More handpicked essays just for you.
Four theories of restorative justice
Theoretical best practices for restorative justice
Four theories of restorative justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Over the years, the traditional criminal justice system has emphasized offenders’ accountability through punishment and stigmatization. The emphasis on the retributive philosophy made it challenging for the system to meaningfully assist and empower crime victims. In the criminal justice system, victims often face insensitive treatment with little or no opportunity for input into the perseverance of their case and report feeling voiceless in the process used (Choi, Gilbert, & Green, 2013:114). Crime Victims, advocates, and practitioners have called for an expansion of victims’ rights and community-based alternatives rather than punishment-orientated justice policies. What victims want from the criminal justice system is a less formal process, more information about case processing, respectful treatment, and emotional restoration. 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 result 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 victim-offender mediation (VOM) program. 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.
Even though, VOM program is exceedingly beneficial, it has its drawbacks. The crucial part of VOM program is the participation;...
... middle of paper ...
...l (Choi, Gilbert, & Green, 2013:129). Maximizing the sensitivity of RJ practitioners towards the victims and offenders would result in thoughtfully processed mediation, a foundation in achieving the promises of RJ.
Works Cited
Amstutz, L.S. (1999). Training issues in Victim Offender Mediation. Journal of Correctional Education, 50(2), 68-71
Choi, J., Gilbert, M., & Green, D. (2013). Patterns of victim marginalization in victim-offender mediation: some lessons learned. Crime, Law and Social Change, 59(1), 113-132
Gerkin, P. (2009). Participation in victim-offender mediation. Criminal Justice Review, 34(2), 226-247.
Presser, L., & Hamilton, C. A. (2006). The micropolitics of Victim–Offender mediation. Sociological Inquiry, 76(3), 316-342.
Reimund, M.E. (2004). Confidentiality in Victim Offender Mediation: A False Promise. Journal of Dispute Resolution, 401-427.
Even though restorative justice has many supporters, it also boasts numerous opponents as well. In response to a proposal for restorative justice, conservatives largely contest the idea in favor of a more “get-tough” on criminals approach. “According to conservative theory, human beings are obliged to curb their drive for self-gratification. Offenders are to be punished harshly in order to provide them with a moral lesson and to serve as a general deterrent” (Mantle, Fox, & Dhami, 2005, p. 20). Many citizens worry that with the advancement of restorative justice comes the loss of state and government power. Because formal court processes are usually avoided and communities execute their own “judge and jury” practices when a crime is committed, restorative justice is sometimes seen as a threat to traditional U.S. state and federal court systems. A reduction in the involvement of the American court systems is viewed as a “breakdown of traditional social and legal authority” (Mantle et al., 2005, p. 20). With “a culture that is becoming increasingly conservative and focused on security rather than personal freedom,” (Siegel, 2008, p. 194) many conservatives are resistant to a form of justice that gives more liberty an...
Young, M. (1999) Restorative community justice in the United States: A new paradigm. International Review of Victimology, 6, p265-277.
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.
Indeed, that correctional counselors and custodial staff need to work together in collaboration to improve on the treatment and management of offenders. For example, they should work together so as to eliminate impediments arising from the conflicting assertions on the advocacy for the treatment and rehabilitation and maintenance of order and security so that the offenders are able to cooperate in correctional treatment without any fear that treatment induced statements may incriminate him/her. This collaboration should be done in a way that ensures offenders are assisted to cope, learn and reform their behaviors so that they can enhance security (McElreath et al.,
impact of victim participation in plea bargaining which it is basic on the levels of victim
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
Across the world, there are a great deal of people that are likely to become victims of offenses against themselves or their property. The criminal justice system is used to govern crimes and impose penalties on individuals that may violate laws. The criminal justice system is made up of different agencies that include: law enforcement, the courts, and corrections. Within this paper, I will discuss the roles of the prosecutor, the defense attorney, the criminal, and the victim and how victimization affects each role. Also, I will inform you about the goals of sentencing associated with each role. The goals of alternative sanctions will be discussed. I will also let u know what recommendations I have regarding victims’ rights.
Clark, P. M. (2011). Interventions for domestic violence: Cognitive behavioral therapy. Corrections Today, Vol. 73 (1), pp. 62-64. Retrieved from http://crimesolutions.gov/PracticeDetails.aspx?ID+16
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...
In recent years the role of victims in the criminal justice system has risen into prominence, inspiring much research into victim experience and possible reform. There are a multitude of factors that influence policy makers in relation to reforming the criminal justice system, one of which is victims. However, victims while they can be catalysts for reforms such as the case of James Ramage among others, they still play a relatively minor role in influencing policy change.
Davis, R. C., Lurigio, A. J., & Skogan, W. G. (1997). Victims of crime (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
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
The Criminal Justice System is a complex system that deals with not simply the perpetrators but also the victims. It helps shed light on what could be a life-altering situation for the victims. In some cases they provide clarity to the issues that the victims are left to face long after the crime has been committed and the perpetrator has been captured. I am interested in this system because it does not focus only on putting the perpetrators in prison but also on the...