Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Restorative justice disadvantages
Solutions to juvenile delinquency
Rehabilitation programs reduce recividism rates among juvenile offenders
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Restorative justice disadvantages
According to www.merriam-webster.com restorative is having the ability to make a person feel strong or healthy again and justice is the process or results of using laws to fairly judge and punish crimes and criminals. When you link the two words together you get an alternate sanction to traditional punishment methods. This alternate method has been proven to work all around the world in countries like Africa, Asia, and Europe, just to name a few. And was established over 20years ago. When most people think of restorative or restitution they make think of money. The restorative program is so much bigger than just money. This program is intended to help the victim and the offender in the long run. Before I reviewed this lesson I also thought
Other who don 't agree with this method would argue that Restorative justice is out of date for this day and age. non-believers of restorative justice don 't think a victim should be chastise anymore more by having to sit and meet with the offender. Other non-supporters would also say the restitution method may be the easy way out for a criminal. I personally agree with the non-believers. I don 't think the restorative program is a viable alternative sanction to traditional punishment. I don 't believe as a victim I would want to sit in the same room and talk to someone who has caused harm to me or one of my love ones. I think having a meeting with the offender only opens up old wounds if the victim is trying to heal from the crime. The best healing for me is out of sight and out of mind. If the offender is locked away, the victim may eventually forget about the pain the offender has caused them. I also agree with this form of punishment being out of date. The young people this day and age don 't listen to anything or anyone. Sitting down in a room with a victim would not help most of these criminals, all that talking would go in one ear and out the other. I 'm pretty sure if talking would help, they wouldn 't have committed the crime in the first place. I do feel like Restorative justice is the easy way out and criminals these days would work the system to get in this program so they won 't have to face jail time. Nine times out of ten, the offender is probably not really sorry, they just want to make it thru this program so they can be out on the streets again. I really feel like this program would cause the victim more harm than healing. Everyday the victim is going to have to face this criminal and live with the fact that they let this criminal talk it out instead of doing jail time. I think talk is cheap and if you do the crime you must do the time. This is just my
Restorative justice is defined as “using humanistic, no punitive strategies to right wrongs and restore social harmony” (Siegel, 2008, p. 189). Instead of imposing harsh penalties on offenders like long prison sentences or even the death penalty, restorative justice calls for a more rehabilitative approach, such as reconciliation and offender assistance.
This voluntary alternative gives the offender the opportunity to take responsibility for their actions and identify the impact they have had on their victim, while also giving the victim the chance to confront the offender and take steps to repair the harm done. The victim can ask the offender questions about the crime and the offender may apologise or make amends for their actions. Restorative justice is confrontational and can be difficult for both parties but is proven to help both the offender and victim. While it is confrontational for the victim, for some it can be better than testifying in court. Data shows that restorative justice greatly helps victims in their recovery from the offence. Although the benefits of restorative justice in adult offenders is unclear, it significantly reduces the number of reoffenders in youth. For this reason, restorative justice is mostly used for minor infringements and within the youth justice system.
There are better ways to punish criminals and protect society than mass incarceration. The state and local governments should be tough on crime, but “in ways that emphasize personal responsibility, promote rehabilitation and treatment, and allow for the provision of victim restitution where applicable” (Alec, 2014). The government also succeeds in overseeing punishment but fails to “…take into account the needs of offenders, victims, and their communities.” (Morris, 2002: Pg. 1 and 2). Alternatives to incarceration, such as sentencing circles, victim offender mediation, and family conferences, can successfully hold criminals responsible while allowing them a chance to get “back on their feet”. Research has proven that rehabilitation has lowered the rate of re-offenders, reducing the crime rate, protecting communities and also saves a lot of
The program is modeled after similar programs that begun in the 1970s and 1980s in New Zealand and Australia (Lawson 2004). It is used in schools, juvenile courts, and youth centers. However, for this discussion I will use the facts from Catherine Lawson’s restorative justice study in Missouri. In Lawson’s writings she references Derek R. Brookes, who came up with the conclusion that restorative justice attempts to produce these three outcomes: reconciliation, reparation, and transformation. Reconciliation is stage where all the apologies happen. Reparation is the stage at which the offender takes responsibility for his or actions, by providing fair restitution to the victim and lastly transformation is the stage where the offender is re-guided back into society as a productive member and is out of the cycle of
Therefore, there is a growing need to progress towards the restorative justice (RJ) system. According to RJ perspective, a crime is considered a conflict between individuals that results in harm to victims, communities, and offenders, and so these parties are also involved in responding to it. One of the prevalent programs of the RJ system is the victim-offender mediation (VOM) program. The VOM program is a process which provides interested victims an opportunity to meet the offender, in a safe and structured setting, with the goal of holding the offender directly accountable for their behaviour while providing assistance and compensation to the victims; mediators do not impose settlements. Over the years, the VOM program has proved to be beneficial to both, the victim and the offender.
As the purpose of restorative justice is to mend the very relationship between the victim, offender, and society, communities that embrace restorative justice foster an awareness on how the act has harmed others. Braithwaite (1989) notes that by rejecting only the criminal act and not the offender, restorative justice allows for a closer empathetic relationship between the offender, victims, and community. By acknowledging the intrinsic worth of the offender and their ability to contribute back to the community, restorative justice shows how all individuals are capable of being useful despite criminal acts previous. This encourages offenders to safely reintegrate into society, as they are encouraged to rejoin and find rapport with the community through their emotions and
This approach has introduced a criminal justice policy agenda. In the past, victims to criminal activities have been outsiders to the criminal conflict. In recent times, many efforts have been made to give the victims a more central role in the criminal justice system. Some of these efforts were introduced a few years back, though even at that time, these efforts were seen as long overdue. Some of these efforts include access to state compensation and forms of practical support. For advocates of restorative justice, crime is perceived primarily as a violation of people and relationships, and the aim is to make amends for all the harm suffered by victims, offenders and communities. The most commonly used forms of restorative justice include direct mediation, indirect mediation, restorative cautioning, sentencing panels or circles and conferencing. In recent...
Restorative justice aims to bring back the sense of security by emphasizing the social relationships and providing social support and control for victims. It focuses on the healing the individuals affected by the crime, permitting all individuals involved in the justice process, and places the responsibility of establishing peace on the government. Three criticisms of restorative justice are the assumptions that agreements those involved are secured when they are sometimes not achieved, it avoids implementing traditional ways of the criminal justice system, and the government holding the accountability. I believe that the blame should not held accountable for the actions of individuals. The government’s job is to enforce the law; however, since
When Mary Catherine Parris was told that I would be talking to her about restorative justice, her response was, “Is that a real thing?” (personal communication, September 23, 2015). Through this assignment I realized that restorative justice is not talked about within the criminal justice system. For both of the individuals I spoke with, the idea of restorative justice seemed like a joke. In trying to persuade them both that restorative justice is a real thing, I was met with very similar beliefs and comments from both individuals. They both believed that restorative justice would not work and believed that some aspects of the approach were completely useless (M. C. Parris, & R. Clemones, personal communication, September 23, 2015). The responses
Pros of the restorative justice system are that it brings parties together in crime. Instead of a short term goal, the restorative justice system takes a long-term approach to reducing crime and violence using different kinds of methods. In restorative justice programs, offenders work with others affected by their criminal actions. Restorative justice promotes instilling positive behaviors in young criminals and teaching long-lasting changes in behavior to prevent future crimes. There also could be negative consequences from the restorative justice system. For restorative justice to work, criminals and their victims must communicate about the crime and its consequences. Since violent crimes often leave victims feeling helpless and vulnerable, encouraging communication can result in increased anxiety and fear. Additionally, communication might breach confidentiality for victims of violent crimes, such as rape and assault, because they must discuss the outcome of the crime and how it has impacted
...restorative justice erodes legal rights; restorative justice results in net-widening; restorative justice trivializes crime (particularly men's violence against women); restorative justice fails to "restore" victims and offenders; restorative justice fails to effect real change and to prevent recidivism; restorative justice results in discriminatory outcomes; restorative justice extends police powers; restorative justice leaves power imbalances untouched; restorative justice leads to vigilantism; restorative justice lacks legitimacy; and restorative justice fails to provide "justice".[72]
It implements small government solutions to social problems and is typically a liberal view. Liberals are concerned with individual rights when entering the criminal justice system and want little government activity. Restorative justice gives them this control. Government activity is limited to only restoring peace if needed and the rights of the offender and victim are in the hands of the community. Liberals want to use government resources to assist the victim and offender and provide them with the needs to support their rehabilitation and heeling process, this is all part of restorative
Restorative mediation can defiantly help victims and offender heal. I think this program works because it helps both parties to come together to communicate and listen to each other. After a terrible accident or tragedy sometimes victims don’t want to hear nothing from the defendant, but I feel like programs like this one can make both parties come together to make a peaceful change. One way to determine if the program was successful is by interviewing both parties and find out what are the emotions and feelings. Another way is to determine if restorative mediation will work both parties must have the want to try to forgive, I feel like making either the victims or the defendant attend the program without wanting to forgive will be pointless.
The restorative model discovers the harm caused by the crime committed and involves the victims, offenders, and the community in order to reconstruct the damage done to everyone immersed in the situation (Bell, 2015, p.53). This pretty much covers their focus. Their focus is to repair the harm caused by the crime, the harm done to the victims, and any harm that could be done in the future by crime prevention (Bell, 2015, p.37). The restorative model has a main philosophy of peacemaking; which includes repairing the past harms, and compromise and harmony amongst the offender, victims, and community (Bell, 2015, p.37). The first two models for juvenile justice discussed do not include any of these attitudes. The restorative model views crime and delinquency as a “violation of people and relationships” (Bell, 2015, p. 38). The main point of restoration is to repair damage, and it is not focused on punishment and law, unlike the justice and the crime control model. This model is valuable in retrospect; but it is not effective for all crimes. In order for it to be fully effective, everyone involved in the crime has to be willing to spend hours rebuilding the relationship and the victims must be all right with facing the perpetrator. This makes it difficult to consider it as the most effective model at reducing crime. The restorative model has been proven
The law of restitution is a kind of remedy available in many civil lawsuits and in some criminal cases. This is a gain based recovery. This type of remedy is intended based on the gains of the defendant. Restitution as a means of rehabilitating offenders, explain that the sentence court at the request of sufferer, levy a claim against any personal and real property the convicted offender or might come to own. Restitutions a means of reconciling offenders. Some restitutions advocates views it is the process as a vehicle for reconciliation. Restitution might be mutual; parties who share responsibilities for breaking law make reconciliation. If a long-term calm settlement is to emerge; both parties consider the restitution agreement pale and positive. Restitution as a means of punishing offenders. It explains that restitution as an additional