In After the Crime: The Power of Restorative Justice Dialogues between Victims and Violent Offenders, its author Susan Miller, provides the reason to why it might be beneficial for both a victim and their offender to meet face-to-face after the crime. Not to mention, what has to happen in order to achieve that through two types of restorative programs. One of the programs is intended to benefit an offender and is known as Diversionary Restorative Justice. This program operates much different from the common Criminal Justice process as it focuses on minimizing the sentence given and seeks to rehabilitate the offender and offers less punishment. This program benefits the offender in their rehabilitative treatment but at the same time benefits …show more content…
Unlike the diversionary program, this program isn’t intended to offer offenders less punishment to their crimes, much less be attentive to their needs, instead, it seeks to offer victims the chance to encounter their offender and ask questions about the crime only they know the answers to. While equally important, the therapeutic restorative justice programs have been effective for victims to be able to heal and obtain answers to those troubling questions they may have for their offender. This has led to a program by Kim Book called the Victims Voices Heard Program that aims to specifically help only the victims of sexual violence or crimes that have taken place by people who know one another. The goal of this program is to heal victims from self-blame and from the fear that has been inflicted upon them. Miller later provides an example as to how the program has been effective for one offender and victim that proves the program to be of great assistance and …show more content…
As well as, contributing largely to the healing process for a victim in empowering them and making them feel control over the situation they’ve experienced. Many victims blame themselves for either not putting up a fight or believing they deserved it and this can create a sabotaging effect on their overall life. When discussing diversionary programs and their purpose of attending to the needs of the offender it might difficult to understand why they would need this. Apart from the Criminal Justice System’s formal process, this program attempts to rehabilitate the offenders who commit offenses that they believe can be treated for, so that they don’t commit the same crime over again. This might be helpful to understand when put into that perspective and diverts entirely from the Victims Voices program that doesn’t attempt to change an offenders sentence nor treat them. The Victims Voices program is a program that intends to offer victims the opportunity to meet with their offender in an attempt to help them understand what led their offender to do what they did and obtain answers to the questions they may have after the crime. As one can infer, this program has proven to be effective in how an offender can feel empathy towards their victim and a victim
The way the criminal justice system should handle crimes has always been a debated subject. For over the last forty years, ever since the war on drugs, there are more policies made to be “tough on crime”. From then, correctional systems have grown and as people are doing more crimes, there are plenty of punishments for them. In the mid 1970’s, rehabilitation was the main concern for the criminal justice system. It was common that when someone was convicted of a crime, they would be sentenced to prison but there would also be diagnosed treatments to help them as well. Most likely, they would have committed a crime due to psychological problems. When they receive treatment in prison, they can be healed and would not go back to their wrong lifestyle they had lived before. As years have gone by, people thought that it was better to take a more punitive stance in the criminal justice system. As a result of the turnaround of this more punitive criminal justice system, the United States now has more than 2 million people in prisons or jails--the equivalent of one in every 142 U.S. residents--and another four to five million people on probation or parole. The U.S. has a higher percentage of the
Its most commonly known definition was provided by Marshall in 1996, that describes restorative justice as a process where both parties; victims and offenders, work together to restore, resolve and deal with the after effects of the offence and future ramifications (as cited in Van Camp & Wemmers, 2013). The concept of restorative justice originally derived from various indigenous and pre-industrial western justice practices, however, in the 1970's it begun to appear in modern times and was then developed as a reference to describe victim-offender programs that were developed in North America (Strang, 2001). Restorative Justice approaches spread across the world in the 1990's, where many countries such as Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom, began introducing these approaches as alternatives in their criminal justice systems (Braithwaite, 1999). The concept of restorative justice usually involves victim and offender direct participation and is conducted in the form of conferences or mediation. This is where both parties; the victims and offenders, come together fact-to-face in one location, alongside a facilitator, police and support people, and work out together the consequences of the offenders actions and the
The need for the Jail Diversion Program arises from the increasing number of mental health problems among the jail population in the United States. According to Bell, Decker, & Sullivan (2013), 64 percent of the adults incarcerated in the US prisons in
The purpose of the restorative justice involves three basic goals: reestablishing the victims, reuniting offenders to the community, and helping to heal the community (Goodstein, and Butterfield, 2010). After being charged with an offense, the offender will always have that label on them and how everyone acts towards the offender will change. Restorative justice practices gives the offender a chance to change their outlook on life after being charged. These type of practices involve repairing and restoring relationships. Victims have the chance to come face-to-face with their offenders which could possibly lead to closure.
My initial reaction to the concept and process of restorative justice was positive. I am in full agreement to the process and feel this is a program that should be implemented in schools, justice systems, at home, and in the community. Van Wormer describes this program goal is to work together as a community (community building) to restore what was once whole and holding the offender accountable for damages (Van Wormer & Besthorn, 2011). Restorative justice is a humane way of problem solving and giving the opportunity for the offender to understand the effects made on the community, it's a form of therapy to discuss the underlying causes and issues. This provides the opportunity for both victim and offender to heal and create solutions.
Restorative justice is based on the principle that criminal behavior injures not only the victim but also the community and the offender, and any effort to resolve these problems caused by criminal behavior should involve all of these parties. Common restorative justice initiatives are victim-offender mediation, circle sentencing, community holistic healing programs, and family group conferences. A key to all these responses to criminal behavior is to address not only the offender, but all parties involved including the victim and their families, offender's family, community citizens, and even the police officers themselves.
Restorative justice (RJ) is the practice of trying to restore the victims of harm or trauma back to a state of peace and contentment. It is used to benefit the victims so they can in a way reclaim a part of themselves. Restorative justice has three main models/practices; Victim Offender Conferencing (VOC), Circle Processes, and Family Group Conferences. Victim offender conferencing is the most common application of restorative justice in North America. In, The Little Book of Victim Offender Conferencing, Lorraine Stutzman Amstutz explains, “the victim offender conferencing process brings victims and offenders of crime together in a face-to-face meeting prepared and led by a trained facilitator, often a community volunteer, to talk about the impact of the consequences of the crime.”
One particular positive is that plea bargains take into account the victims needs and include the victims throughout the plea-bargaining process. In the past, victims issues were not heard and often created secondary victimization. Erez and Tontodonato (1990) found that “The most consistent result emerging from the studies was victims’ frustration with and alienation from the system” (p.452). Listening to victims needs is important and has come to the forefront in recent years. Although prosecutors, Crowns, and judges do not have to take the victim's statement into account, it is important for their voices to be heard.
2) What did the Partners in Healing Project do? The partners in healing project defined restorative justice as “everyone affected by crime or harm, including victims, offenders, and community members”. They aspired to improve conditions for prisoners and invited them to seek out new ways of understanding their offenses and their prison experience. Their purpose isn’t to reduce the use of imprisonment although, many of the member do advocate for a reduced use of prison in response to crime. The community-based committee that oversees the project has a mandate to promote restorative justice at a community-wide level. This program has restorative justice committees that meet twice a month for a few hours. The committees provide inmates with opportunities to learn about restorative justice and how it might help them face the effects of their offenses. The goal of this was to provide inmates with a safe environment where they can communicate feelings, come to accept responsibility for what they
Restorative Justice and Prison Restorative justice practices in the prison setting focus on various factors, including the offending behavior, victims, community service work, victim-offender mediation, and the restorative justice philosophy(Dhami et al, 2009). With these various contributing factors, mutually agreeable and best possible solution can be achieved to repair the serious harm caused by the criminal behaviors through the consistent communication within every individual members. In addition, these processes can provide the valuable effects of reconciliation, victim healing, offender rehabilitation, and as well as the reintegration of the offenders into the society(Dhami et al, 2009). Both restorative justice and imprisonment aim
The three key goals victims can pursue through the criminal justice system is to punish the offender, compel law breakers to undergo rehabilitate treatment and restitution. Punishment is usually justified on utilitarian grounds as evil. Although it is argued that making transgressors suffer curbs future criminality in a number of ways. It is said if an offender gets punished by unpleasant and unwanted consequences it will most likely discouraged him/her from breaking the law again. Also it satisfies victims thirst for revenge and prevents future vigilantism and incapacitates dangerous predators so they can be off the streets; a safer community. Rehabilitation, some victims want professionals to help offenders become decent,
A person who experiences a traumatic event may be expected to experience a range of psychological effects, and, for many years, it was assumed that these psychological effects would be the same regardless of the cause of the injury. However, a growing body of knowledge is demonstrating that the impact of criminal victimization is different than the impact of other types of injuries because the intent element makes a difference in how the victim perceives the harm. In addition, victims of different crimes may respond differently to victimization. The psychological effects of victimization are important because they can help guide the criminal justice system for how to interact with victims and how to make the process more victim-appropriate. For example, victims of violent crimes, like sexual assaults, may benefit more from a victim-centered criminal justice approach than victims of other types of crimes (Resick, 1987). However, one of the problems with the traditional approach to victimology is that it has distinguished between different groups of victims. Emerging research suggest that victim needs are similar across the entire spectrum of crime, particularly the victims' needs for information about the crime and the needs for financial restitution to make them whole (ten Boom & Kuijpers, 2012).
During this type of healing circle, the offence will be discussed as well as how it affected the victim and the community and the relationship between them and the offender (Justice Education Society, 2016). Not only does the circle attempt to heal community ties, the circle also focuses on the offender and the fundamental causes of their offence (Justice Education Society, 2016). Following a healing circle that is directed towards offenders and victims, a consensus is taken to decide the subsequent steps that should be taken by the offender to correct the harms caused by their actions (Justice Education Society, 2016). These steps could include specialized counseling or treatment programs, community work service, potlatch or other traditional remedies, direct restitution to the victim or community and in some cases, unique and creative solutions emerge (Justice Education Society, 2016).
With the rise of Civil Rights Movement in western countries, the circumstances of the criminal victims are getting more attention gradually. Due to this emphasis, it directly led to a first revolution in the criminal justice, the revival Restorative justice. For a criminal justice system, victim support and healing is a priority which might seem an obvious aim. "Restorative Justice" was first introduced by an American professor, Randy Barnett in 1977. Nowadays, restorative justice systems have been applied to criminal justice system in many countries (Tai Wan, Australia, the US and the UK etc). In spite of many researches of restorative justice composed by western scholars, however it has not yet been defined properly and cover over the cons of this system. Restorative Justice repairs the harm that caused by crime and reducing the future harm on victims, there are advantages yet there are also bad. In this essay, I will use the application of the principles of sociology, literature, ethics knowledge to demonstrate argumentation to restorative justice and to reflect the pros and cons. (160words)
How many inmates were isolated from their communities when they had committed a crime or when they got released from the prisons? And how many effective programs can be helpful for them?Many posts-release prisoners have experienced recidivism and social stigmas due to lack of programs. In fact, restorative justice for people in prison has played a big role in our correctional systems in many different ways.Restorative justice in prison shapes our prisoner 's morals and abilities by providing a suitable technique. Although punishment may play a part in restorative justice techniques, the central focus remains on relationships between the affected parties, and healing reached through a deliberative process guided by those affected parties.( Tsui,2014). For instance, many inmates have attended into reentry programs and educational orientations when they finished their time in prison. These programs cost less money for the government, and inmates can be reintegrated into societies easily. Many post-release prisoners have avoided recidivism after these effective programs taught them the value of lives. This study will examine the importance of restorative justice in prison, which is essential for our correctional facilities. Numerous studies have been done recently which focused on this restorative justice.For example, restorative justice answers the justice question in a different way.(Toews,p.5,2006).