Review of research on victims' experiences in restorative justice: Implications for youth justice

Choi, Jung Jin; Bazemore, Gordon; Gilbert, Michael J.

doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.08.011

Cited by 43 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It also provides more concrete and realistic avenues through which RJ can continue to "grow," at least in terms of the quality of programs and restorative processes. As we discussed above, a number of significant studies on RJ (those beyond the use of satisfaction surveys) have found that victims in particular do not find restorative processes as meaningful or "victim-focused" as is frequently set forth in more idealistic accounts of RJ (Choi, Bazemore, and Gilbert, 2012;Choi, Gilbert, and Green, 2013;Zernova, 2007). At the same time, these studies tend to suggest that reasons for this are not insurmountable at the jurisdictional or program level.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another problem is the lack of adequate preparation, especially for victims, in terms of achieving restorative goals (Choi, Bazemore, and Gilbert, 2012). In observing victimoffender mediation programs in the US, Gerkin (2008, p. 242) suggested that without victims possessing an understanding of the goals of RJ to some degree, it was difficult to achieve restorative outcomes because victims had difficulty viewing "the situation through a restorative lens."…”

Section: Also Found In Interviews Withmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Four Challenges in the Future of Restorative Justice

Wood

Suzuki

2016

Victims & Offenders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restorative justice (RJ) emerged in the late 1970s as an alternative to conventional youth and criminal justice practices. Since this time, RJ has experienced rapid growth in theory and practice. At the same time, much of this growth has come from expansion in lower-end criminal justice responses to crime, and in the increasing use of the term "restorative" for a widening host of practices and interventions. RJ has also faced problems related to its increasing institutionalization, resulting in divergence from earlier aims and goals. In this paper, we set forth what we see as the four biggest challenges facing the future of RJ, namely problems related to definition, institutionalization, displacement and relevance of RJ practices.We follow with discussion of possible future directions of RJ.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Also Found In Interviews Withmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four Challenges in the Future of Restorative Justice

Wood

Suzuki

2016

Victims & Offenders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet despite its importance, preparation, especially for victims, is often compromised (Choi et al, 2012). As mentioned above, this is partly because of lack of attention to victims and RJ principles (Choi et al, 2012).…”

Section: Administrative Constraints Of Rj Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other evaluation studies have also highlighted co-option of RJ practices as a part of their overall findings (Choi et al, 2012). Several evaluation studies have reported that although many victims were satisfied with the way their case was dealt with, a smaller number of victims showed dissatisfaction or felt re-victimized after RJ practices (Morris & Maxwell, 1997;Strang, 2002;Wemmers, 2002;Wemmers & Cyr, 2005).…”

Section: Paradox Of Institutionalization Of Rj Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specific attention was given to areas such as victim satisfaction and redress (Latimer, Muise, & Dowden, 2005;Sherman & Strang, 2007;Strang, Sherman, Mayo-Wilson, Woods, & Ariel, 2013), and offender compliance and reoffending (Bonta, Jesseman, Rugge, & Cormier, 2006;Latimer et al, 2005;McCold & Watchtel, 1998;Shapland et al, 2008;Sherman & Strang, 2007;Sherman, Strang, Mayo-Wilson, Woods, & Ariel, 2015). Work from Daly (2002) and others (Choi, Bazemore, & Gilbert, 2012) found that RJ often did not live up to what Thorburn (2005) has called its sometimes 'impossible 3 dreams,' and by the late 1990s there was an emerging body of 'gap' research on RJ. Some of this research, as in the case of Daly's work (2003aDaly's work ( , 2003bDaly's work ( , 2005Daly's work ( , 2006 focused more immediately on the gaps between the promises of RJ and actual experiences of people in conferencing or other restorative interventions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Co-option, coercion and compromise: challenges of restorative justice in Victoria, Australia

Suzuki

Wood

2017

Contemporary Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restorative justice (RJ) encompasses a widely diverging set of practices whereby those most affected by crime are encouraged to meet, to discuss the effects of harms caused by one party to another, and to agree upon the best possible redress of harms when appropriate. In its inception in the late 1970s, RJ was conceptualized and developed as an alternative to formal criminal justice practices. Since this time, however, RJ has largely moved from being an alternative to criminal justice practices to an 'alternative' practice within criminal justice systems. This institutionalization has resulted in the significant growth of RJ practices, but has also resulted in RJ being used for criminal justice system goals that are at odds with the needs of victims or offenders. This paper examines the use of the Youth Justice GroupConferencing Program in Victoria, Australia. Drawing from interviews with conference conveners, our research highlights problems related to administrative 'constraints' and 'cooptions' in conferencing in terms of referrals, preparation of conference participants, and victim participation. Following presentation of findings, we conclude with a discussion of implications for the use of RJ within a highly institutionalized setting.

show abstract

Restorative Justice

Dawson‐Edwards¹

2015

The Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restorative justice is philosophy that places repairing the victim's harm as a primary goal in the justice process. It includes concepts of reparation, reconciliation, and transformation while offering a space for victim healing and forgiveness. Restorative justice requires that offenders acknowledge the impact their behavior has on victims, family members, and the community and mandates some form of amends. Various models of restorative justice exist with mixed evaluative results. Restorative justice continues to serve as an alternate sanction for juvenile and adult offenders and has increasingly become a more popular solution in educational settings.

show abstract

Review of research on victims' experiences in restorative justice: Implications for youth justice

Cited by 43 publications

References 38 publications

Four Challenges in the Future of Restorative Justice

Four Challenges in the Future of Restorative Justice

Co-option, coercion and compromise: challenges of restorative justice in Victoria, Australia

Restorative Justice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About