The belief in redeemability – version 2 (BiR-2) scale and its relation to desistance
| Pages | 300-312 |
| Date | 04 December 2017 |
| Published date | 04 December 2017 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRPP-06-2017-0018 |
| Author | Kevin O’Sullivan,Chana Levin,David Bright,Richard Kemp |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Criminology & forensic psychology |
The belief in redeemability –version 2
(BiR-2) scale and its relation to
desistance
Kevin O’Sullivan, Chana Levin, David Bright and Richard Kemp
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to test the relationship between the belief in redeemability –Version 2
(BIR-2) Scale and desistance from crime. It also seeks to explore how patterns of responding on the BIR-2
with offenders compare to previous patterns of responding in the general public.
Design/methodology/approach –The authors report the results of a study of offenders using the belief in
redeemability –Version 2 (BiR-2) scale. In total, 180 offenders under the supervision of the Community
Corrections Service (formerly the Probation and Parole Service) of New South Wales completed the ten-item
questionnaire and when these data were combined with demographic and reoffending data collected by
Corrective Services New South Wales, 168 sets of useable data were collected. Scores on the BIR-2 scale
were compared to Level of Service Inventory –Revised (LSI-R) score, Most Serious Offence category,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status, number of custodial sentences in previous five years, age, gender
and reoffending.
Findings –Results showed that the sample overall was closely representative of the caseload from
which the study sample was drawn (a metropolitan community corrections office) and that BIR-2 scores
showed a small, significant, negative correlation with LSI-R scores. Analysis of re-offending data indicated
a small, positive, but non -significant correlation with BIR-2. Impl ications of this are discussed and future
research outlined.
Practical implications –The paper suggests that it is worth attempting to measure belief in redeemability in
the broader context of a narrative approach to desistance.
Originality/value –This is the first time that a scale has been used to test the importance of a belief in
redeemability quantitatively and to permit the use of multivariate analysis.
Keywords Narrative, Through-care, Desistance, Redeemability, Reoffending, Community corrections
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Theideaofthe“redeemable”wrongdoer, one who can be salvaged for society after having
strayed from the path, has a long history in general usage and in literature (Burney, 2012;
Nellis, 2009). It is at least as old as the parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32) and may
provoke equally varied responses. Classic texts such as Les Miserables by Victor Hugo, which
Farrall (2009) ca lls the archetype of modern release d prisoner stories, or Tolstoy’sAnna
Karenina, and many others, turn on the issue of whether a person who has done wrong can
lead a good and worth while life untainted by the ir previous fault. Some ver sions of the trope see
the protagonist sa crificing him or herself (usually hi m) in order to atone for past wrongdoin g.
Other versions require only a willingness to pay the price as a token to demonstrate goodness
of heart as in the story of Isaac being willing to sacrifice his son but being reprieved at the last
minute (Genesis 22, 1-19). Many literary accounts of the question are optimistic and positive,
and some even playfu l as in Gilbert and Sullivan’sopera,The Pirates of Penzance,where
the cutlass-wiel ding outlaws are reintegrated int o society because they are found to b e “all
noblemenwhohavegonewrong”.
Received 11 June 2017
Revised 14 August 2017
Accepted 14 August 2017
The authors are grateful for the
assistance of SC from the
Corporate Research and Statistics
Branch of Corrective Services
New South Wales who provided
demographic and reoffending data.
Kevin O’Sullivan is a Clinical
Associate at the School of
Psychology, University of
New South Wales, Sydney,
Australia.
Chana Levin is based at The
Group Psychology Practice,
Surry Hills, Australia.
David Bright is an Associate
Professor at Flinders University,
Adelaide, Australia.
Richard Kemp is based at the
School of Psychology,
University of New South Wales,
Sydney, Australia.
PAGE300
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGICAL RESEARCH, POLICY AND PRACTICE
j
VOL. 3 NO. 4 2017, pp.300-312, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2056-3841 DOI 10.1108/JCRPP-06-2017-0018
To continue reading
Request your trial