Restorative Justice and Gendered Violence

Hay, Anne den; Wormer, Katherine Stuart van

doi:10.4135/9781452244228.n14

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The victim also gains acknowledgement and validation of the harm caused by the offence, public condemnation of the offence, and release from feelings of guilt and shame (Herman, 2005) in a respectful manner (Stern, 2010). Likewise, the victim's empowerment becomes possible as a result of their ability to experience control during the process (Daly & Curtis-Fawley, 2006;Daly & Stubbs, 2006;Gustafson, 2005;Hayden & Van Wormer, 2013;Jülich, 2010;McAlinden, 2007;McGlynn, 2011;McGlynn et al, 2012;Koss, 2000;Van Wormer, 2009;Wager, 2013).…”

Section: Sexual Offences and Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is clarified from the outset that the victim is not to blame, as often happens during legal processes. Taking part in a process wherein the offender acknowledges accountability for their actions and expresses remorse, and the victim has support from family and friends, can help reduce the victim's feelings of selfblame, and aid their recovery and healing process (Daly & Curtis-Fawley, 2006;Daly & Stubbs, 2006;Hayden & Van Wormer, 2013;Herman, 2005;Hopkins, 2012;McGlynn, 2011;McGlynn et al, 2012;McNevin, 2010;Miller, 2011;Naylor, 2010;Pali & Sten Madsen, 2011;Toren, 2015;Wager, 2013).…”

Section: Sexual Offences and Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The principles of RJ and feminist criminology rely on shared values and areas of interests (Hayden & Van Wormer, 2013). The proponents of RJ in sexual offence cases suggest that RJ processes can be viewed, especially in gender-related offences, as an empowering experience that can reduce the severity of trauma, since it is victimoriented and allows the victim to express their own narrative and voice.…”

Section: Sexual Offences and Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The #MeToo movement and restorative justice: exploring the views of the public

Peleg-Koriat

Klar‐Chalamish

2020

Contemporary Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study examined 'the day after' the #MeToo protest, and proposes channeling the outcry of millions of women toward developing and establishing alternative mechanisms for dealing with sexual offences, focusing on restorative justice conferencing. A mixed-methods design (quantitative and qualitative) was employed to empirically examine the public's attitude toward the #MeToo movement and restorative-justice in sexual offence cases. The findings (n = 252) revealed that the majority of the public supports the #MeToo movement, but not publications that name alleged offenders. Higher levels of support were found among women and people who define themselves as sexual offence victims. A positive correlation was found between support for the #MeToo movement and support for restorative-justice in sexual offence cases. To better understand the quantitative findings, indepth interviews were conducted with 30 participants. Analysis of the interviews showed that the public acknowledges the importance of the movement, especially due to the widespread discussion on sexual offences and their implications, giving voice to victims, and the possibility that this will help their coping and healing process. Similarly, proponents of restorative justice view the process as an opportunity to conduct a meaningful dialogue, allowing victims to sound their voice and act in a way that suits them.

show abstract

Section: Sexual Offences and Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sexual Offences and Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sexual Offences and Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The #MeToo movement and restorative justice: exploring the views of the public

Peleg-Koriat

Klar‐Chalamish

2020

Contemporary Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the social dimension, we found that the most prominent barriers were offender-victim power gaps and concern with others' reactions. RJ processes rely on participation by both the offender and victim and are based on an understanding of power relations and the need to cope with them (Hayden & van Wormer, 2013;Morris, 2002). In coping with power gaps-evident in the case that led to the current protest (Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh)-the RJ approach can empower the victim and help her cope with the offender, assuming he is willing to participate and acknowledges his responsibility for the harm done.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexual offense victims' responses to the question #WhyIDidntReport? Examining restorative justice as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism

Peleg-Koriat

Klar‐Chalamish

2022

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to examine barriers to reporting sexual offenses as reflected in texts by victims who participated in the #WhyIDidntReport protest that revolved around the reasons for not reporting sexual offenses. Content analysis was used to analyze 95 public posts of Israeli victims published on social media. The findings revealed two main barrier dimensions-personal and social-each comprising several main themes. The most common barrier in the personal dimension was difficulty naming or labeling the experience as a sexual offense to begin with. The most prominent barriers in the social dimension were the power gap between offender and victim, and concern with others' reactions. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings from the perspectives of alternative dispute resolution, with focus on restorative justice as an optional platform for victims.

show abstract

“…Restorative justice involves a range of processes that can respond to individual incidents of harm as well as to the broader cultural contexts that enable harmful behaviour, and its practices are rooted in the basic human impetus to sit together and deliberate on an issue (Karp et al, 2016). At the macro-level, restorative justice is about peacemaking; at the micro-level, it is about relational repair (Hayden & van Wormer, 2013).…”

Section: Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Sustained Restorative Dialogue to Address Sexual Harm at University: Examining agency in sexual harm discourse and evaluating a restorative model for prevention

Giles-Mitson¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ubiquity of sexual assault and harassment has been illuminated on a global scale in the wake of #MeToo and other like movements, foregrounding the need for strategies that aim to combat and reduce sexually harmful behaviour. As in other areas of society, there is a critical need for innovative and proactive processes that look to address the issue on universities campuses, where sexual harm is rife. While many policies and programmes have been designed to respond to sexual misconduct in the campus setting, cultivating forums for honest and respectful communication may be a more effective way to address harm and the culture that gives rise to it. This study investigates a Sustained Restorative Dialogue, a proactive initiative that uses restorative circle practice to better understand the issue of sexual harm in the community, and identify practical steps that aim to reduce it. I undertake a linguistic analysis of language use within the dialogue practice, contextualised by qualitative knowledge gained from participant-observation, to investigate what takes place in restorative dialogue and what it is able to achieve. Specifically, I use syntactic and semantic analysis of discourse to evaluate how individuals engage with the process, and how this goes on to shape their actions and beliefs after the dialogue has taken place. In order to illuminate how participants express their individual and shared experiences, I adopt the concept of agency as an analytic focus. The analysis in this study is in two parts. The first involves an examination of the linguistic strategies that participants use to claim, ratify, negotiate, and deflect agency, which sheds light on how agentive positions are encoded and enacted within sexual harm discourse, and the wider social issues and structural constraints that such positions are connected to. This focus on agency is also able to demonstrate the layered and collaborative way in which meaning is co-constructed in restorative practices, and how structured, intentional dialogue can foster resistant, pro-social discourse and collective agentive expression. The second stage is an evaluation of the outcomes of the restorative practice, through further analysis of discourse from within the dialogue sessions and post hoc interviews with participants. The analysis shows a number of positive outcomes are associated with participation in the process, such as an increased proclivity to communicate about sexual harm, an enhanced awareness and understanding of the issue, and a great deal of personal benefit for those members of the group who had directly experienced harm. This research indicates that Sustained Restorative Dialogue can and should be implemented in campus communities as part of an effective sexual violence prevention strategy. This is of particular relevance to students entering university, where there is considerable potential for dialogue around sexual harm to build on and help provide a practical, agentive platform for sex and consent education.

show abstract

Restorative Justice and Gendered Violence

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

The #MeToo movement and restorative justice: exploring the views of the public

The #MeToo movement and restorative justice: exploring the views of the public

Sexual offense victims' responses to the question #WhyIDidntReport? Examining restorative justice as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism

The Use of Sustained Restorative Dialogue to Address Sexual Harm at University: Examining agency in sexual harm discourse and evaluating a restorative model for prevention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About