The ambivalence of people who offend and of their prosocial relatives

Criminologists have long looked at the relatives of people who offend to understand their conduct, notably to understand how they eventually desist from crime. Though no consensus has been reached concerning the mechanisms of social influence, they have agreed that those who love and care for offenders have the power to restrain offending, to the extent that they endorse a prosocial orientation (Cullen, 1994; Giordano, Cernkovich, Rudolph, 2002; Hirschi, 1969; Sampson & Laub, 1993; Sutherland, 1947). Research has given support to many of their propositions, and relatives are now routinely integrated into theories of crime and desistance. However, to date, these works have had little to say about these influential actors. What are the consequences of being in a relationship with someone who acts unlawfully? How is one’s personal experience affected by this conduct? As a matter of fact, a small but burgeoning literature about offenders’ relatives suggests that their experiences are also shaped in significant ways as they maintain relationships with someone who breaks the law (Condry, 2007; Christian & Kennedy, 2011). As opposed to the premise upon which desistance research rests, however, it is the antisocial orientation of those who offend that affects them.  Combining insights from these two scholarships, this thesis argues that both offenders and their prosocial relatives are influenced by their relationship to one another, and that this influence specifically occurs at the confluence of the prosocial and the antisocial. It is further proposed that because it is simultaneously tainted by offending of one of its members—a conduct that breaches well-known moral norms—and by the prosocial orientation of the other, this social bond is likely to generate ambivalence.  This thesis is dedicated to individuals who navigate this antithetical universe where conventions and law-breaking commingle. Specifically, it seeks to examine the ambivalence hypothesis among both offenders and the prosocial individuals who care for them. Empirically, this endeavour is carried out through a multiple methods design composed of two independent, yet connected, studies. The qualitative component first examines ambivalence among prosocial relatives through data from semi-directed interviews conducted with 18 individuals who support someone who has offended. Second, the quantitative piece relies on a quantitative dataset containing information on 1,318 individuals who have received a sentence in the province of Québec, Canada in order to analyze ambivalence among those who break the law.  Findings from qualitative analyses suggest that being related to someone who offends is an experience that often generates ambivalence. In order to decrease that tense state, participants employ a series of strategies, which, when effective, allow them to maintain their relationship with the person who had acted unlawfully. Quantitative analyses, for their part, suggest that ambivalence among those who offend emerges from heterogeneous social environments that exist somewhere between the prosocial and the antisocial. The implications of these findings are explored.

Keyphrases: Ambivalence, Attitudes, Offenders, Relatives, Ambivalence, Attitudes, Tolerance, Social bonds, Social influence