Recovery and Desistance: Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Background and Purpose: Recovery is the process of attaining wellbeing in light of mental health difficulties and desistance is the process of stopping criminal behavior and activities. Both recovery and desistance are desired goals for those with mental illnesses involved in the criminal justice system. These processes have been researched extensively but separately within the criminal justice and mental health fields, respectively, but rarely have both concepts been applied to those with mental illnesses and incarceration histories. Focusing on the processes of recovery and desistance, instead of risk factors contributing to recidivism, allows for a more comprehensive and strengths-based approach that identifies necessary supports for successful community reintegration after incarceration in jail or prison. This study sought to answer: What are the recovery and desistance processes for individuals with mental illnesses and incarceration histories?

Methods: Purposive sampling was used to recruit 15 participants who were graduates of a peer training program, had a major mental health diagnosis, spent at least 6 months incarcerated in jail or prison, and were working as peer provider. The sample was predominately male (85%), African-American or bi-racial (100%), on average had worked 2 years as a peer provider, received 12 years of mental health services, and had spent 11 years incarcerated. Phenomenological life history interviews were conducted consisting of 1) a life history interview, 2) a phenomenological interview about their work experiences and, 3) a meaning making interview with each participant, resulting in 45 interviews. All three interviews for each participant took place over the course of a month, and interviews lasted between 30-115 minutes in length. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, entered into HyperResearch qualitative software, and coded thematically using grounded theory and phenomenological techniques.

Results: Recovery and desistance were intertwined processes for this population. While stopping criminal offending may have motivated individuals to change, initial steps in the recovery process seemed to support the desistance process and vice versa. For example, desistance was activated by a critical event, like arrest or incarceration. Once activated, individuals were open to a recovery process that involved learning about mental health symptoms, treatment, and recognizing their own self-worth. As individuals became hopeful, they engaged in more prosocial activities like job training and new relationships. These individual changes were supported socially through connections to others and developing meaningful social roles. Recovery and desistance were further supported by structural elements such as being able to obtain employment despite their past histories, losing dependency on systems of care, and connection to their work, resulting in the development of changed identities around wellness and not offending.

Conclusions: Recovery and desistance processes are closely aligned for individuals with mental illnesses and incarceration histories. Both processes involve individual change, social connections, and access to opportunities like work that support meaningful social roles. Supporting individuals in both recovery and desistance simultaneously may be the key to improved outcomes for this population.