Striving for a good life: The good lives model applied to released child molesters

Abstract

The good lives model (GLM) is a strengths-based approach to offender rehabilitation in which treatment aims to equip offenders with the skills and resources necessary to satisfy primary goods, or basic human values, in personally meaningful and socially acceptable ways. The aim of the present research was to explore the practical utility of the GLM with a sample of released child molesters, and investigate the relationship between primary goods attainment and overall re-entry conditions (in terms of accommodation, social support and employment). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 child molesters at one, three and six months following their release from prison. As expected, participants endorsed the majority of GLM primary goods with high importance, and positive re-entry experiences were associated with increased goods attainment. Implications for clinicians, policy makers and society as a whole are discussed.     

Emergent authority and expert knowledge: Psychiatry and criminal responsibility in the UK

In the UK context, the rise of the discipline and practice of forensic psychiatry is intimately connected with the concurrent development of principles and practices relating to criminal responsibility. In this article, we seek to chart the relationship between psychiatry and the principles and practices of criminal responsibility in the UK over the early modern, modern and late modern periods. With a focus on claims about authority and expert knowledge around criminal responsibility, we suggest that these claims have been in a state of perpetual negotiation and that, as a result, claims to authority over and knowledge about criminal non-responsibility on the part of psychiatrists and psychiatry are most accurately understood as emergent and contingent. The apparent formalism of legal discourse has tended to conceal the extent to which legal policy has been preoccupied with maintaining the primacy of lay judgments in criminal processes of evaluation and adjudication. While this policy has been somewhat successful in the context of the trial – particularly the murder trial – it has been undermined by administrative procedures surrounding the trial, including those that substitute treatment for punishment without, or in spite of, a formal determination of criminal responsibility.