Paper 3 - Forensic Psychology - Restorative Justice

Question 1

What is restorative justice?

Answer 1

Restorative justice is a type of intervention which aims to make the offenders realise the implications of their actions for the victims and to improve heir relationships with the victims and community by repairing the harm they have caused. Which is lead by the victims

Question 2

What did the early models of RJ do?
And now?

Answer 2

focused on the victims now they focus on the community

Question 3

What are the 3 aims of Restorative Justice?

Answer 3

Rehabilitation of Offenders
Atonement for Wrongdoing
Victims Perspective

Question 4

Explain the aim of Restorative Justice: Rehabilitation of Offenders

Answer 4

Victim explains impact of the crime from their perspective. The criminal is encouraged to take responsibility for the offence.

Question 5

Explain the aim of Restorative Justice: Atonement for Wrongdoing

Answer 5

Offenders offer concrete compensation for the crime (money or unpaid community work). Offender has opportunity to show feelings of guilt and empathy.

Question 6

Explain the aim of Restorative Justice: Victims Perspective

Answer 6

Victim is no longer powerless but has a voice and can also listen to offender – reduces their sense of harm.

Question 7

What did Braithwaite say?

Answer 7

Crime hurts justice should heal

Question 8

What is the main aspect of restorative justice

Answer 8

Giving power back to the victims

Question 9

Briefly explain the process of restorative justice?

Answer 9

■ Active rather than passive involvement of both parties
■ Braithwaite (2004) “crime hurts, justice should heal.”
■ Intended to restore the harm done by the crime.
■ Focus on positive outcome for victims and offenders.
■ Early models focused on victim – more recent focused on community.

Question 10

Sherman and Strang (2007)

Answer 10

• Sherman and Strang’s (2007) meta-analysis concluded that in no way can RJ be more harmful than the traditional justice system.
• It is at least equally as effective as the traditional justice system in all cases.
• In most cases (especially with more serious offences and with adult offenders) it is significantly more effective than the traditional justice system at lowering recidivism rates as well as lowering rates of PTSD in the victims

Question 11

Latimer, Dowden and Muise (2012)

Answer 11

Restorative justice compares favourably with other forms of punishment.
Reoffending rate is lower and both the victim and the offender report higher levels of satisfaction with the technique.

Question 12

Miers et al (2001)

Answer 12

Miers et al. (2001) examined the extent to which victims felt happy with restorative justice programmes.
The majority of the victims were happy with the outcome, although some were cynical about the offenders’ sincerity and their motivation taking part (ie. doing to reduce their sentence).
Some found it made uncomfortable feelings resurface, and some victims found it intimidating.

Question 13

What are the positive evaluations of Restorative Justice?

Answer 13

UK Restorative Council (2015)
Comparison to custodial sentencing
Diversity of Programs

Question 14

What are the negative evaluations of Restorative Justice

Answer 14

Ethical and Practical Issues
relies of the offender showing remorse
Expensive
Soft Option
Feminist Critique

Question 15

Explain the positive evaluation for RJ: UK Restorative Justice council.

Answer 15

■ 85% satisfaction from victims in face-to-face meetings with offenders.
■ Avon and Somerset reported a 93% satisfaction rate with violent crimes.
■ 14% reduction in reoffending
(However, some psychologists argue that this is too low)

Question 16

Explain the positive evaluation for RJ: Comparisons with Custodial Sentencing

Answer 16

Avoids people engaging with other offenders.
■ The restorative justice council - £8 is saved for every £1 spent on the restorative process (Shapland et al., 2007)
■ Zeher (2002) the traditional system has not addressed the needs of victims or promoted offender accountability.

Question 17

Explain the positive evaluation for RJ: Diversity of Programs

Answer 17

■ Degree of flexibility – wide range of possible applications
■ Schemes can be adapted and tailored to the needs of the individual situation
■ However, presents difficulties in terms of drawing general conclusions about the effectiveness of the approach (a more holism approach)

Question 18

Explain the negative evaluation of RJ: Ethical and Practical Issues

Answer 18

Ethical issues
■ Victim could feel worse after.
■ Victim can gang up on offender
Practical issues
■ The system will never be able to be applied to all offenders and victims.
■ Based on victim and offender engaging – some may not want to.

Question 19

Explain the negative evaluation of RJ:

Answer 19

■ Success hinges upon the extent to which the offender feels remorse for their actions (which could be faked and is hard to operalisationlise)
■ Danger that some offenders will sign up to avoid prison
■ Victim- could be seeking revenge or retribution

Question 20

Explain the negative evaluation of RJ: Expensive

Answer 20

■ Due to emotion= skilled and experienced mediators might be needed
■ ‘lose their nerve’- high drop out rates
■ Not always cost effective

Question 21

Explain the negative evaluation of RJ: Soft Option

Answer 21

■ Public support is lacking
■ Political views – keen to show the electorate, they are ‘tough on crime’

Question 22

Explain the negative evaluation of RJ: Feminist Critique

Answer 22

■ Women’s Aid have called for a legislative ban on the use of restorative justice in domestic violence cases
■ Their concerns relate to the power imbalance between the abuser and the abused
■ Often the wider community resorts to blaming the victim
• Furthermore, the investment model would argue that there is high investment in an abusive relationship so as a result giving the abuser a voice could lead to the victim feeling as if they are at fault (as they may be vulnerable and easily manipulated)

Question 23

Explain the general negative evaluation of Custodial Sentencing?

Answer 23

■ Davies and Raymond, (2000) argued that custodial sentencing never achieves all the goals it aims to
Punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation and incapacitation