Reintegration experiences in a sample of Israeli parolees on completion of their term of supervision: A qualitative study
| Published date | 01 July 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211055975 |
| Date | 01 July 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211055975
Criminology & Criminal Justice
2023, Vol. 23(3) 387 –408
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/17488958211055975
journals.sagepub.com/home/crj
Reintegration experiences
in a sample of Israeli parolees
on completion of their term
of supervision: A qualitative
study
Ronit Peled-Laskov
Uri Timor
Ashkelon Academic College, Israel
Lior Gideon
John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY, NY, USA
Abstract
For many released prisoners, the period following release is characterized by extreme challenges.
The ability to overcome such challenges depends on the services, level of supervision, and
type of support available. One type of support offered by the Israeli Prisoners’ Rehabilitation
Authority provides a supervisory and rehabilitative framework for reintegration after release
from imprisonment, with an emphasis on employment. The present study examines the
subjective experiences of ex-prisoners on their journey from incarceration through reentry
and reintegration while participating in supervision, treatment, and employment intervention
operated by the Israeli Prisoners’ Rehabilitation Authority. Semi-structured interviews were
conducted with a sample of released prisoners who successfully completed Israeli Prisoners’
Rehabilitation Authority supervision between 2014 and 2019. The interviews reveal four main
themes that in turn identify pathways to “better lives” through the reintegration process.
Keywords
Employment intervention, reentry, reintegration, released prisoners, supervision, psychological
treatment
Corresponding author:
Ronit Peled-Laskov, Ashkelon Academic College, 78211 Ashkelon, Israel.
Email: peleronit@gmail.com
1055975CRJ0010.1177/17488958211055975Criminology & Criminal JusticePeled-Laskov et al.
research-article2021
Article
388 Criminology & Criminal Justice 23(3)
Introduction
Many released prisoners encounter difficulties after their release from prison that impede
the reintegration process. Overcoming such difficulties depends on the individual’s abili-
ties, motivation and mental state, as well as the social environment’s willingness to assist
in the reintegration process (McNeill, 2016), the rehabilitative and therapeutic milieu,
and the level of supervision and guidance provided (Seiter and Kadela, 2003; Visher and
Travis, 2011).
Rehabilitation is a specific process intended to enable participants to resume and prac-
tice a normative and healthy lifestyle and activities. In the penological literature, this
concept is further developed into stages of reentry and reintegration, the latter referring
to the long process of reintegrating into normative society as a law-abiding citizen,
desisting from crime (LeBel et al., 2008; Maruna, 2001; Sampson and Laub, 2003) and
exhibiting full recovery (White and Kurtz, 2005).
Specifically, rehabilitation, reentry, reintegration, and desistance from crime are
viewed as related concepts that describe an evolving process. Rehabilitation describes
the initial process that targets the needs of the offender as identified by the intake pro-
cess, and will vary in depth and duration of intervention until the point of reentry (usu-
ally, the date of release back into the community). A successful rehabilitative intervention
while incarcerated may culminate in early reentry followed by the reintegration process,
a process of assimilation that will vary in duration depending on the strengths and weak-
nesses of the individual and the conditions of their release (Gideon and Sung, 2011;
Travis, 2005). Successful reintegration means that the individual refrains from criminal
involvement while assuming normative roles in society that symbolize their desistance
from crime. Such desistance involves breaking away from old connections while making
good (Maruna, 2001).
One theoretical model aimed at rehabilitating offenders and reducing their recidivism
is the good lives model (GLM; Ward and Stewart, 2003). According to this model, reha-
bilitation of offenders should focus on those means that will enable them to better live
their lives while improving their well-being and quality of life, which in turn will reduce
their risk of recidivism (see Ward and Maruna, 2007). Accordingly, setting modest and
attainable goals, such as securing a job, taking up new hobbies, and being exposed to
new experiences, will assist the individual in moving forward and building new life,
rather than simply desisting and “floating” (Healy, 2014; Weaver, 2013, 2015).
The GLM approach to rehabilitation sees desistance from crime as a by-product of
major positive life events experienced by the individual offender (Cullen, 2012; Laub
et al., 2006). For example, Laub and Sampson (1993), in their age-graded theory, argue
that marriage, stable and meaningful employment, and military service are key turning
points that lead to desistance from crime (Doherty, 2006). Such explanations were fur-
ther developed into desistance theories (Bersani and Doherty, 2018; Broidy and
Cauffman, 2017; LeBel et al., 2008; Maruna, 2001; Segev, 2018) that describe a gradual
process that is completed when criminality is no longer manifested.
Specifically, desistance theories distinguish between primary desistance (temporary
desistance from delinquent and criminal behavior) and secondary desistance (active
To continue reading
Request your trial