The phenomenon of incarcerating minors is widespread across the world. It is within this context that several researchers revisit the issue of their post-release social reintegration ([22]; [27]; [35]), emphasizing its complexity and, therefore, the need for the involvement of multiple actors ([36]). The simplest way to approach the problem of post-release social reintegration of minors is probably to begin planning their reintegration from the very first day of their incarceration ([30]). This approach, which consists of systemic-type interventions, is referred to as “continuous support.”

In different countries, families adopt various practices to address this issue. In Canada, researchers such as Strimelle and Poupart, cited by [8], show that families primarily focus on strengthening family ties ([13]; [17]). In the United States, families take in minors released from prison by providing them with accommodation, as demonstrated by Dolwick Grieb et al., cited by [8]. In Belgium, family housing is considered fundamental (Monchaux, 2021). In Morocco, according to the Ministry of Justice (2016), certain sanctions are implemented in the best interest of minors, including returning them to their families (39% of all decisions), as noted by [1].

In Burundi, incarcerated minors face numerous challenges when attempting to reintegrate into society after serving their sentence. The question is: how do families help these children reintegrate? In this article, we examine the role of the family in the post-release social reintegration of minors in Burundi ([25]; [28]; [34]). To achieve this, semi-structured interviews were conducted with formerly detained minors, as well as with some of their family members and members of their social environment ([20]; [28]). The results show that families play a crucial role in the success of their post-release social reintegration by carrying out a wide range of supportive actions.

Our study, aimed at identifying the actions undertaken by families to reintegrate their children after release, is qualitative in nature. Semi-structured interviews and life histories were used as data collection techniques. Using an interview guide, we gathered the views of 15 participants (from different families with a child under 18 who had been convicted of an offense) regarding the actions taken to support their post-release social reintegration.

The interviews were conducted in various parts of the country with (3) formerly detained minors, (6) parents of former detainees, and (3) members of the child’s extended family. Life histories were collected from (3) formerly detained minors. A content analysis of the corpus was carried out using NVivo software. Our analyses therefore made it possible to identify the main activities undertaken by families in the social reintegration of minors after their release.

In this section, before identifying the activities undertaken by families to ensure the reintegration of their children after release and presenting the views of the participants, we first outline the socio-demographic characteristics of our respondents (Table 1).

Table 1.Socio-demographic characteristics of participants.

Note: Age (at the time of the survey); F: Female; M: Male.

Our analysis of the field data made it possible to identify several activities undertaken by families of released minors to support their reintegration after release. The main ones are presented below.

The findings of this study highlight the central role played by families in the social reintegration of juveniles after their release from custody in Burundi. The socio-demographic profile of participants shows that most families come from modest socio-economic backgrounds, with parents largely engaged in subsistence farming and possessing low levels of education ([31]; [35]). This context shapes both the type and extent of support families are able to provide, confirming that reintegration processes are deeply embedded in structural and relational realities ([23]).

One of the most significant findings concerns the use of restorative justice practices. Families often initiate reconciliation processes between the offender and the victim’s family, emphasizing dialogue, apology, and community involvement ([3]; [21]). This aligns with restorative justice principles, which seek to repair harm and rebuild social ties ([26]). Testimonies from respondents, such as Kaneza and Bigirimana, illustrate that these practices can reduce resentment and foster mutual understanding, thereby lowering the risk of recidivism ([19]). However, divergent views, such as that of Muhimpundu, suggest that the effectiveness of restorative justice depends on individual perceptions and the nature of prior conflicts.

The study also underscores the importance of socio-professional reintegration. Families actively support juveniles in engaging in income-generating activities, either by providing initial capital or by encouraging the continuation of pre-incarceration occupations ([9]; [19]; [20]). This finding is consistent with research showing that stable employment significantly reduces reoffending ([6]; [24]). Nonetheless, the inability of some families to provide such support due to economic constraints highlights a critical gap, as unemployment remains a key risk factor for recidivism ([11]).

Accommodation emerges as another crucial dimension of reintegration. The provision of shelter, food, and emotional support by host families facilitates a smoother transition from prison to community life. This reflects the broader literature emphasizing the role of family support in fostering desistance and social stability ([37]). However, the study also reveals that not all families are able or willing to provide such support, often due to limited resources or weak prior relationships, thereby exposing some juveniles to heightened vulnerability.Education and vocational training further contribute to successful reintegration. While some juveniles resume formal schooling, others pursue vocational skills such as tailoring. These pathways enhance employability and social inclusion, supporting findings that skill acquisition and education are key factors in desistance from crime ([2]). Yet, the absence of structured educational programs within the penitentiary system remains a major limitation ([5]; [16]; [30]).

Finally, the study highlights the indispensable role of families in providing financial and healthcare support in the absence of institutional assistance. Families often bear the full burden of meeting basic needs and addressing health concerns, which can be exacerbated by poor detention conditions ([14]). This reliance on family solidarity underscores both its strength and its limits.

In sum, while families in Burundi play a pivotal role in supporting the reintegration of formerly detained juveniles, their efforts are constrained by socio-economic challenges. Strengthening institutional support mechanisms alongside family involvement would therefore be essential to ensure sustainable reintegration outcomes.

This study highlights the crucial role of families in the post-release social reintegration of formerly detained minors. Families promote restorative justice to foster reconciliation, support income-generating activities to ensure stability, provide accommodation and emotional support, facilitate access to education or vocational training, and offer financial and healthcare assistance.

Despite these efforts, some families face economic and social constraints that limit their ability to support reintegration effectively. Given the vulnerability of released minors, family involvement remains essential to help them adapt to a new life and achieve sustainable social reintegration.