EMOTIONAL AND MORAL PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALING (Barton, 2000)
Retzinger and Scheff observed that two things happen in a restorative justice practices (ex. Victim offender mediation); material and symbolic reparation. Material reparation occurs between the offender and victim in a form of settlement, this could be compensation or community service. However, symbolic reparation is less visible and usually takes the form of “gestures and expressions of courtesy, respect, remorse, and forgiveness” (Barton, 2000). These conferences usually require the offender’s apology and the victim’s forgiveness, the key to reconciliation, victim satisfaction and decreased recidivism. The restoration process help to repair and restore a bond between the victim and
…show more content…
Conversely, when the offender feels they are being lectured or bullied by others with power, they tend to be defensive. However, the healing process for both the victim and offender is interdependent. Therefore, they rely on each other for the emotional healing process to work.
LOW SELF-CONTROL AND BULLYING (Moon, Hwang & McCluskey, 2011)
Gottfredson and Hirschi developed the low self-control theory in 1990. They determined that criminal behaviour and behaviours similar to crime (ex. Bullying), main source is low self-control.
These individuals usually “seek immediate gratification, they are known to be physically active, insensitive to others and they often possess limited cognitive and academic skills” (Moon, Hwang & McCluskey, 2011). This insensitivity to others was evident in our scenario as Julie and Jane bullied Amanda for over 3 months without thinking of the consequences. Furthermore, their deviant behaviour towards Amanda in front of other children at the school showed their immediate need for gratification. Therefore, Gottfredson and Hirschi reported that effective parenting practices (i.e., monitoring, recognition of deviant behaviors, and punishment of deviant behavior), help children develop self-control (Moon, Hwang & McCluskey,
The self-control theory suggested that people engaged in criminal behaviors as they believed that crime was an advisable way of fulfilling their self-interest, which provided them a sense of pleasure immediately. Everyone has different ability to control their impulses for instant satisfaction, the ability mainly developed before puberty and relatively stable over the life span. The probability for engaging in criminal behaviors was greater in people with low self-control than those with high self-control. Moreover, the self-control theory suggested that the relationship between self-control and the involvement in criminal behaviors was less affected by factors like peer influences or cultural influences (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). Therefore, self-control theory is totally different from differential association theory. According to Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990), the major cause of children with low self-control may be inefficient parenting. Parents should monitor their children, keep the children under surveillance, and actively react to improper behaviors. They should be able to recognize when deviance occurs, then punished and disapproved that misbehaviors. If the parents failed to do so, children with low self-control may be produced and thus the children may have a greater likelihood to commit in
According to Graham, reconciliation is both “… a goal in the sense that it aims to restore relationships or to promote agonism or mutual tolerance, respect, and dignity […] [And] it is a process because it requires multiple modes, steps, stages, and transformations across all levels of society and amongst all stakeholders in a conflict” (Graham 2015). Through reconciliation and the related processes of restorative justice, parties to the dispute explore and overcome the pain brought on by the conflict and find ways to build trust and live cooperatively with each other. Restorative justice seeks to have a positive impact on offenders by confronting them with the consequences of their actions and delineating their responsibilities, giving them both the opportunity to repair the damage caused to the victim and to work on finding a solution to their problems (Umbreit, Bradshaw and Coates, 1999). According to Philpott, there are six components of political reconciliation: building socially just institutions and relations between states, acknowledgement, reparations, punishment, apology, and forgiveness (Philpott
...presented by Giordano et al. and Kreager et al. that note its limitations. Laub and Sampson’s theory is detailed and extensive in its explanation of why individuals desist from crime.
Restoration Restorative justice is based on bringing together the victim, the offender, and the community; all have equal parts in repairing the relationships destroyed by
This voluntary alternative gives the offender the opportunity to take responsibility for their actions and identify the impact they have had on their victim, while also giving the victim the chance to confront the offender and take steps to repair the harm done. The victim can ask the offender questions about the crime and the offender may apologise or make amends for their actions. Restorative justice is confrontational and can be difficult for both parties but is proven to help both the offender and victim. While it is confrontational for the victim, for some it can be better than testifying in court. Data shows that restorative justice greatly helps victims in their recovery from the offence. Although the benefits of restorative justice in adult offenders is unclear, it significantly reduces the number of reoffenders in youth. For this reason, restorative justice is mostly used for minor infringements and within the youth justice system.
It aims to describe an arrangement of the major political and social institutions of a society such as the constitution, legal system, economy, family, and so on as being fair. Fairness is also at the core of restorative justice. Unlike the retributive system restorative justice is concerned with reforming. Not just the offender but the wrongdoing itself. As previously mentioned, the victim is not primary subject of the retributive system the law or state is. This is an unfair assurance of power by the state over the victim, to the point they where the victim may even feel re-victimized. The State assess what was lost, the state gets to talk at the trial, the victim rarely gets a chance to even see the offender before the trial. By keeping the participants of the trial apart the likelihood of proliferating long lasting resentment, and emotional trauma increases. Dining both parties closure and healing. Rawls believes the state should only be the facilitator of these communications between the parties not key participant in the
Control theories in general are very common in criminological research and have been successful both theoretically and empirically. As a result, this theory has been comprehensively studied by many researchers and is popular for its cognitive clarity (Brunet, 2002). Furthermore, as Gouldner (1970) notes "some theories are simple experienced as intuitively convincing" and low self-control theory falls into this category for many (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001, p.5). A critique of this approach is that it assumes that self-control is stable across the life course and therefore presupposes that an individual 's propensity for crime also remains stable (Holtfreter et al., 2008). However, when applied to the scenario, even if Tim and Lionel lack proper self-control, it is possible that through a process of socialization, they could adjust in society and operate as law abiding citizens regardless of their low
Thio, ., Taylor, ., & Schwartz, . (2013). Deviant Behavior (11th ed., pp. 5-7). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
Pros of the restorative justice system are that it brings parties together in crime. Instead of a short term goal, the restorative justice system takes a long-term approach to reducing crime and violence using different kinds of methods. In restorative justice programs, offenders work with others affected by their criminal actions. Restorative justice promotes instilling positive behaviors in young criminals and teaching long-lasting changes in behavior to prevent future crimes. There also could be negative consequences from the restorative justice system. For restorative justice to work, criminals and their victims must communicate about the crime and its consequences. Since violent crimes often leave victims feeling helpless and vulnerable, encouraging communication can result in increased anxiety and fear. Additionally, communication might breach confidentiality for victims of violent crimes, such as rape and assault, because they must discuss the outcome of the crime and how it has impacted
Restorative justice is defined as “using humanistic, no punitive strategies to right wrongs and restore social harmony” (Siegel, 2008, p. 189). Instead of imposing harsh penalties on offenders like long prison sentences or even the death penalty, restorative justice calls for a more rehabilitative approach, such as reconciliation and offender assistance.
For instance, Donner & Jennings (2014) contributes to literature built on previous research in low self-control theory. Low self-control theory (as cited by Donner & Jennings, 2014) contends that individuals who lack self control are generally impulsive risk takers with non-verbal skills who have short sighted goals. (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990) Therefore, many studies in self-control design their measures around impulsive behaviors which are generally manifested in low level crime. (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990)
The program is modeled after similar programs that begun in the 1970s and 1980s in New Zealand and Australia (Lawson 2004). It is used in schools, juvenile courts, and youth centers. However, for this discussion I will use the facts from Catherine Lawson’s restorative justice study in Missouri. In Lawson’s writings she references Derek R. Brookes, who came up with the conclusion that restorative justice attempts to produce these three outcomes: reconciliation, reparation, and transformation. Reconciliation is stage where all the apologies happen. Reparation is the stage at which the offender takes responsibility for his or actions, by providing fair restitution to the victim and lastly transformation is the stage where the offender is re-guided back into society as a productive member and is out of the cycle of
In this paper I will argue that America should pay reparations to black communities that have suffered most from institutionalized racism. My view is not that reparations should be paid via checks mailed by the federal government, of an undeterminable sum, to families that are most eligible, but rather, through changes in policy. These policies would tackle racial inequality at it most obvious sources, the wage gap, the mistreatment of black Americans by our criminal justice system, quality of education, and the disparity in housing between black and white Americans.
This approach has introduced a criminal justice policy agenda. In the past, victims to criminal activities have been outsiders to the criminal conflict. In recent times, many efforts have been made to give the victims a more central role in the criminal justice system. Some of these efforts were introduced a few years back, though even at that time, these efforts were seen as long overdue. Some of these efforts include access to state compensation and forms of practical support. For advocates of restorative justice, crime is perceived primarily as a violation of people and relationships, and the aim is to make amends for all the harm suffered by victims, offenders and communities. The most commonly used forms of restorative justice include direct mediation, indirect mediation, restorative cautioning, sentencing panels or circles and conferencing. In recent...
As the purpose of restorative justice is to mend the very relationship between the victim, offender, and society, communities that embrace restorative justice foster an awareness on how the act has harmed others. Braithwaite (1989) notes that by rejecting only the criminal act and not the offender, restorative justice allows for a closer empathetic relationship between the offender, victims, and community. By acknowledging the intrinsic worth of the offender and their ability to contribute back to the community, restorative justice shows how all individuals are capable of being useful despite criminal acts previous. This encourages offenders to safely reintegrate into society, as they are encouraged to rejoin and find rapport with the community through their emotions and