Restorative Justice Pros And Cons

Restorative Justice, according to Google, is a system of criminal justice that focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large. It does not have a place in our society for several reasons. It is ineffective because it doesn’t punish people, doesn’t change them, and makes the situation even worse in most cases.

Rooted in our civilization, restorative justice was once viewed as a sin against a sovereign society of a King, Queen, or Emperor. Albert Eglash (1975) first articulated restorative justice over retributive and rehabilitative justice, an indeed search for the original status of security of the victim’s feelings. Restorative Justice, a more victim-centered aspect of punishment than the offender, however, the victim should consider, what it is that restorative justice will restore to its original state of security, and would it be enough justice that the victim seeks.

Restorative justice is rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community. Restorative justice programs are conferences held to enable offenders, victims and community members to meet face to face to discuss the crime that was done and determine the best way to repair the harm. Usually when offenders hear their victims describe the effect the crime had on them, they often feel sympathy and express remorse. Restorative justice conferences give the victims and community member’s justice and satisfaction. I believe the system is good because it gives criminals time to try and better themselves and try to change, and also gives justice and closure to the victims.

What is restorative justice? Restorative justice is when youths that were affected by an incident choose to repair the damage that they committed, restore trust, and find a place in the community in which they can fit into society. Not only that, but one of their main focus is to build respectful relationships that can be noticed by everyone (Murthy, 2016, para. 2). The restorative justice approach shares three goals. These three goals are known as accountability, competency, and public safety. Accountability is responsible for making amends and reestablishes the losses to victims and communities. The purpose of accountability is not to obey a curfew, attending counseling, having interaction with a probation officer, or evade the usage of drugs. The full meaning of restorative justice is simply to take full responsibility for the actions that were committed (del Carmen & Trulson, 2006, p. 446). The purpose of competency is basically doing something that’s going to value another person. Not doing an illegal crime doesn’t count as a standard for competency. Getting offenders involved in different activities would value the community. Activities that value the community are work, community service, dispute resolution, and community problem solving. All of these activities help rebuild the offender, victim, and of course the community (del Carmen & Trulson. 2006, p. 446). The last one which is public safety helps offenders get more involved within the community through

Restorative justice ways are a very controversial topic. Many people have different opinions about whether restorative justice is a good idea or not. Restorative prisons are a part of restorative justice and they can positively impact many people who were involved in some way of the crime or not. One way of restorative prisons are very effective and beneficial is because it gives the perpetrator more of an option on rebuilding their life after. It also helps the perpetrator see the good in themselves as well as others see the good in this perpetrator. Restorative prisons don’t just give the perpetrator freedom right away they have to go through a process to prove that they want to be a better person so they are not just receiving freedom

For most people, our first thought when we have been hurt by someone is to either get revenge or receive the worst punishment they can get for their offense. Instead of our first thought is to get back at the person what if we learn why they caused the harm they did, learn to forgive them, help them to not cause the harm to someone else. The United States criminal justice system focuses on just punishing the offender which does not help the victim or the offender, also known as retributive justice. Sometime during the 1970's a new system started to evolve called restorative justice. Restorative Justice is a criminal justice system focus attention on the rehabilitation of offenders through reuniting with victims and the community.

Restorative justice practices have the possibility to influence people in a positive way, and strengthen society around the world. The central purpose of these practices are to make people happier, more cooperative, and include positive changes. Yes, there should be an increase in the use of restorative justice. The reasons why there should be an increase in restorative justice practices consist of: reducing crime, restoring relationships, providing leadership, and repairing harm. Restorative justice practices are becoming more popular and having a positive outcome for everyone.

Restorative justice is a system of criminal justice that emphasizes the rehabilitation of offenders through mending ties with the victims and the community. A better explanation of restorative justice is a theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm caused by criminal behavior. It is best accomplished through cooperative processes that include everyone involved. This can lead to transformation of people, relationships and communities.

I obtained my associates degree in psychology and when I started Walden for my bachelor’s that was also in psychology, however after taking a few criminal justice classes as my concentration I liked it so much I switched my major, so explaining criminal justice to people is not new to me as many people want to know why I switched and what the difference is.

Restorative justice is a system of criminal justice that focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large. This criminal justice system that restores promotes accountability between parties involved and builds the community through the provision of assistance and respects to victims and anyone involved in the community because crime disrupts lives.

The criminal justice system is a set of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws. Different jurisdictions have diverse laws, agencies, and ways of managing criminal justice processes. In recent years, it has been debated that the criminal justice system has two primary and possibility conflicting perspectives known as the retributive justice approach and the restorative justice approach. Retributive justice and restorative justice have contrasting approaches when imposing punishment, that will be explored within this research paper, in regards to the disadvantages and potential advantages resulting from the implementation of it’s polices within the criminal justice system. These two perspectives have been implemented amongst many different criminal justice systems internationally, however the questions still remain, what is justice? And how should justice be served? This debate has created a divide between countries, due to the differing interpretations of justice and it’s response to criminal activity. The statistical information has been extracted from various online sources listed within the references as well as primary and secondary sources, “Prisons” by Haley, James and “Alternatives to Prisons” by Jennifer Skancke.

The criminal justice system views any crime as a crime committed against the state and places much emphasis on retribution and paying back to the community, through time, fines or community work. Historically punishment has been a very public affair, which was once a key aspect of the punishment process, through the use of the stocks, dunking chair, pillory, and hangman’s noose, although in today’s society punishment has become a lot more private (Newburn, 2007). However it has been argued that although the debt against the state has been paid, the victim of the crime has been left with no legal input to seek adequate retribution from the offender, leaving the victim perhaps feeling unsatisfied with the criminal justice process.

The traditional criminal justice system is criticized for its neglect of victim importance and needs, for example (Symonds, 1980) acknowledges, that the criminal justice system is concerned about looking back at the event rather than focusing on how to rehabilitate and as a consequence making victims be in a ‘secondary victimization’ effect. This is the attitudes, behaviors and the beliefs of the people in the criminal

When considering studies in corrections on a global scale it is important to understand how to utilize the most applicable method to gather knowledge. Comparative studies are often used to explore methods for explicating or developing knowledge and attitudes. Comparative research examines cases with the intention to reveal the structure and invariance or unchanging relationship for an entire group or population. In this case, and for the purpose of this paper, the comparative research is suggested to be used in corrections on a global scale. Several problems arise when using comparative research studies on a global scale. Some of these issues are cross-cultural research between countries, selecting a compatible research design whether

This paper will focus on retributive justice and restorative justice. Let’s begin with the definition of each. Retributive justice is a theory of justice that considers that punishment, if proportionate, is a morally acceptable response to crime. On the other hand, restorative justice is the opposite. It is a theory of justice that focuses on the needs of the victims and the offenders. So which of these should be morally right?