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Other who don 't agree with this method would argue that Restorative justice is out of date for this day and age.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 I also agree with this form of punishment being out of date.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 a process whereby parties with a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future” (Munchie, 2004).
Restoration Restorative justice is based on bringing together the victim, the offender, and the community; all have equal parts in repairing the relationships destroyed by
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.
Instead of focusing on crime prevention, restoration focuses on repairing the harm done to the victim and the community. Along with restoring property and personal injuries, restoration is meant to bring back some kind of security. Legislators and victims want to know that justice has been done. Van Ness and Strong (1997: 8-9) suggested three core principles for the nature of restorative justice. First, Justice requires the healing of victims, offenders, and communities injured by the crime. Also, they should be permitted to stay involved in the justice process in a timely manner. Lastly, the government should be responsible for preserving a just order and the community should be responsible for establishing peace. The victims family in a murder case can have a since of relief when the offender is sentenced to the death penalty. They can know that justice has been done and will have a sense of security knowing the offender cannot harm anyone else again. The family can now mourn over there loss more
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
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 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.
The program really aims for long-term results instead of short term. It is hard to obtain quantitate measures on such a program. However, Lawson does mention a study that began in 1997 at Indiana University that measured overall satisfaction of offenders and victims who used a restorative justice approach. The findings were that “90% of the victims were satisfied with the way their case was handled, as compared to 68% whose cases were handled by conventional means” (Lawson p186 2004). “80% of offenders completed their restitution agreements compared to 58% for juveniles assigned restitution by other means, and the re arrest rates for those who completed restorative justice conferences were 25-45% lower than that of their counterparts” (Lawson p186 2004). This to me means that the program is working. Since this program is aimed at long-term solutions I would encourage that communities that use restorative justice track the offenders. They should keep a running database with offender’s names and check back with law enforcement every few years to see how the offender is doing. I would track each person for at least twenty years. I would continuously check to see if the juvenile is still committing crimes, the types of crimes they are committing and how much time passes between each
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.
Agreeing on a definition of restorative justice has proved difficult. One definition is a theory of justice that focuses mostly on repairing the harm caused by criminal behaviour. The reparation is done through a cooperative process that includes all the stakeholders. Restorative justice can also be explained as an approach of justice that aims to satisfy the needs of the victims and offenders, as well as the entire community. The most broadly accepted definition for restorative justice, however, is a process whereby all the parties that have a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve on how to deal with the aftermath. This process is largely focused around reparation, reintegration and participation of victims. That is to say, it is a victim-centred approach to criminal justice, and it perceives crime differently than the adversarial system of justice.
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.
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
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
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