Forgiveness and rehabilitation of Portuguese incarcerated individuals: what do they think about forgiveness?

Abstract Literature reveals that forgiveness can bring advantages to those who experience it, increasing quality of life. This study explores the relevance of forgiveness in a prison context and aims to understand how incarcerated individuals perceive forgiveness, focusing on their rehabilitation processes. The sample comprised N = 11 participants (males) who were serving a prison sentence in the Porto Prison Establishment. Qualitative data were collected through a sociodemographic questionnaire and a semi-structured interview and analyzed based on thematic analysis. The findings offer further evidence on the importance of all types of rehabilitation programs and, specifically the ones focused on forgiveness. These findings show that forgiveness can be a facilitator for behavioral changes in incarcerated individuals and highlights the importance of psychological interventions during rehabilitation. We discuss the implications of these results, suggesting the need to increase knowledge with future studies about forgiveness and rehabilitation processes with this public.

In prisons, episodes of violence, behavioral problems, suicide, and selfharm are prevalent.Thus, it is crucial to invest in mental health programs and psychological interventions to prevent or minimize these behaviors in incarcerated individuals (Blaauw & van Marle, 2007).Promoting rehabilitation programs and facilitating the involvement of incarcerated individuals becomes essential, as these interventions can be useful to improve their mental health and facilitate a more positive process of transition to community (Chamberlain, 2012) and their restructuring as social individuals (Sachitra & Wijewardhana, 2020).
A study carried out by Stasch et al. (2018), with incarcerated individuals, aimed to evaluate the relationship between prison climate, treatment resistance, and their influence on changes in risk factors.The results suggest that a positive perception of the prison climate influences the success of a therapeutic process.Furthermore, incarcerated individuals considered therapy to be beneficial for their rehabilitation (Stasch et al., 2018).According to Huynh et al. (2015), a new pathway for intervention models with incarcerated individuals is focused on behavioral transformation through selfawareness, specifically by the identification of strengths and other skills, and through general self-improvement.Studies show that forgiveness interventions bring relevant contributions to individuals in terms of psychological well-being and self-esteem (Alencar & Neto, 2021).Previous research has revealed that it is very important to have a deeper knowledge of the treatment proposed so that the implementation of future programs can be most effective (Yesberg & Polaschek, 2019).
The present study addresses the perspectives of Portuguese incarcerated individuals about interventions focused on (self)forgiveness, implemented within the scope of prison rehabilitation.This study aims to contribute to understanding what this target audience thinks about this topic and their perspectives regarding the role, importance, and challenges of approaching forgiveness and self-forgiveness processes in prison rehabilitation.For this, we adopted a more humanized language to describe the people involved in the criminal system (Tran et al., 2018).Therefore, the participants are described here as "incarcerated individuals," avoiding labels or stigmatizing expressions.

Forgiveness in the rehabilitation processes of incarcerated individuals
Forgiveness has been a subject of recent, but increasingly important studies in Psychology (Alencar & Abreu, 2019).Advances made in recent years have allowed a remarkable evolution of the psychological literature on forgiveness (Toussaint et al., 2015).Forgiveness is usually defined as a modification of the negative thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that individuals experience about the person who hurt them (Altmaier, 2019;Enright et al., 1998), transformed into more positive thoughts, feelings, and behaviors concerning the offender (Altmaier, 2019;Rique & Camino, 2010).Thus, forgiveness can transform anger and resentment into empathy or compassion toward the offender.Self-forgiveness implies that the subject can "reflect upon and acknowledge the harm caused to the other, taking responsibility for the other's pain and regretting the unjust action ( … )" (Alencar & Abreu, 2019, p. 3).
Studies conducted in Brazil and in the United States concluded that individuals tend to forgive more easily when they have a close relationship with the offender, such as forgiving their friends (Rique & Camino, 2010;Rique et al., 2007) or family members (Barros-Oliveira, 2010;Rique & Camino, 2010).It has also been found that it is more difficult to forgive strangers or distant persons (Rique & Camino, 2010;Rique et al., 2007).Thus, interpersonal forgiveness can be achieved when the victim can put oneself in the offender's shoes, and if the offender, in turn, works through recognizing and regretting the offenses committed, paving the way for forgiveness (Pinho & Falcone, 2018).
According to Castrill� on-Guerrero et al. ( 2018) and Dentz (2014), forgiveness can assist in the way offenders and victims deal with judicial/legal phenomena, due to the sense of (in)justice associated with forgiveness.Forgiveness can function "as a means for the release of pain" (Pinho et al., 2016(Pinho et al., , p. 1516)), helping the victim and the offender to experience and strengthen more positive attitudes.This facilitates the process of change, both within the victim and the offender (Pinho, 2009).
This emphasizes the importance of forgiveness therapies and their potential for improving mental health and well-being (Akhtar & Barlow, 2018;Bono et al., 2008), especially in individuals who have suffered some type of abuse/trauma (Akhtar & Barlow, 2018;Wade et al., 2014).Some aspects of self-victimization of incarcerated offenders were related to chronic anger associated with histories of pain and hurtfulness, especially during childhood, and working through forgiveness can help them to cope with those deep hurts and traumas, without turning into revenge or violence behaviors (Blaauw & van Marle, 2007;Erzar et al., 2019).
According to Proeve and Howells (2002), some offenders, especially the most violent, show great difficulties in forgiving themselves and in dealing with shame and guilt.These self-condemnation feelings have been associated with self-forgiveness, when an individual reveals more capacity to forgive oneself, there is a decrease of shame, guilt, anxiety and depression levels (Zechmeister & Romero, 2002).This enables the reconstruction of self-esteem and self-concept, allowing more positive attitudes toward others and society (Cornish & Wade, 2015;Woodyatt & Wenzel, 2013).

Forgiveness interventions
In the last few years, a variety of programs and interventions have started to emerge with the focus on self-reflection work and prosocial behaviors with incarcerated individuals (Osei-Tutu et al., 2021).These programs usually involve facing the responsibility for wrongdoings, processing self-condemnation feelings, and finding support and strategies to engage in reparative behaviors (Woodyatt & Wenzel, 2013).
In a study conducted by Osei-Tutu et al. (2021) with incarcerated individuals in Ghana, the authors found that participants exhibited a higher incidence of self-condemnation feelings when compared to offenders who did not go to prison.Another study, conducted by Bishop et al. (2014) with 261 male inmates from ten prisons in the state of Oklahoma, showed that forgiveness was significantly correlated with the perceptions of incarcerator's health (decreasing the severity of depressive symptomatology).
The use of forgiveness-focused therapies can become an instrument for change inside prisons, as incarcerated individuals can experience a more effective rehabilitation process, decreasing the likelihood that they will commit crimes again (Enright et al., 2016).Two forgiveness-focused projects have been developed with this public, in the international scenario: Houses of Healing and the RESTORE Programme.
Houses of Healing (USA -Casarjian, 1995) is a self-awareness project that aims to encourage greater responsibility and greater inner power through writing with incarcerated individuals (Rausch, 2015).This program uses a combination of bibliotherapy, mindfulness-based, and cognitive behavioral skills, as a self-help resource that uses writing as a form of rehabilitation, allowing them to manage difficult emotions, heal unresolved trauma and acquire greater responsibility and inner power.Outcomes of the participation in this program revealed statistically significant changes in pre-to post-levels of depression, hostility, alexithymia, mindfulness, and community and positive effects in reducing recidivism (Casarjian and colleagues, 2007;Rausch, 2015).
The RESTORE Programme (UK) is an intensive group intervention program that aims to help incarcerated individuals to develop empathy through victim's stories and promote a dialogue between them.Through participating in this program, offenders can understand: (i) the consequences of their behaviors, (ii) become more aware of them, (iii) identify the mistakes in their actions and (iv) feel more willing to correct them in the future (Liebmann, 2010).Individuals of several UK prison establishments (incarcerated individuals and prison staff) participated in The Forgiveness Project (TFP), in a study conducted by Adler and Mir (2012) with 51 participants (including 20 in a control group).The outcomes showed significant improvements in the group that had been through the TFP program, evidenced in their general attitudes, especially on the capacity of being less likely to judge and condone toward offending, and revealed more changes in their perspectives, considering crime as something inappropriate (Adler & Mir, 2012).Cornish and Wade (2015) also indicate that the effects of substances and addictions can lead substance (ab)users to commit crimes and cause emotional injuries in other people.Therefore, several authors argue that, in the case of individuals with addictions, it may be important to address forgiveness (and self-forgiveness) in the treatment processes occurring in drug rehabilitation centers (Orbon et al., 2015).In addition, forgiveness can become a central element for the motivation of the offender in restorative processes (Tiveron, 2009), and may be considered in the treatment carried out with them during the rehabilitation processes; however, the authors caution that it is also necessary to consider who can be suited/benefit from these interventions (Cornish & Wade, 2015).

The present study
Research on forgiveness processes in the context of the rehabilitation of incarcerated individuals is still scarce, especially in Portugal, where this study was conducted.This study aims to understand the perspective of Portuguese incarcerated individuals on forgiveness in rehabilitation, as well as to bring possible contributions to the scientific community on this topic.
The present study was guided by the following research question: Is forgiveness an important variable for the rehabilitation of incarcerated individuals, according to their own perspectives?The aims here were 1) to analyze the perspective of incarcerated individuals regarding the importance, challenges, and difficulties associated with rehabilitation programs inside prison; 2) to study the participants' perspectives on the importance/role of forgiveness and self-forgiveness in their rehabilitation processes; and 3) to investigate the potential contributions of a larger investment in the rehabilitation processes of incarcerated individuals, namely in the field of forgiveness.

Incarcerated individuals
This research involved 11 incarcerated individuals, aged between 27 and 48 years (M ¼ 35.5;SD ¼ 5.88).Inclusion criteria was being an adult male incarcerated individual, serving time in a Portuguese Prison Facility, with an ongoing prison sentence of more than one year; with adequate reading and writing skills.Incarcerated individuals serving sentences for sexual crimes (e.g., pedophilia and sexual assault) and with severe psychopathological conditions (e.g., psychopathy and schizophrenia) were excluded from this study.
These participants were all integrated in a broader rehabilitation program in a substance addiction rehabilitation unit from the Porto Prison Establishment, a Portuguese Prison establishment (more on this unit below, see Procedures section).This unit has a total capacity for 15 individuals, but at the time of the current investigation there were only 11 members (incarcerated individuals) integrated in it.This sample of 11 participants was made up mostly of singles (n ¼ 8), most of them with a high school education diploma (90%).Regarding the total sentence assigned, two participants did not provide information concerning this question, and two were waiting to know the court's decision regarding the length of their current conviction (22.2%).About the remaining participants: three had between [0,3 [years of the total sentence (11.1%); two obtained a sentence between [6;9 [years (22.2%); two had a total sentence assigned between [9,12 [years (22.2%).
Regarding the reasons for conviction, six incarcerated individuals were convicted of the crime of theft/robbery (54.5%) and one was in pretrial detention (9.1%).The remaining incarcerated individuals were convicted for: robbery, domestic violence, and dangerous driving (n ¼ 1); domestic violence (n ¼ 1); receipt of precious metals and co-authorship of robberies (n ¼ 1); drug trafficking (n ¼ 1).Six individuals were incarcerated for the first time (54.5%).Five were recidivist incarcerated individuals (45.5%; all had been presently arrested for another crime, different from the first sentence).
Finally, as they were integrated in a broader substance addiction rehabilitation program, as members of the unit (Free of Drugs Unit), participants reported hashish and cocaine as the most frequent substances of abuse.

Researchers
Data were collected by two of the authors of this study: the first researcher is a female Psychologist with a Master's degree in forensic clinical psychology, and one year of professional experience.The second researcher is a female Psychologist, member of the Portuguese Psychologists' Association and with 7 years of professional experience, with a Master's degree in clinical and health psychology.The second researcher is also currently a PhD student in a doctoral program in Psychology, with a specialization in Clinical Psychology.Her PhD research aims to analyze the results of a selfforgiveness program applied to incarcerated offenders.Both researchers were involved in the data collection (based on interviews conducted by the first and second authors, as described below) as well as in the data analysis (based on transcripts made by the first author).This study was supervised by a third researcher, as the scientific advisor of the first and second authors.Data analysis was mainly conducted by the first author, who consulted with the second author.The third author acted as an auditor for the present data analysis.This third researcher is a female Psychologist, member of the Portuguese Psychologists' Association, with a graduation in Psychology, Master's degree in Clinical Psychology, and a PhD in Clinical Psychology.She has 20 years of professional experience and several publications with qualitative methods.

Measures
Participants answered two measures: a sociodemographic questionnaire and a semi-structured interview.Both were developed for the present study.
The sociodemographic questionnaire contained general questions to collect participants' data (such as gender, age, marital status, nationality and education) for a characterization of this sample.The questionnaire also contained questions about recidivism in crime, total and remaining time for the current sentence, as well as the reason why the incarcerated individuals were detained in the prison facility.
To collect the participants' perspectives, a face-to-face, semi-structured interview (Appendix A), was developed.It included general questions about their rehabilitation, their views on processes of forgiveness and self-forgiveness, and how participants perceived the importance of these processes for themselves.In addition to the pre-defined questions, further questions were asked to the participants to develop or clarify their answers, to obtain as much information as possible for the current study.

Authorization and ethical approval
This research is part of a larger study with incarcerated individuals from the Porto Prison Establishment (PhD research of the second author, supervised by the third author), which aims to analyze the results of a self-forgiveness program applied to incarcerated offenders.This original project consists upon the implementation and evaluation of the results and effectiveness of a self-forgiveness group intervention program with incarcerated offenders (Free of Drugs Unit).Study participants were selected as a convenience sample in a Portuguese prison establishment, as they were all part of a specialized treatment program for drug rehabilitation in this Prison establishment.The participants in the present study later participated in a self-forgiveness group intervention program, as part of the PhD research project mentioned above.Yet, the data collection for this current research was conducted before the implementation of that program, to avoid bias in the participants' perspectives.
For this research, authorization was required and granted from the Board of the Porto Prison Establishment and also the Governing Body of Portuguese Prison Establishments.This was formalized under a cooperation protocol between the Porto Prison Establishment and University of Maia, which secured authorization and ethical approval for this study.
These participants were all integrated in a broader substance addiction rehabilitation unit within this Prison establishment.This rehabilitation unit consists of a separate space from the rest of the prison, where incarcerated individuals with addictive behaviors can receive a specialized treatment program for drug addiction.The program is coordinated by a medical team, is led by a chief-nurse (Director) and takes place in a group setting, lasting an average of 18 months.In this substance addiction rehabilitation program, incarcerated individuals participate in educational, occupational, and therapeutic activities.These activities provide a context for learning and experimenting with personal and social skills, facilitating, and promoting the development of a drug-free life project.
It should be noted that before contacting the participants, it was also necessary to grant permission from the Prison Facility Porto Prison Establishment, the medical team of Free of Drugs Unit and its Director.Thus, the research team presented the current study to all of them (the Board of the Prison Facility, the Director of this rehabilitation unit and to the medical team).This presentation clarified the objectives and procedures of this study, ethical aspects involved, participant selection criteria and implications for the rehabilitation of the incarcerated population, securing their prior approval and help in the recruitment of participants.After all the necessary authorizations had been obtained, the staff approached the eligible participants and sought for their voluntary participation for these interviews (as a convenience sample, given that all participants belonged specifically to this unit).Afterwards, the participants were approached by the research team, presenting the study, and gathering their informed consent.The participants' perspectives were obtained from an interview carried out for this purpose and, once collected, the researchers proceeded to transcribe and analyze the data.

Data collection
Data collection took place in 2019 and information was collected from the sociodemographic questionnaires and semi-structured interviews (see the previous section).A code was assigned to each participant to ensure confidentiality of data analysis (e.g., "ULD1"; "ULD2").All interviews were audio-recorded and lasted around 30 minutes, on average (minimum: 10 minutes; maximum: 45 minutes).They were then transcribed by the first researcher and subjected to a qualitative analysis of the data by the first and second authors (audited by the third author).
This research used non-probability sampling, namely convenience sampling, where participants were invited to participate and involved due to being already enrolled in the rehabilitation unit described above, that the research team was given access to.The medical staff approved and initially conducted the assessment according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria (mentioned above), that led to their recruitment.Participation in the interviews was voluntary, secured by prior institutional and medical approval and occurred after gathering informed consent from each participant.The interviews were scheduled and conducted individually at the Prison Facility, in private medical offices, ensuring a favorable environment for communication and the necessary confidentiality of scientific research in Psychology.No field notes were taken during the interviews.However, after the interviews, the first and second authors reflected on the interviews together (e.g., speech; participants' attitudes; difficulties in conducting the interview) and took notes as necessary, which were useful for the transcription process.

Data analysis
For data analysis, the interviews were transcribed in full by the first author, and each one was given an identification number corresponding to each participant (e.g., "ULD1"; "ULD2").The first author then began the process of analyzing the interviews, using inductive thematic analysis and the different stages of this type of analysis (e.g., 1. familiarizing oneself with the data; 2. creating initial codes; 3. searching for themes; 4. reviewing the themes; 5. defining and naming the themes; 6. writing up the results), according to the guidelines by Guest et al. (2012).We used the open axial method, where this researcher tried to create different codes by systematically reading the data and the participants' speeches, which were later grouped into different themes and sub-themes.To facilitate the process of analysis and familiarization with the data, this researcher underlined different words in the participants' discourse using different colored markers.Whenever there were difficulties with this analysis, the first author discussed with the second.This practice helped with the subsequent identification of codes and the relationship established between the different interviews, where axial coding was used.To ensure the fidelity of the study, the first and second authors held meetings to discuss the process of analyzing the data and identifying the codes, sometimes readjusting the codes identified.The third researcher acted as an external auditor, whose main function was to audit the codes and themes found by the first and second researchers and considered relevant in the data set.
After reaching consensus on the identification of themes and sub-themes, a description of the different perspectives of the participants was made to understand what they think about the research topic and what the main theoretical and practical implications of this research were.From the analysis, it emerged that several themes gathered consensus among participants and the number and variety of themes arrived at allowed to reach data saturation (Saunders et al., 2018).It is important to note that, due to the constraints associated with the lockdown caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, it was not possible to return the transcripts of the interviews to the participants (e.g., provide a copy or even give feedback) or gather participants' feedback concerning the validity of the researchers' interpretations.

Results
The data from this research allowed us to identify different themes and sub-themes, described as follows.

Theme 1: Rehabilitation and reintegration in the prison context
Participants considered themselves privileged to have the opportunity to work on rehabilitation aspects in prison, unlike the rest of the incarcerated population (who do not always have access to therapeutic or rehabilitation programs during detention): "And once again I'm going to say that I'm privileged here because I'm inserted in a therapeutic program within a prison" (ULD12).
Participants stated that rehabilitation is fundamental since working on these aspects helps them, for example, in self-knowledge and acquiring new social skills: "( … ) we're acquiring things that outside we're losing in terms of social skills, in terms of behavior and it's a bit like that … we're going to learn again how to live in society."(ULD6) and may contribute to their reintegration: "( … ) all these activities and therapies we do [at this unit] are always with a view to the future and reintegration ( … ) to acquire tools and strategies to be able to deal with the problems of life outside, of reintegration and the adversities that will arise to us … certainly."(ULD8).
As for the challenges of rehabilitation, and eventual reintegration processes, the participants pointed out some of the main obstacles: (i) the lack of mental health professionals: "( … ) the psychologists are for extreme cases ( … ) there should be a greater monitoring in this sense to help people."(ULD7); (ii) the overcrowding of some prisons: "It is also a very large jail, then it cannot respond … they exceed the number of [incarcerated] people" (ULD11); (iii) the contrast in types of imprisonment within the same establishment: "( … ) I have been feeling that social reintegration work inside prison is almost non-existent ( … ) ULD is ULD and then there is the rest of the prison: forget about it, there are no programs, there are none.( … )" (ULD12); (iv) the existing social stigma in the community: "We can't forget that our society puts a label on us that we are ex-convicts, prisoners, right?( … ) It pushes us aside; society is a bit like that ( … )" (ULD4).
Theme 2: General perspectives on forgiveness Some participants mentioned that forgiveness consists of (i) expressing feelings: "It is the most complicated and personal thing: talking about our feelings, our emotions and things from our world ( … )" (ULD11); (ii) and forgiving the acts committed in the past: "It's forgiving myself … I have to forgive a little bit my past and for having taken refuge on drugs."(ULD1).Others mentioned that (self)forgiveness is synonymous with self-esteem: "( … ) Forgiving myself is self-esteem.( … ) Learning to forgive me is selfesteem."(ULD12) or implies a settling of accounts: "( … ) I'm not going to be here all my life and one day I'll have to settle accounts and that's what forgiveness is"(ULD11).And some participants face detention as a way to ask for forgiveness for the crime committed: "For me, the sentence itself is already forgiveness.( … ) with the time I am spending here already … it has made me see things and, in a certain sense, I am already asking forgiveness for a lot of things" (ULD2).
Participants mentioned that the process to achieve forgiveness is timeconsuming, subjective, and complex, since each person may present different needs: "I think that this is a process that varies from person to person and that … each one has their timing" (ULD8).The participants also refer that it is necessary to go through different stages to accomplish forgiveness: (i) the stage of reflection on the acts committed in the past: "It is looking at myself, seeing the points where I failed and that … I caused troubles either to society, or to someone closer, or the family … it is more directed at myself and what I did wrong." (ULD6); (ii) the punishment phase (culpability) about these same acts: "( … ) then there is the punishment phase that we will automatically punish ourselves … myself … for what we did wrong that brought us here … " (ULD8); (iii) and the liberation phase, when it is possible to start a new narrative of life: "( … .)and then there is the moment that you have to free yourself from it, you have to free yourself … of course, you will not be able to erase the past, but you can learn to live with it and not be [upset] all the time … " (ULD8).
As for the value assigned to this construct, participants considered selfforgiveness to be more important to themselves compared to interpersonal forgiveness: "( … ) What does it matter to me to be forgiven for what I did if I do not forgive myself?One without the other does not help each other but forgiving ourselves has more meaning than the other forgiving us."(ULD12).

Theme 3: Benefits of forgiveness and self-forgiveness
The main benefits were identified in the following subthemes: (i) psychological well-being, helping to live day-to-day life with greater tranquility during detention: "Everything that allows us to be a little more at peace-… you end up having a more peaceful day-to-day ( … ) and the fulfillment of the sentence will, of course, be … softer" (ULD8); (ii) personal growth, self-worth and appreciation of others, by allowing them to know themselves and evolve as people: "It would help me become a better person."(ULD4), "Forgiveness helps personal evaluation, to value others, to respect others as they are, what they think, what they feel and what they think."(ULD12); (iii) letting go and moving forward by recognizing, owning and learning to live with the acts previously committed: "Yes, yes, to move forward in life otherwise it is impossible ( … ) we should forgive ourselves to move forward."(ULD1).
Finally, according to the participants, forgiveness allows them to increase their self-knowledge and help them in future decisions: "It is an added value, it is from here on, it is not how long this [sentence] lasts.It is what is this going to teach me to live from now on" (ULD4).

Theme 4: Facilitative dimensions of the forgiveness process
Theme four describes the participants' perspective about the dimensions, attitudes or actions that facilitate the process of forgiveness, mostly related to personal changes on the offender: (i) show regret for the committed offenses, since there is the recognition that the person deserves a second chance: "I think we should only forgive if we feel … first that the person deserves to be forgiven and that the person is sorry" (ULD10); (ii) to be trustworthy: "( … ) to get forgiveness we also have to do something about it.Don't we?We have to show trust, transmit trust so that they can … forgive."(ULD11); (iii) feel empathy for those who have hurt them: "( … ) to forgive someone I had to put myself in their place and think about why." (ULD3); (iv) ask for support and acceptance from others: "If people do not condemn me and are with me unconditionally … it makes everything easier.( … ) I think this process is much easier if you don't have people pointing fingers at you, yeah."(ULD8); (v) feeling of reciprocity: "If I need to forgive someone else, I also need to forgive myself."(ULD9).
Participants also pointed out that talking about forgiveness is a good strategy in itself: "( … ) the more we work with forgiveness and self-forgiveness, the more we will know how to deal with situations and learn how to do it."(ULD10).

Theme 5: Difficulties and obstacles in the process of forgiveness
The participants considered that one of the difficulties inherent in the process of forgiveness lies in the complexity of this process.Achieving forgiveness is a arduous process because it implies remembering the (offensive) acts: "( … ) It is a delicate subject, where you touch wounds ( … ) it is going to hurt me.I am going to walk around here [the prison] thinking about people."(ULD7).Also, the crime committed is understood as an obstacle to forgiveness: the participants considered that some offenses are not likely to be forgiven -being unforgivable: "Because it is not right!What kind of forgiveness deserves a person that does that?( … ) How can you forgive something that has no forgiveness?"(ULD10).Participants also reported that they should be provided with good resources regarding the (self-)forgiveness process while they are incarcerated: "Sure, but I cannot [forgive myself].I would like to get tools to be able to, to be able to understand myself better."(ULD3).

Discussion
The current study aims to assess incarcerated individuals' perspectives on forgiveness as a rehabilitation program through individual qualitative interviews.This group of 11 participants emphasized the significance of having access to rehabilitation programs during incarceration, deeming it a crucial and valuable matter.These programs can provide various tools and positive contributions, particularly for the development of new skills and perspectives on life.These participants showed consensus in two main issues: i) the scarcity of rehabilitation programs happening in prison, and ii) on the privilege of being able to access a rehabilitation program and enjoy these aspects within the scope of the rehabilitation unit they were a part of.
Participants revealed that forgiveness also allows them to cope with detention.This corroborates the studies of Castrill� on-Guerrero et al. (2018) and Dentz (2014) who state that the forgiveness process helps offenders deal with legal proceedings.Participants here also considered that forgiveness could promote personal growth, as reiterated by Cornish and Wade (2015), who point out that self-forgiveness allows for individual progression.This perspective is also aligned with the findings obtained by Adler and Mir (2012), who found that incarcerated individuals who participated in the RESTORE Programme (TFP) showed better discernment when judging offenses in general and the prospect of being able to live a life away from crime.In this study, participants prioritized self-forgiveness over interpersonal forgiveness.In their views, self-forgiveness is harder to achieve, although it is necessary to allow for self-transformation and promote a more positive life.
These participants also mentioned some steps to achieving forgiveness, according to their perspectives.For these individuals, several stages must be achieved to attain forgiveness, including phases of reflection and "letting go."This corroborates the perspective of Pinho et al. (2016), as these authors consider that identifying the acts committed and their consequences is one of the steps in the process of change in the offenders and in the path to "release the pain."Empathy is another aspect that facilitates forgiveness, in the perspectives of the participants, also aligned with the literature (Pinho & Falcone, 2018;Tsang & Stanford, 2007).
Regarding forgiveness, and as mentioned in the studies of Castrill� on-Guerrero et al. ( 2018), Gouveia et al. (2015), and Orbon et al. (2015), participants perceived it to be a lengthy, personal and complex process, requiring a great effort and commitment from individuals.In their perspectives, the process to achieve forgiveness is time-consuming, subjective, and complex, with a first step implying the reflection upon the offensive acts committed in the past, then a punishment phase, where the offender expresses culpability and, finally, a liberation phase.This is when it becomes possible to start a new life narrative.It is pointed out that forgiveness is an important process, that can impact their psychological well-being and the way they feel daily concerning crime and detention.This perspective is convergent with the previous findings in the studies conducted by Akhtar and Barlow (2018), Bono et al. (2008), Gouveia et al. (2015), and Zechmeister and Romero (2002).
On the other hand, participants stated that personal changes help the forgiveness process.Pinho and Falcone (2018) also stress that interpersonal forgiveness increases when offenders commit and work toward it.However, participants also perceived several obstacles to the forgiveness process, such as the severity of the offense committed.Gismero-Gonz� alez et al. ( 2019) and Rique et al. (2007) also refer to the difficulties inherent in forgiving more severe types of interpersonal offenses.As Alencar and Abreu (2019) state, the most serious offenses require an increased effort to achieve selfforgiveness (if it can be possible), and this may be the reason why these incarcerated individuals also expressed that there are unforgivable acts in which forgiveness cannot be achieved.
Concerning now some of the limitations of this study, we first highlight the small number of participants (given the number of incarcerated individuals in Portugal).This was a consequence of the fact that data collection was only carried out with the participants integrated in this rehabilitation unit (Free of Drugs Unit of the Porto Prison Establishment), which was the one that the research team was given access to, according to the authorization granted to this study.As these incarcerated individuals were integrated in this very specific unit, where they can work daily on their social skills and their capacity for reflection and expression, their perspective is probably different and even contrasting with the perspective of the remaining incarcerated population.Another limitation was the access to the participants after the initial data collection (e.g. for validation of their transcribed perspective or the interpretations researchers made upon these interviews), which was no longer possible due to the lockdown caused by the Covid-19 pandemic and/or subsequent pardon provided to some of these individuals, which allowed for prison release.Although these participants' discourse was very rich in terms of the importance of forgiveness for each of them, it remains unclear the impact that this variable can have on their rehabilitation processes.This may be an interesting avenue for future research with this population.
Future studies should aim to broaden participant numbers and extend this research to include individuals representing various segments of the global incarcerated population.This approach will yield more diversified data and perspectives, particularly from those who are not currently enrolled in rehabilitation programs within the prison establishment and who have been convicted of different crimes.Another line of future research is to contrast the perspectives of incarcerated individuals with those of professionals who work with them (e.g., psychologists, social reintegration professionals, prison guards), to determine if their views and beliefs align concerning the process of forgiveness (and self-forgiveness) in the incarcerated population.
In terms of theoretical and practical implications, this study underscores the openness, receptivity, and importance attributed by these individuals to rehabilitation programs, particularly interventions that center around (self-) forgiveness.These interventions are seen as positive contributions to enhancing psychological well-being, potentially preventing suicidality, self-harm, and other problematic behaviors or mental health conditions within the incarcerated population in prison settings (Blaauw & van Marle, 2007;Sachitra & Wijewardhana, 2020).Finally, the present study draws attention to the urgent need to invest in hiring more professionals working in the field of rehabilitation for Portuguese prisons, since the existing resources are scarce and end up intervening only in extreme cases.Overall, these recognize the necessity of addressing aspects that foster self-reflection, personal transformation and growth, while also enhancing psychological well-being and mental health.This, in turn, can help prevent adverse behavioral outcomes, such as recidivism and criminality.