China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Envisioning a better victim response
Published in Rachel E. Lovell, Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Sexual Assault Kits and Reforming the Response to Rape, 2023
Margaret J. McGuire, Danielle B. Sabo, Joanna Klingenstein
Restorative justice approaches for victims of sexual violence often can be considered trauma-informed and survivor-driven. Restorative justice is “a process whereby all parties with a stake in a particular offence come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future” (Marshall, 1999, p. 5). Upon speaking with survivors, Herman (2005) and Jülich (2006) found that many expressed a desire for restorative justice approaches which go beyond current criminal justice services. For example, a pilot program named RESTORE offered sexual violence victims restorative justice approaches (Wemmers, 2017). RESTORE gave victims the opportunity to engage in conversations with their offenders with the purpose of reducing the number of cases that drop out of the criminal justice process (Koss, 2014).
Making Discipline Reform
Published in Frances Vavrus, Lesley Bartlett, Doing Comparative Case Studies, 2023
In contrast to such therapeutic approaches to school discipline that emphasize the medical or psychological causes of student behavior or (mis)behavior, restorative justice theory emphasizes the moral and ethical obligations to “disrupt cycles of injustice and inequality” (Winn, 2018, p. 7). Restorative justice is a paradigm shift that involves relocating the focus from the (mis)behavior to harm done and to meeting the needs of both the victim and offender (Zehr, 1990). Restorative justice typically includes practices such as community-building and problem-solving circles and victim-offender reconciliation. While PBIS and SEL have been widely used at the national and state levels, restorative justice has been relatively absent from the state and federal discipline reform discourse, though several large cities (e.g., Oakland, Denver) have centered restorative justice in their discipline reform efforts (Hirschfield, 2018; Koon, 2020).
Restorative Justice and Ethics
Published in Michael C. Braswell, Belinda R. McCarthy, Bernard J. McCarthy, Justice, Crime, and Ethics, 2019
Lana A. McDowell, Michael C. Braswell, John T. Whitehead
Restorative justice is different from the traditional view of justice. As mentioned in previous chapters, the traditional view is more reactive, relies heavily on law enforcement, specifies punishments, and is highly connected to retributive philosophies of justice. The traditional view of justice is reactive in that offenders do not typically come into contact with the criminal justice system until after a crime has been committed and often have little or no contact with the victim(s). Restorative justice and peacemaking criminology require a more proactive approach to crime by helping the offender more fully understand and take responsibility for the personal harm they caused others. Such an approach can at least increase the odds that the offender will more seriously consider the effects and consequences of their future actions.
Restorative Justice Practices in Forensic Mental Health Settings – A Scoping Review
Published in International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 2023
Krystle Martin, Sayani Paul, Erin Campbell, Korri Bickle
Restorative justice has long been considered an important alternative lens to approach illegal and harmful behavior compared to traditional criminal justice approaches. Restorative justice principles include justice that focuses on repairing harm, holding offenders responsible, and addressing the needs of all parties affected by crime – victims(s), offender and community – when responding to crime in order to prevent future harm (Cormier, 2002). And yet, others have tried to encourage a more flexible approach that merely proffers that justice considers all stakeholders and their needs in an effort to “put things as right as possible” (Zehr, 2002, p. 73). Regardless, restorative justice programs have demonstrated positive outcomes in many different populations such as when used to divert youth (e.g. Sliva & Plassmeyer, 2021) and adults (e.g., Rye et al., 2018) from the criminal justice system or with adult offenders who are incarcerated (e.g., Ross & Muro, 2020) or post-release from a correctional institution (Stewart et al., 2018). Many different methods of restorative justice have also been used such as letter writing (e.g., Tomporowski et al., 2011), victim surrogates (e.g., McChargue et al., 2020), and circles of support and accountability (e.g., Duwe, 2018). Despite this widespread and successful application, efforts to use this approach within forensic mental health settings, especially in Canada have seemingly been minimal.
Restorative Justice and School-wide Transformation: Identifying Drivers of Implementation and System Change
Published in Journal of School Violence, 2022
Andrew Martinez, Lina Villegas, Lama Hassoun Ayoub, Elise Jensen, Michelle Miller
The current study leveraged an experimental design to understand how restorative justice can lead to system change through the implementation of enhanced RJ staff capacity. Using a system change framework, this qualitative study aimed to answer two research questions Research Question 1: How do system structures (i.e., resources, decision-making and power, beliefs, policies) affect RJ implementation?Research Question 2: What is the contribution of RJ staffing capacity in bringing forth system-wide change? This question examines thematic differences between treatment and control schools to elucidate how staffing capacity can drive system-level changes.
Defund the Police: Moving Towards an Anti-Carceral Social Work
Published in Journal of Progressive Human Services, 2021
Leah A. Jacobs, Mimi E. Kim, Darren L. Whitfield, Rachel E. Gartner, Meg Panichelli, Shanna K. Kattari, Margaret Mary Downey, Shanté Stuart McQueen, Sarah E. Mountz
The Just Discipline Project (JDP) is a research-to-practice initiative that supports schools in developing affirming school climates and eliminating reliance on punitive measures through the implementation of restorative practices and an explicit focus on racial equity (Huguley et al., 2018). In contrast to the exclusion and isolation strategies employed by zero-tolerance policies, restorative justice is both a reaction to harm that seeks to repair rather than punish and a “proactive relational strategy to create a culture of connectivity” (Davis, 2019, p. 19). Recognizing the complexity of changing school culture and of supporting students and school professionals, the JDP model consists of eight inter-dependent tiers: (1) school-community buy-in; (2) strong relational climate; (3) just discipline policies; (4) full-time staff; (5) integrated behavioral systems; (6) attention to race and social context; (7) structural supports (e.g., data tracking systems and professional training); and (8) intensive behavioral and social supports (Huguley et al., 2018).