Unique challenges can be faced when attempting to repair the harm caused by domestic violence. One way to repair the harm caused by domestic violence is restorative justice. This paper will break down the meaning of restorative justice. It will also discuss restorative justice approaches to helping victims of domestic violence. An examination into the potential benefits and harms of restorative justice in domestic violence cases will be addressed. Finally the paper will discuss how social workers can benefit from the use of restorative justice when it comes to helping victims of domestic violence.
Restorative Justice and Domestic Violence Victims
Domestic violence is a problem that can often be ignored, covered up and denied. Once a victim decides to take action to get out of an abusive relationship restoration can begin. When a victim has gone through a traumatic event he or she can struggle with the process of restorative justice. The victim may still be dealing with frightening memories of the abuse. Also a victim may have come to terms with the domestic violence and would just like to leave it in the past. These are some of the unique challenges faced by
Circle of Peace is a restorative justice program designed to deal with the trauma and violence of domestic violence (Mills, Barocas, & Ariel, 2013). This program focuses on meeting needs of both victim and abuser. To meet the needs of victim and abuser, Circle of Peace attempts to go beyond criminal punishment. To do this, Circle of Peace mediates restorative justice between the victim and abuser. The program also works with judges by educating them on alternatives to criminal punishment, such as helping abuser come to terms with exerting power and control over victims. Also, the program is designed to confront the limitations of domestic violence intervention (Mills, Barocas, & Ariel,
Domestic violence is a problem in our country with nearly 1 million women experiencing at least one incident of domestic abuse each year, (2009/10 British Crime Survey). Social-program funding is being scrutinized in the current economic climate with doubts as to whether American tax dollars should be used to help victims of domestic violence. Cutting funds for government programs that assist victims of domestic violence is not an option for many reasons. In this essay I will explore some of the many ways these programs help our fellow citizens in order to support the argument for continuing to fund said programs.
Young, M. (1999) Restorative community justice in the United States: A new paradigm. International Review of Victimology, 6, p265-277.
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.
Every year about 4000 women die in the U.S. because of the domestic violence. Every year this number gets higher and higher. Even though we live in the 21st century people can’t find the way to improve the situation. But before searching for the solution, people should understand what domestic violence is. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, domestic violence is: “any abuse—including physical, emotional, sexual, or financial—between intimate partners, often living in the same household” (Encyclopedia Britannica). Most of the people believe that domestic
Domestic Violence is a widely recognized issue here in the United States. Though many people are familiar with domestic violence, there are still many facts that people do not understand. Abuse is not just physical, it is mental, emotional, verbal, sexual and financial. Many victims of physical abuse are also fall victim to these abuse tactics as well. An abusive partner often uses verbal, mental, emotional, and financial abuse to break their partner so to speak. It is through this type of abuse the victim often feels as though they are not adequately meeting their partner’s needs.
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
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.
Therefore, there is a growing need to progress towards the restorative justice (RJ) system. According to RJ perspective, a crime is considered a conflict between individuals that results in harm to victims, communities, and offenders, and so these parties are also involved in responding to it. One of the prevalent programs of the RJ system is the victim-offender mediation (VOM) program. The VOM program is a process which provides interested victims an opportunity to meet the offender, in a safe and structured setting, with the goal of holding the offender directly accountable for their behaviour while providing assistance and compensation to the victims; mediators do not impose settlements. Over the years, the VOM program has proved to be beneficial to both, the victim and the offender.
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...
When looking at the Criminal Justice system there are so many different elements make up the system to create a whole, it is sometimes hard to grasp every element. Throughout history people and governments alike have tried to figure out cost saving yet efficient strategies to keep offenders from reoffending and out of jail. Restorative justice is one of these elements; created to focus on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large. Within the realm of restorative justice there are many different types of procedures and programs from alternate dispute resolution to veteran trauma courts and everything in-between. Not everyone will agree that these specialty courts and procedures
Tinneke Van Camp of California State University, Fresno and Jo-Anne Wemmers of the University of Montreal conducted a research of how victims might like to be offered the restorative justice approach to resolving their issues. They provide, “Independent studies reveal that when done properly, restorative justice (RJ) practices outperform criminal justice proceedings in meeting victims' concerns for insight, voice, and fairness and, as a result, can have therapeutic value. Introducing RJ to victims of crime should be done responsibly, and, therefore, it is important to understand whether and how victims want to be informed about RJ,” (Van Camp, Wemmers 2016). For their research, they decided to interview 34 victims using two different approaches
Domestic violence, also referred to as intimate partner violence, intimate partner abuse or domestic abuse, affects over one million people in the United States alone. It can be carried out in any number of ways including physically, emotionally, sexually, psychologically and/or financially. Its legal definition considers it to be “any assault, battery, sexual assault, sexual battery, or any criminal offense resulting in physically injury or death of one family member or household member by another who is residing in the same single dwelling unit” (Brown, 2008). In the United States it is considered a major health problem so much so that it was declared the number one health concern by the U.S. Surgeon General in 1992 (Peterman & Dixon, 2003). Not only is it a rapidly growing health problem but it is a growing societal concern as well. Extending beyond the effect felt by the victims and their families, it impacts our communities, government, law enforcement and public service agencies.
When Mary Catherine Parris was told that I would be talking to her about restorative justice, her response was, “Is that a real thing?” (personal communication, September 23, 2015). Through this assignment I realized that restorative justice is not talked about within the criminal justice system. For both of the individuals I spoke with, the idea of restorative justice seemed like a joke. In trying to persuade them both that restorative justice is a real thing, I was met with very similar beliefs and comments from both individuals. They both believed that restorative justice would not work and believed that some aspects of the approach were completely useless (M. C. Parris, & R. Clemones, personal communication, September 23, 2015). The responses
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