forensics- restorative justice

Question 1

“Flexibility of programmes”, double whopper, strength

Answer 1

One strength of restorative justice is that there is diversity in the programmes.
There is flexibility in the way restorative justice programmes can be used, unlike custodial sentencing, and restorative justice covers a wide range of possible applications (prisons, schools etc).
This is positive in that the schemes can be adapted and tailored to the needs of the individual situation.
This suggests that this method of dealing with offending behaviour will be more effective.

Question 2

“Offenders’ intentions”, hamburger, limitation

Answer 2

The success of restorative justice programmes may hinge on the extent to which the offender feels remorse for their actions.
Some offenders may ‘sign up’ to avoid prison or for a reduced sentence. The victim may also have an ulterior motive i.e. to seek revenge or retribution of their own.
This means that restorative justice programmes may not lead to positive outcomes if the participants themselves do not have the best intentions.

Question 3

“Expense of programme”, combo whopper

Answer 3

Restorative justice may save the government money.
Shapland et al (2007) concluded after a seven-year project that every £1 spent on restorative justice programmes would save the criminal justice system £8 through reduced offending.
However, they require the input of a skilled and experienced individual to act as a mediator to prevent serious conflict.
These people are hard to come by so are expensive. This means that in practice, it may not always be the best and most cost-effective option.

Question 4

Limitation,“Not suitable for all”, double whopper

Answer 4

Feminist commentators take issue with the widespread use of restorative justice.
The charity Women’s Aid has called for a legislative ban on its use in domestic violence.
They are concerned about the power imbalance in the relationship between abuser and abused, and the fact that the wider community, which should be supportive, often resorts to blaming the victim.
This questions the suitability of restorative justice programmes for certain types of offence, limiting their effectiveness.

Question 5

limitation, “Soft option”, Hamburger

Answer 5

Restorative justice may reduce recidivism rates and is cheaper than running overcrowded prisons, but it often does not receive public support.
Programmes are often regarded as soft options, a view echoed by politicians’ keen to convince voters that they are ‘tough on crime’.
This means that despite their effectiveness, the political will to use restorative justice is not always there.