The Social Components Model of Recovery from Addiction and Desistance from Crime

Recovery from addiction and desistance from crime are processes which are often experienced and supported in the same physical spaces, while recovery and desistance are also frequently experienced by the same people. Research so far has predominantly explored the two processes separately, however there are a number of social factors that have been identified separately by research as having the capacity to positively influence both processes. Examining the common social factors which shape these processes will strengthen the evidence base and better support people in practice. This thesis has synthesised existing evidence and theory on social factors, with three categories emerging from the two literatures: Relationships and social bonds; Social identity, group membership and social networks; and Social capital. Using a mixed methods approach, the thesis outlines a new ‘social component model of recovery and desistance’, based on two studies. The samples consist of recovery support group members, the first from social enterprise Jobs, Friends and Houses; and the second across three settings: Blackpool, Sheffield and Lincoln. The influence of the social components is explored with regards to their capacity to influence recovery and desistance from onset, in order to fully understand their change roles in consequential desistance and recovery. This research also examines the possibility of the existence of a radius of trust (Fukuyama, 2001) as something that emerges in group settings as a mechanism through which the social components are enhanced, producing beneficial effects for group members and their recovery/desistance. The results show the presence of each of the social components, and indicate that trajectories into addiction and offending were shaped by a lack of or damaging versions of the social components, and the consequent journey into recovery/desistance was shaped by each of the pro-social components, including a ‘lead component’ which was prioritised by the participant in order to progress their recovery/desistance. The radius of trust was identified in both studies as important to the social components model, acting to enhance each component (for example through strengthening relationships) and reduce perceptions of stigma. The radius of trust requires further examination from a community perspective for its potential to extend beyond the perimeters of the group and have positive effects on social cohesion in wider communities through promoting the accessibility and visibility of the pro-social components.