Positive criminology, as stated above, is a new conceptual criminological perspective that, encompasses several theories and models emphasizing individual strengths (e.g., protective factors and resilience, values, faith, morality, positive psychology, post-traumatic growth), and formal and informal interventions that highlight humanistic values and capabilities (e.g., compassion, love, forgiveness, social acceptance, human kindness, gratitude, altruism). Reintegrative shaming. A central theory included in the positive criminology perspective is Braithwaite's (1989) reintegrative shaming, which calls for a clear distinction to be made between an individual's personal identity and his or her actions. Reintegrative shaming, partially implemented as rehabilitative practice, is based on the idea that rehabilitative interventions may be most effective when they include condemnation of the offense (shaming), along with the perpetrator's reacceptance by the community (reintegration). In contrast, disintegrative shaming occurs when the offender is functionally excluded from society after completing his or her sentence; in fact, the ex-convict is rejected by society and negatively labeled. The distinction between a person's identity and behavior, which allows for self-correction and social rehabilitation, can be found in spiritual and religious traditions such as Judaism, Christianity and Zen (Brazier, 1995; Post, 2005), and more recently, in 12 step programs for addicts (Ronel, 2006), humanistic approaches and in the contemporary positive psychology (Gable & Haidt, 2005; Seligman, 2002).
The programs included in the practice of restorative justice, such as victim offender mediation, conferencing and circles, are characterized by four key values: (a). Encounter. Create opportunities for victims, offenders and interested community members, to meet and discuss the crime and its aftermath. (b). Amends. Expect offenders to take steps to repair the harm they have caused. (c). Reintegration. Seek to reintegrate victims and offenders to the whole, to be contributing members of society. (d). Inclusion. Provide opportunities for parties with a stake in a specific crime to participate in its resolution.
The desistance literature has also inspired an applied school of thought, sometimes known as the "desistance paradigm" or "desistance-focused practice" (see especially the work of Fergus McNeill and Stephen Farrall). Farrall (2004) distinguishes 'desistance-focused' perspectives from 'offending-related' approaches on the basis that whereas the latter concentrates on targeting or correcting offender deficits, the former seeks to promote those things thought to be associated with desistance (such as strong social bonds, pro-social involvements and social capital). Others have argued for a shift from 'deficit-based' interventions (focusing on risk factors and 'needs' as defined by the experts) to 'strengths-based' approaches that seek to promote 'good lives' as defined by the person him or herself.
Until recently, desistance research has been more interested in how offenders give up crime in their own way, rather than how interventions can help them give up. Desistance research has not, as said, given much attention to the role of programs, but few desisters say that programs were part of what helped them give up offending. However, many modern correctional interventions have a strong evidence base, and they could be seen as "assisting desistance" by helping to develop the internal mindsets that are important to desistance. It has also been said that programs can help desistance by offering a "blueprint" for change. But the desistance research suggests that just doing a program won't be enough without also paying attention to the important external desistance factors. In addition, interventions that label, that penalize and that exclude are likely to pose problems for and create obstacles in desistance pathways, impeding successful integration.
Desistance research makes clear that offenders are heterogeneous, their needs are complex and their pathways to desistance are individualized. Having this in mind, the desistance literature offers several suggestions for intervention with desisters that might increase the chances for prolonged desistance. These suggestions are represent the positive criminology perspective: focus on strong and meaningful relationships; give strong optimistic messages and avoid labeling; focus on strengths and not just on risks; recognize and mark achievements towards desistance; make practical assistance the priority; work with parents and partners; work with support communities.
emotions, and thoughts – to the point of an existential need to commit crime. This innovative theory describes a widespread human tendency of "more of the same," along with increasing offending. Sometimes it is described as a "slippery slope" or a "criminal drift" (Matza, 1964), in which a given deviation is followed by an inevitable, uncontrolled decline.
A criminal spin is a process were individuals' and groups' self-centeredness raises thus it more and more separates them from other members of society. A criminal spin is a process of exclusion, and denotes a need for an integrating force. When a criminal spin is detected, it is possible to identify gateways for breaking the destructive cycle and to offer an appropriate intervention (Ronel, 2010). For example, by exposing the offenders to positive human strengths of meaningful agents, such as social support and acceptance (Biernacki, 1986; Elisha, 2010; Maruna, 2001), that may enhance their recovery process, as positive criminology posits.