Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aims of punishment essay
Essay on restorative justice in school
Rehabilitation and restorative justice within the penal system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aims of punishment essay
The Goals of Punishment
For many generations there has been an old saying that “if you do the crime then do the time” and still apply in this current epidemic. In fact, which goes to show that there are some in society that may need to be punished for their wrong doings. Parents use the same exact metaphor when disciplining their children when they do something wrong. No one is perfect and as humans there will be times when mistakes will be made. Life is all about living and learning from past mistakes and move on to know what not to do. Punishments is an effective method for not only parents and children, but with those who do wrong in the eyes of the law. This summary and analysis of the arguments supporters of restorative justice use to
In fact, restorative justice system response to wrongdoing that emphasizes healing the wounds of victims, offenders, and communities caused or revealed by crime (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2014, p.62). The main goal here is to establish a form of boundaries when it comes to the level and extent of punishment. Non one here on earth is allowed to just display deviant criminal behavior without some form of discipline and/or punishment. Furthermore, for those whom display criminal behavior disrupts the community as well. In addition deterrence is another key factor in the goals of punishment and the efforts to make it back right. Exploring further along to where restoration of the justice system have and still is occurring in today’s
Through a restorative justice analysis is in ways to improve and restore the young minds of the youth and to stir them into the right direction in life. In fact according to (Bently, 2015, p.26), “restorative justice doesn’t let the juvenile offender off the hook but helps the young person to understand and learn from mistakes, as well as giving him/her a stake in the community”. Now the restorative justice is not to in any way or shape or form is not intended to reward deviant behavior. Youth programs were created as a manifold to restore their better judgement and to become better productive members of
Roach, K. (2000). Changing punishment at the turn of the century: Restorative justice on the rise. Canadian Journal of Criminology. 42, (2), 249-280.
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 Youth Criminal Justice Act has many concerns creating inequalities in the restorative justice approach. For instance, juvenile delinquents who develop from a background that is impoverished may lack the ability to satisfy the reparative objectives of punishment and may not be ready to be reintegrated back into socie...
Question 1. Both Thomas Mathiesen and Stanley Cohen argue that alternative criminal justice responses that were presented after the 1970s were not real alternatives (Tabibi, 2015a). The ‘alternatives’ which are being questioned are community justice alternatives generally, and Restorative Justice specifically. The argument here is that Restorative Justice cannot be a real alternative because it is itself finished and is based on the premises of the old system (Mathiesen, 1974). Moreover, Restorative Justice is not an alternative, as it has not solved the issues surrounding the penal system (Tabibi, 2015a). Cohen (1985) supports this sentiment, and suggests that community based punishment alternatives have actually led to a widening and expansion
A growing number of probation officers, judges, prosecutors as well as other juvenile professionals are advocating for a juvenile justice system which is greatly based on restorative justice. These groups of people have been frustrated by the policy uncertainty between retribution and treatment as well as unrealistic and unclear public expectations. As a primary mission, the balanced approach or policy allows juvenile justice systems together with its agencies to improve in their capacity of protecting the community and ensuring accountability of the system and the offenders . It enables the youths to become productive and competent citizens. This guiding philosophical framework for this policy is restorative justice as it promotes the maximum involvement of the community, victim, and the offender in the justice process. Restorative justice also presents a viable alternative to sanctions as well as interventions that are based on traditional or retributive treatment assumptions. In the policy proposal for restorative justice, the balanced approach mission assists juvenile justice system in becoming more responsive to the needs of the community, victims, and the offenders . Therefore, this paper considers how restorative justice reduces referrals of juveniles to criminal and juvenile justice systems and gives a proposal on the implementation of restorative justice in the community together with a number of recommendations. For instance, preliminary research reveals that application of restorative justice in schools significantly reduces school expulsions, suspensions, and referrals to the criminal justice systems. Restorative justice programs are an alternative for zero-tolerance policies for juveniles or youths .
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.
Similarly to rehabilitation, restoration looks to better society, however, this approach to justice emphasises the needs of the victim. In cases of minor crimes such as vandalism or petty theft, restoration is preferable to rehabilitation. This is because those who commit these minor crimes often don’t have the need for rehabilitation as mental health isn’t a large concern. In these small cases, it is also not burdensome to compensate for the losses of the victim, making restoration the ideal
Another way that some argue against pure restitution is to say that is does not have an acceptable implication that punishment does have. Pure restitution lacks implications that are backed with punishment. Additionally, it is argued that pure restitution has an unacceptable implication that punishment also shares. Some say that pure restitution is too individualistic. It is also argued that some harm is beyond repair, and restitution will not solve or make these issues better, and the theory of pure restitution allows us to do nothing at all to the offender. A very controversial issue here is the question of murder.
The concept of restorative justice became a game-changer in juvenile justice system. Through the course of time, professionals explored every possible methods and approaches that could positively affect the children without the expense of harming their future and wellbeing. The idea of restorative justice is “administer justice that focuses or repairing the harm done to the victim and the community. (Save the Children-UK, 2005)” The four guiding principles are to: (1) Repair and restore the balance within the community. (2) restitution for the victim. (3) Ensure that the offender understand and take responsibility. (4) Help the offender to change and improve. In South Africa, this is practiced in their community throughout
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
Walgrave, Lode. Restorative justice for juveniles: potentialities, risks and problms for research : a selection of papers presented at the international conference Leuven, May 12-14, 1997. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1998.
...apabilities to deal with this which is not the case so much nowadays as Tony Marshall (1999) argues. There are criticisms over procedures, loss of rights such as an independent and impartial forum as well as the principle of proportionality in sentencing. There is also an unrealistic expectation that restorative justice can produce major changes in deviant behaviour, as there is not enough evidence to support this claim (Cunneen, 2007). Levrant et al (1999) on the other hand suggests that restorative justice still remains unproven in its’ effectiveness to stop reoffending and argues that its appeal lies in its apparent morality and humanistic sentiments rather than its empirical effectiveness. He continues to argue that it allows people to feel better within themselves through having the moral high ground rather than focusing on providing justice to the offender.
According to Champion the 3 factors that indicate changing criminal justice policy toward punishing offenders are: (1) decrease in crime, (2) changing public attitudes, and (3) fiscal pressures (2007). Due to these changes restorative or reparative justice has become more popular, particularly in case of property crimes. Restorative justice can be defined as, “A philosophical framework and a series of programs for the criminal justice system that emphasize the need to repair the harm done to crime victims through a process of negotiation, mediation, victim empowerment, and reparation (West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, 2008). This thread will provide a synopsis of the 3 factors mentioned and if or how this impacts the victim’s voice.
“Restorative justice is an approach to crime and other wrongdoings that focuses on repairing harm and encouraging responsibility and involvement of the parties impacted by the wrong.” This quote comes from a leading restorative justice scholar named Howard Zehr. The process of restorative justice necessitates a shift in responsibility for addressing crime. In a restorative justice process, the citizens who have been affected by a crime must take an active role in addressing that crime. Although law professionals may have secondary roles in facilitating the restorative justice process, it is the citizens who must take up the majority of the responsibility in healing the pains caused by crime. Restorative justice is a very broad subject and has many other topics inside of it. The main goal of the restorative justice system is to focus on the needs of the victims, the offenders, and the community, and focus
In a society filled with crime, violence, and corruption prisons are overflowing and imprisonment often creates more hardened criminals, rather than creating rehabilitated persons. South Africa needs to adopt a less putative approach to the punishment of crimes, and restorative justice can either help achieve this or only worsen matters. In this essay I will evaluate this punishment theory with regard to case law, legislation and various implementations relating to the matter. In evaluating these, I will develop my own opinion on restorative justice and its efficacy in a South African context.