Restorative Justice Essay

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.

While many conservatives oppose the rehabilitative measures restorative justice offers offenders and demand more prisons and penalties, advocates for restorative justice counter this demand with research. Restorative justice advocates call for restitution rather than retribution. According to promoters for restorative justice, imposing harsh penalties on offenders and lengthening prison sentences is futile. “Critical theorists argue that the ‘old methods’ of punishment are a failure and that upwards of two-thirds of all prison inmates recidivate soon after their release” (Siegel, 2008, p. 188). While conservatives want to build more prisons and lock away more offenders for longer terms, supporters of restorative justice believe that a more rehabilitative approach is beneficial for not only the offender, but also the community. “The offender is asked to recognize that he or she caused injury to personal and social relations along with a determination and acceptance of responsibility. Only then can the offender be restored as a productive member of society” (Siegel, 2008, p. 190). Placing an offender in prison for any amount of time is shown to be harmful to the offender, their victim, and society. “Rather than reduce recidivism, harsher punishments may increase the likelihood of reoffending” (Siegel, 2008, p. 86). A conservative asking for more prisons would likely be met with a barrage of evidence explaining why restorative justice will and

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.

Restorative justice practices is seen as an innovative informal approach to criminal justice and is used as an alternative to the mainstream criminal court procedures. It offers alternate ways to aid in repairing the harm caused by the offenders and involves both the victim and offenders in the process. Surrounding restorative justice lies the debate that the practices are potentially more harmful than beneficial for the victims. This debate is complex and interminable, as there are various factors that can influence the outcome of the procedures. This essay will explore and discuss the concept of restorative justice and the practices that are commonly supported and conducted in Australia. The essay will then explore the debate around restorative

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.

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

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.

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.

During the research for this discussion board, I found that there were many devils advocates that view restorative justice as infringing on the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. As Lucas noted, restorative justice does not hinge on a specific religion but rather on the notion of accountability. For this reason, it should be viewed as a viable option towards Criminal Justice reform as it can harmonize competing perspectives. Currently, the Criminal Justice system utilizes retributive justice as a means of deterrence and, as a result, has pushed jails and prisons to be more like warehouses of human beings. The key to reform lies in changing one’s view towards delinquency, offenders, victims and accountability for crimes.

They have one or more people there that act as a coordinator and they normally prepare the victim and the offender so that they will know what to expect. Victim-offender mediation is the oldest practice and is usually used with the victims and offenders of property crime and minor assaults, participants include the victim, the offender, and the facilitator. The face-to-face meeting is based upon the victim and the offender, accompanied by a small number family members and friends. Family group conferencing originated in New Zealand and its purpose was to divert young offenders from formal judgement of court. It usually involves friends and family members for both victims and offenders as well as additional participants from the community.

377). There is evidence that suggests restorative justice practices reduce reoffending therefore reducing crime, in comparison to incarceration (Wenzel et al., 2008, p.377). This is because the offender accepts accountability for his or her actions and they must do something in support of the victim or the community. Gwen Robinson and Joanna Shapland discuss the crime reduction that restorative justice has in “Security with Care” by Elizabeth Elliot. Offenders share feelings of shame, guilt, remorse and how they will improve as people, which leads to helps offenders realize the harm they have caused in hopes that they will not reoffend (Elliot 2011, p.73).

There are already existing restorative practices that are place within the conventional criminal justice system at present namely probation, restitution and community service (Zehr, 1990). Admittedly they are not readily termed restorative justice programs however they are grounded in its theory.

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 is a theory of justice that emphasizes restoring the injury caused by criminal behavior .The growing eminence of restorative justice interference necessitates a reconceptualization of criminal justice in terms of a novel prototype. The most credible contender for this is an empowerment paradigm of justice. However, for achieving an overarching theory of criminal justice in these terms needs to be complemented by more fine-grained theoretical

The practice of making criminals repay their victims is an ancient one. Prior to the rise of governments, the writing of laws and the creation of criminal justice systems, acts of revenge were typical responses by injured parties and their kin before restitution was invented (Karmen, 2016). Such revenge would include harming wrongdoers physically in counterattacks and by taking back things of value. Nevertheless, as wealth accumulated and primitive societies established rules of conduct, the tradition of retaliatory violence gave way to negotiation and reparation (Karmen, 2016). For the sake of community harmony and stability, compulsory restitution was institutionalized and intended to satisfy a thirst for vengeance as well as repay losses.