Juvenile Justice in New Zealand: a New Paradigm

Morris, Allison; Maxwell, Gabrielle

doi:10.1177/000486589302600108

Cited by 35 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Australian and New Zealand Police Federation carried a resolution at its 1991 conference supporting the New Zealand juvenile justice reforms. In New Zealand, 91 per cent of the time, police report that they are satisfied with the outcomes of the conferences in which they participate, a higher level than for youth justice coordinators (86 per cent), parents (85 per cent), offenders (84 per cent) and victims (48 per cent) (Morris and Maxwell 1992). Perhaps this should not surprise us.…”

Section: (14) the Ceremony Must Be Justified By A Politically Resonanmentioning

confidence: 99%

CONDITIONS OF SUCCESSFUL REINTEGRATION CEREMONIES: Dealing with Juvenile Offenders

Braithwaite

Mugford

1994

The British Journal of Criminology

279

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shifting criminal justice practices away from sligmalization and toward rcintegration is no small challenge. The innovation of community conferences in New ZealandThe spectre of failure haunts modern criminology and penology. Deep down many feel what some say openly-that 'nothing works': that despite decades of study and debate, we are no nearer deterrence than we ever were and/or that more 'humane' forms of treatment are mere masquerades concealing a descent into Kafaesque bureaucracy where offenders suffer a slow and silent suffocation of the soul. Worse still, we fear that even when something does work, it is seen to do so only in the eyes of certain professionals, while 'outside' the system ordinary citizens are left without a role or voice in the criminal justice process. This paper takes a different view. Rejecting the pessimism that pervades discussions about crime and punishment, it offers an optimistic view of at least one area-the punishment of juvenile offenders. It argues that it is possible to develop practices that 'work'-both in the sense of reducing recidivism and reintegrating offenders into a wider web of community ties and support and, at the same time, in giving victims a 'voice' in a fashion that is both satisfying and also socially productive. Further, it links a theory (reintegrative shaming) and a practice (the reintegration ceremony) which explain how to understand and how to implement this success.While there are elements that are quite distinctive about both the theory and practice of reintegrative shaming, there is also a great deal in common with the theory and practice of 'making amends' (Wright 1982); restorative justice (Cragg 1992;Galaway and Hudson 1990;Zehr 1990); reconciliation (Dignan 1992;Marshall 1985;Umbreit 1985); peacemaking (Pepinsky and Quinney 1991); redress (de Haan 1990) and feminist abolitionism (Meima 1990). We differ from abolitionists, however, in believing that it is right to shame certain kinds of conduct as criminal in certain contexts.The rest of the paper has two sections. The second section outlines some fieldwork * Division of Philosophy and Law, The Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University. We would like to thank John McDonald, Gabrielle Maxwell, David Moore, Jane Mugford, Terry O'Connell, and Clifford Shearing for the stimulation and critique they provided in developing the ideas in this paper. JOHN BRAITHWAITE AND STEPHEN MUGFORDwhich we have undertaken to examine such ceremonies, makes a relatively brief series of arguments which connect the theory of reintegrative shaming to the seminal paper by Garfinkel on degradation ceremonies and outlines how the latter must be transformed to cover reintegration ceremonies. The major point of this section is a specification of the conditions for successful reintegration ceremonies. The third and longer section follows the logic of such ceremonies, illustrating each point with material derived from the fieldwork and offering comments about policy and implementation.

show abstract

Section: (14) the Ceremony Must Be Justified By A Politically Resonanmentioning

confidence: 99%

CONDITIONS OF SUCCESSFUL REINTEGRATION CEREMONIES: Dealing with Juvenile Offenders

Braithwaite

Mugford

1994

The British Journal of Criminology

279

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Youth justice in New Zealand prior to 1989 was similar to the youth justice systems in many Western jurisdictions at that time in that it emphasized the importance of diversion (Morris & Young, 1987). Under the 1974 Children and Young Persons Act, for example, consultation was meant to take place between the police and social workers about whether or not it was necessary to prosecute young offenders over the age of 14.…”

Section: Youth Justice In New Zealand Prior To 1989mentioning

confidence: 95%

Youth Justice in New Zealand: Restorative Justice in Practice?

Maxwell

Morris

2006

Journal of Social Issues

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 put in place new objects, principles, and procedures for youth justice in New Zealand. Both the philosophy underpinning this system and the use of family group conferences exemplify a restorative justice approach that has now been adopted in many other countries. This article describes these changes and presents some of the results of recently published research that examines the extent to which young offenders have been diverted from courts and custody, held accountable for their actions, and had their wellbeing enhanced. It suggests that the New Zealand youth justice system has achieved many but not all of its goals, and that there are still aspects where improvement is possible.

show abstract

“…VOM emphasizes victim healing, offender accountability, and restoration of loss; in doing so, it allows for the important process of sincere apology to occur (Bradshaw & Umbreit, 1998;Zehr, 1990). FGC, rooted in the dispute resolution traditions of the Maori people, has been widely accepted in both New Zealand and Australia (Morris & Maxwell, 1993). FGC brings the victim and offender-and their family members, friends, and key supports of both parties-to the table (OJJDP, 1998).…”

Section: The Development and Contemporary Status Of Restorative Justimentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a Culturally Competent Restorative Justice Practice Framework: A Focus on Asian Americans

Choi

Severson

2009

Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Service

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article suggests a culturally competent restorative justice practice framework for Asian Americans. In developing the framework, the historical development and contemporary issues of restorative justice in the West are explored, and the salient cultural traits and core elements of cultural competence with Asians and Asian Americans are examined. Tentative principles are advanced and recommendations are made for developing a culturally competent restorative justice practice framework for this cultural group, who now constitute 4.4% of the American populace, and for whom harmony in interpersonal relationships and the power of shaming are key considerations. ABSTRACT

show abstract

Juvenile Justice in New Zealand: a New Paradigm

Cited by 35 publications

References 3 publications

CONDITIONS OF SUCCESSFUL REINTEGRATION CEREMONIES: Dealing with Juvenile Offenders

CONDITIONS OF SUCCESSFUL REINTEGRATION CEREMONIES: Dealing with Juvenile Offenders

Youth Justice in New Zealand: Restorative Justice in Practice?

Toward a Culturally Competent Restorative Justice Practice Framework: A Focus on Asian Americans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About