In 1977, Eglash coins the term restorative justice (Gavrielidies, 2012), a term that not many people know of due to the lack of mainstream popularity, yet it is clearly evident that restorative justice practices can impact the community in a positive manner. An idea that supporters of restorative justice constantly sends out with good reason though, as the case of (Guest speaker), the case in the Diamond article (2012), and the case of Mr. Kelly (2016) clearly show that restorative justice can improve the life of an individual. This is a welcome sight as restorative justice provides a different perspective on crime, and more recently, another version of restorative justice has emerged from psychometric research (Flynn, 2014), which people refer …show more content…
The first being the social identity theory. In the 1980s, Social identity theory gained prominence as unlike the other theories, it draws from a multiple disciplines including psychology, sociology, and even criminology to help examine the relationship between the social group and the individuals residing in the social groups (Brown, 2000). What this theory proposes is that the social identity is a common trait that everyone in the social group processes (Stets & Burke, 2000), an idea that emotionally intelligent justice clearly reflects in its core values. This is because supporters of emotionally intelligent justice advocate that crime is not merely a violation against a person, but instead against the community as well. This falls in line with what social identity theory is proposing since if an individual violates a law, they are deviating from the common trait of being good law abiding citizens. A social trait that the group, or in this case, the community wants the individuals to exhibit and if they are not reflecting this trait, they then break the social cohesion of the group; similar to what numerous criminologists such as Merton states as they associate low level …show more content…
This is important to note as people will naturally take pride in their own group and see their own group in a positive light (Hornsey, 2008) when people compare their group with other groups (Tajfel & Wikes, 1963). As well, people will naturally consider their own group 's trait as salient to help distinguish themselves from other groups (Tajfel & Wikes, 1963). This is important as like what Elliott (2007) said, if people take pride in their community it could help prevent them from a life of crime or even if they do commit a crime, it would help then reintegrate back into society. Furthermore, social identity theorists state that "social identity is derived primarily from group membership" (Brown, 2000, p.747), which is an illustration of how important a social group is. This is something that the criminal justice system often ignores since the core values of the criminal justice system is deterrence where the state agents focus on the certainty of a threat (Matthews & Agnew, 2008) to encourage the potential offender from refraining from certain illegal actions (Quackenbush, 2011). Unlike emotionally intelligent justice which focuses on community involvement. The second portion of social identity theory is the self-categorization theory, which is a subset theory that examines the individual through self-categorization or identification (Stets
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.
Zehr (1990) who is thought to be one of the pioneers leading the argument for restorative justice highlighted three questions presented when taking a restorative approach; what is the nature of the harm resulting from the crime? What needs to be done to make things right or repair the harm? Who is responsible for this repair? He ascertained that ‘crime is fundamentally a violation of people and interpersonal relationships’. He also noted that violations create obligations and liabilities and that restorative justice seeks to heal and put right the wrongs. Restorative jus...
The social identity theory is a person’s sense of who they are based on their social
As said by Governor George Ryan, “Since 1973, over 130 people have been released from death rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions.” With each of these wronged convictions, the victim who should rightfully be convicted was able to walk free and possibly continue to commit crimes. Many of these wronged convictions entail parts of conflict theory with them because the dominant group will view things that they believe are socially deviant as criminal. The example in class of the 1992 Chicago gang ordinance shows how the dominant group, the police force, viewed standing on a street corner as socially deviant and thus, labeled it criminal. In The Central Park Five, the five who were convicted were in Central Park late at night, which was socially deviant. Since there was crime that was committed that night, it was easy to take the socially deviant situation of the kids being in the park late at night, them being in the same place as the crime, and them all being non-white and the victim being white and turn the crime on them. At the start of the night, there were kids who were throwing rocks at cars and assaulting homeless people to the extent of smashing one with a beer bottle. Out of all of the kids who were in the park that night, when they all took off running, it didn’t matter which five were stopped and taken to the police station, as long as there were non-white and in the park that night they could have been one of the “central park five”. “Central park five” turns into a label knowing that regardless of who the kid was and their background, the officers involved were going to manipulate they into confessing to the crime and then end up being convicted. Crime today involves conflict theory and can
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
Over the years, the traditional criminal justice system has emphasized offenders’ accountability through punishment and stigmatization. The emphasis on the retributive philosophy made it challenging for the system to meaningfully assist and empower crime victims. In the criminal justice system, victims often face insensitive treatment with little or no opportunity for input into the perseverance of their case and report feeling voiceless in the process used (Choi, Gilbert, & Green, 2013:114). Crime Victims, advocates, and practitioners have called for an expansion of victims’ rights and community-based alternatives rather than punishment-orientated justice policies. What victims want from the criminal justice system is a less formal process, more information about case processing, respectful treatment, and emotional restoration. Therefore, there is a growing need to progress towards the restorative justice (RJ) system.
Agreeing on a definition of restorative justice has proved difficult. One definition is a theory of justice that focuses mostly on repairing the harm caused by criminal behaviour. The reparation is done through a cooperative process that includes all the stakeholders. Restorative justice can also be explained as an approach of justice that aims to satisfy the needs of the victims and offenders, as well as the entire community. The most broadly accepted definition for restorative justice, however, is a process whereby all the parties that have a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve on how to deal with the aftermath. This process is largely focused around reparation, reintegration and participation of victims. That is to say, it is a victim-centred approach to criminal justice, and it perceives crime differently than the adversarial system of justice.
Throughout the history of law enforcement within the United States, theories has been explored and implemented as polices in addressing deviant behaviors produced by humans. Models such as Crime Control through the Conflict perceptive suggest the human nature is persuaded by social opportunities and considered a fundamental aspect of social life (Schmalleger, 2009, p. 347). However, social disorders must be addressed in a cordial and civil procedural fairness; thus, individual rights guaranteed by policies such as Due Process ensure that individuals under allegations are treated equally and just. Although crime and deviant behaviors exist within our communities, policies are intended to reduce such disorders by following cohesive criminal justice frameworks with the intentions of protecting individuals accused of crimes. Crime Contro...
...apabilities to deal with this which is not the case so much nowadays as Tony Marshall (1999) argues. There are criticisms over procedures, loss of rights such as an independent and impartial forum as well as the principle of proportionality in sentencing. There is also an unrealistic expectation that restorative justice can produce major changes in deviant behaviour, as there is not enough evidence to support this claim (Cunneen, 2007). Levrant et al (1999) on the other hand suggests that restorative justice still remains unproven in its’ effectiveness to stop reoffending and argues that its appeal lies in its apparent morality and humanistic sentiments rather than its empirical effectiveness. He continues to argue that it allows people to feel better within themselves through having the moral high ground rather than focusing on providing justice to the offender.
Social identity theory can be applied to many different problems and real life situations. It demonstrates the role of categorization in behaviors, and explores how being part of a group affects social interaction in everyday life.
Some of the strengths of the social identity theory are that; throughout the years it has supported many empirical studies, it has also demonstrated the social categorization in intergroup behaviors, allowed us to differentiate between social and personal identities and has provide explanations for other areas of psychology (conformity). A weaknesses of the Social identity theory is that its application is restricted in the sense that it has very low ecological validity. Another weakness is that SIT favors situational factors rather than dispositional is not supported by evidence. The social Identity theory can be used to how to explain how we form our social and personal identities in the terms of in and out groups. SIT can also be used to explain why there is conflict between humans and different societies.
“Restorative justice is an approach to crime and other wrongdoings that focuses on repairing harm and encouraging responsibility and involvement of the parties impacted by the wrong.” This quote comes from a leading restorative justice scholar named Howard Zehr. The process of restorative justice necessitates a shift in responsibility for addressing crime. In a restorative justice process, the citizens who have been affected by a crime must take an active role in addressing that crime. Although law professionals may have secondary roles in facilitating the restorative justice process, it is the citizens who must take up the majority of the responsibility in healing the pains caused by crime. Restorative justice is a very broad subject and has many other topics inside of it. The main goal of the restorative justice system is to focus on the needs of the victims, the offenders, and the community, and focus
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
Burke, P.J. & Stets, J.E. (2000). Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly 63(3), 224-237
Despite the amount of studies that agree with the social identity theory, it suffers some weaknesses such as methodological considerations like having unrepresentative samples as well as the fact that this theory only favors situational factors. Also, stereotyping is a big factor that plays in the social identity theory as it is a big form of social categorization. This can also be known as schema