Restorative Justice Methods Can Be Substituted For Incarceration

Entry #1: Maynard, Robyn. "Incarcerating youth as justice? An in-depth examination of youth, incarceration, and restorative justice." Canadian Dimension Sept.-Oct. 2011: 25+. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 24 Oct. 2016.

Studies suggest that there is a divide between the government and public response to juvenile incarceration. Bullis & Yovas (2005) state that support is given to correctional facilities to house juvenile offenders as a form of punishment (as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). Individuals who support this perspective are often more likely to support the construction of more prisons and stern penalties on crime based upon the presumptions that youthful offenders are aware of the consequences of their actions (Drakeford, 2002 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). On the other hand, opponents of this perspective believe that incarceration creates an opportunity to rehabilitate the offenders (Huffine, 2006 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 18). This perspective supports the purpose of juvenile detention centers as “preparatory in nature – that is, offering services focused on the development of skills needed to return successfully to mainstream

Finding a new way to deal with criminal issues for young adults is very rare, especialy in a predomenatly impoverished area. So to be a part of the Restorative Justice Research team was an honor, also very insightful. At first I knew only a brief description about restorative justice being used in a way of restoring small issues not applying it to a more serious incidents such as criminal justice. I looked at it as harm causing problems were as justice repairs a partial amount of the problem. For this project however, it was way more than just rebuilding but a way to bring justice in a creative way that can not only benefit people who have done crimes but help repair community thoughts and views in the process.

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 ways are a very controversial topic with some people thinking it is the best way for crime to be handled and others not being a fan of it. Some people don’t believe in restorative justice because it is giving offenders a second chance. Restorative prisons are a part of restorative justice that can positively impact many people including any individual who was involved in the crime in some way. Restorative prisons are more useful for the community as well as the offender because they have that opportunity to help many people. Restorative prisons are a perfect example that could have saved a 19 year old kid who was sentenced to 47 years in prison.

Karp argues that restorative justice is a more effective system than the prevailing retributive model. Within the book it is asserted that restorative justice systems had a higher degree of satisfaction for victims than the retributive approach(page 46). In addition to the higher degree of victim satisfaction the restorative approach was also less likely to result in an appeal, with a less than one percent of cases being appealed(page 47). (MAYBE A LITTLE MORE) These are the tangible benefits when compared empirically to retributive systems, restorative approaches have other benefits as well.

The goals of juvenile corrections are too deter, rehabilitate and reintegrate, prevent, punish and reattribute, as well as isolate and control youth offenders and offenses. Each different goal comes with its own challenges. The goal of deterrence has its limits; because rules and former sanctions, as well anti-criminal modeling and reinforcement are met with young rebellious minds. Traditional counseling and diversion which are integral aspects of community corrections can sometimes be ineffective, and studies have shown that sometimes a natural self intervention can take place as the youth grows older; resulting in the youth outgrowing delinquency.

Currently to deal with juvenile offenders involved in the youth crime, there are two options available. The first option that prevails to a larger extent is known to us as incarceration while the second option that is slowly gaining trends is known to us as rehabilitation programs. This paper focuses on thorough analysis of both these options and the impact that they have on the offenders as well as the society as a whole. The paper also assesses the viability of these options in order to determine which of these will prove to be more effective and beneficial.

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.

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.

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)

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.

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).

The perception by many involved in the justice system in general, and youth justice in particular, is that the present model of punitive retributive justice, often involving incarceration does not work. Indeed, it may be compounding an already huge social problem. This realisation has lead many to look for alternative systems. At present there is a considerable momentum building that advocates the use of a restorative justice model. Marshall has defined restorative justice as a process whereby parties with a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve how to deal with the aftermath of

It is a common believe that adolescents require a special system thru which be processed because they are “youth who are in a transitional stage of development…young offenders that are neither innocent children nor mature adults…” (Nelson, 2012). Because juveniles are in a process of constant development sociologically, psychologically and physiologically, the juvenile court system focuses on alternative sentences and the creation of programs that will offer them rehabilitation instead of incarceration. However, in cases of extraordinary circumstances, the juvenile system shifts from looking at rehabilitation as a first choice to accountability and punishment (Read, n.d). All levels of society are collectively involved in delinquency