Restorative Justice

Juvenile offenders in the United States are typically accountable to either retributive or restorative justice. This paper argues that restorative justice programs for juveniles, when compared retributive justice, is the preferred option in many cases. The restorative justice philosophy involves a shift in viewing and dealing with crime. Instead of focusing on who did what wrong and how that offender will be punished, restorative justice looks at what happened, who was affected, and looks to create expectations for the offender and agreements so harm does not happen again. The varying forms of restorative justice share a focus on offender accountability through victim-offender-community programs.

This paper begins with a brief outline of

The primary goal of restorative justice is restoration of victims, offenders and the community. Restorative justice for juveniles should be designed in the human developmental context that accounts for the mental and emotion distinctions been adolescents and adults. (USDOJ 2011) Accountability is a recurring theme in restorative justice models. It involves a consideration of juvenile development, public safety and the effects of victimization when designing restorative justice programs that assist juvenile offenders to avoid putting themselves and others at risk in the future. (USDOJ 2011) A principle of restorative justice is the “idea of discussion, dialogue, and negotiation between parties involved in and affected by a given crime.” (Karp

California’s Welfare and Institutions Code require that offender training and treatment be substituted for retributive punishment and shall be directed to the correction and rehabilitation of juveniles who have committed offenses. (Pavelka 2008) Another example is Colorado, where the goal is to lower recidivism by offering treatment in the best interest of the juvenile. (Pavelka 2008)

3. The Balanced Approach

Seven states have a model based on the principles of “personnel responsibility, accountability, accountability and reformation” within the context of public safety and restitution to the victim and community. (Pavelka 2008)

Codes vary state by state, but a common restorative justice language pervades throughout all jurisdictions. The primary findings of an examination of restorative justice indicate that virtually every state is implementing restorative justice in some form at numerous levels (e.g. state, regional, or local, in program and policy). Many states that have changed their codes or statutes to incorporate restorative justice principles have accomplished this within the past 20 years. (Pavelka