ABSTRACT
The overview of desistance studies elaborated by Laub and Sampson (2001) sets a challenge for future researchers: do the factors they highlighted as relevant to understanding desistance (attachment to a spouse, job stability and successful experience in the military) continue to be pathways to desistance in contemporary societies? Some authors have answered that the socio-economic context of the post-Second World War era was very different – with respect to opportunities for stable jobs and family formation – from the reality of post-industrial societies (Giordano et al. 2002). Other scholars have considered that the relevance of some institutions as turning points may depend on the social meaning and social policies related to them in each country. For example, in Scandinavian countries some institutions that have not generally been considered as turning points may assume this function. This may happen with cohabitation, given that in these societies cohabitation is seen as an institution similar to marriage, or with paternity, given that policies devoted to sustain parents with children may increase the positive influence on men of having children (Savolainen 2009). Extending this line of research, Farrall et al. (2010) explored the structural changes in the modern UK that might have affected the possibilities of desistance: employment (fewer opportunities for non-qualified people), families and housing (delaying the age for achieving one’s own house and reducing the possibilities of independence) and criminal policy (labelling offenders as risky persons and weakening the focus on reintegration).
