidentity, they are more likely to be projected into the future, and the personbegins to think of his or her “self” as one who would like to change to besomething else. This perceived sense of a future or possible self as a non-offender coupled with the fear that without change one faces a bleak andhighly undesirable future provides the initial motivation to break fromcrime. Movement toward the institutions that support and maintaindesistance (legitimate employment or association with conventional others,for example) is unlikely to take place until the possible self as non-offenderis contemplated and at least initially acted upon. Human agency, webelieve, is expressed through this act of intentional self-change.

Further,

See generally

ARUNA

supra

note ; N

EAL

HOVER

REAT

RETENDERS

URSUITS AND

AREERS OF

ERSISTENT