Restorative Justice: A Therapeutic Process

Restorative justice is an innovative approach to the criminal justice system that focuses on repairing the harm caused by crimes committed. The methods used in the conventional justice system may deter the offender from committing further crimes, but it does neither repair the harm caused, nor help them acknowledge their responsibility, instead it stigmatises them, worsening the situation instead of improving it (Johnstone 2003). “Stigmatisation is the kind of shaming that creates outcasts; it is disrespectful, humiliating” (p.85). It breaks the moral bonds between offender and community and can result in the creation of a destructive cycle that may result in fear and isolation. The shaming by stigmatisation creates a negative effect which

While The Little Book of Restorative Justice for Colleges and Universities has many merits it also posses some off-putting weaknesses. Karp opens his work up for criticism and makes it less likely to be accepted or seen as a serious alternative to the traditional disciplinary systems with the inclusion of frivolous illustrations and talks of the spiritual. The Little Book also lacks much evidence outside of personal testimony or the authors own reasoning —while that can be strong evidence, empirical evidence have a place in this discussion.

Some principles of restorative justice that I believe are very important are, being responsive to ones needs, showing empathy, respect, and openminded to both parties, being able to recognize the capability of those impacted. Learn from and repair harm and promote healing for everyone, work together not against one another, and being understanding to all situations from a less judgemental stand point. These are just a few that caught my attention completely when we were given a brief summary of some of things being provided to those whom either commited a crime or was a victim of a crime. Being able to find out the reason why a young adult commited a crime for the first time, as well as finding out how the victim felt knowing the reason for the criminals action.

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 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.”

The way I explained the concept of restorative justice to my longtime friend Michelle who also obtained her associates in psychology is as follows:

Restorative justice will not work for everyone and will not be appropriate for every victim of these types of crime. It is important to be careful that the mediator has had a sufficient training and experience in it. “The victim has to be entirely comfortable with the process and receive the right support both before the conference and in the aftermath, as does the offender” (Collins,

This essay aims to make clear the system of restorative justice and its aims towards youth offending, whilst arguing points for and against the current system and whether or not it is more appropriate in terms of dealing with youth offending. It will also define restorative justice as well as defining what is meant by conventional justice. Making clear how and why these two systems came to be a part of youth justice whilst concluding as to which if either is more appropriate in dealing with youth offending behaviour.

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).

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.

Restorative justice has some key restorative values that are vital in the restorative justice conference to make the experience ‘restorative’. Concerning addressing victim needs and concerns means for listening, respecting, being non-judgmental, not blaming the victim and apologizing. The RJ system was bought as an alternative to the criminal justice system to give greater emphasis on victim rights and needs, offender accountability and community involvement. Throughout the essay, there will be an insight into how Restorative Justice addresses needs of victims in terms of the different proponents such as Information provided to victim, restitution/compensation, emotional and practical needs met, participation and involvement of victim and protection of victim, which (Wemmers and Marisa, 2002) as essentials to victims participating in the practice. The two countries that will be addressed will have had restorative justice built out of injustices and over-representation of the current criminal justice system to the indigenous peoples of those countries.

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

Re-integration not segregation might be said to be the moral centre of restorative justice. Daly and others see it, as at least in part, a feminist issue, with the role of the state being a dominating masculine presence, which is in essence aggressive to both victim and offender, and a change in this dynamic must occur to allow inclusiveness (Daly,2008).