Week 6: Future Applications of Restorative Justice Suppose you were charged with
Week 6: Future Applications of Restorative Justice
Suppose you were charged with implementing a restorative justice program in your community. Would community members be receptive to the approach, or would they argue that a “tough on crime” approach is more effective?
This week, you consider the factors that affect a community’s willingness to consider restorative justice as an option. You also reflect on what you learned about restorative justice in this course and consider how you would apply your new knowledge to your professional and personal life.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
Analyze political, social, and cultural factors that affect a community’s receptiveness to restorative justice
Argue the benefits of restorative justice compared to a “tough on crime” approach
Apply restorative justice principles to professional and personal life
PLEASE READ ALL REQUIRED ASSIGNMENT FOR THIS LESSON FROM TOP TO THE BOTTOM I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED ALL THE INFORMATION THAT NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED DOWN BELOW. MAKE SURE YOU DO THIS PAPER IN 150 TO 200 WORD COUNT WITH REFERENCES YOU CAN USE OUTSIDE REFERENCES UNTIL OTHERWISE TOLD DIFFRENTLY PLEASE REACH OUT IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS……THANKS
Discussion: Community Receptiveness to Restorative Justice
Historically, the perceived solution to the presence of or increase in crime has been a “tough on crime” approach—that is, enact stricter laws and dole out harsher sentences. While the “tough on crime” approach is not as widely accepted as it used to be, key political, social, and cultural factors drive this perspective in some communities more than others. Unfortunately, this perspective is often at odds with the restorative justice approach.
In this Discussion, you examine the political, social, and cultural factors that affect a community’s receptiveness to restorative justice. You also formulate a response to a community member who insists on a “tough on crime” approach, using what you have learned about restorative justice in this course.
Post a response that addresses the following:
How do political, social, and cultural factors affect a community’s receptiveness to a restorative justice approach?
Is your community receptive to a restorative justice approach? Why or why not?
If you were confronted by a community member who insisted that a “tough on crime” approach works best, how would you respond given what you have learned in this course?
Journal: Professional and Personal Application of Restorative Justice Principles For many people,
The geologic rock record is vast and diverse. It suggest that supercontinents appear and disappear over time as new Writing Assignment Help Journal: Professional and Personal Application of Restorative Justice Principles
For many people, restorative justice is an unfamiliar concept that challenges traditional conceptualizations of justice and accountability. Think back to the beginning of the course. What did you know about restorative justice? How does your initial knowledge of this topic compare to what you know now? In this final Journal, you have an opportunity to reflect on your learning in this course and how you will apply it to your professional and personal life.
Write a 250-word journal response to the following prompts:
What are three key takeaways you have learned about restorative justice by participating in this course?
How will you apply restorative justice principles in your professional and personal life?
PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW ALL DIRECTIONS ABOVE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED ITEMS THAT NEEDS EXTRA ATTENTION ALSO MAKE SURE YOU REFERENCE YOUR WORK AND YOU CAN USE OUTSIDE REFERENCES AS WELL. THIS PAPER IS A 250 WORD COUNT OR MORE AND IF YOU SHOULD HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS JUST MESSAGE ME, I WILL ANSWER BACK IN A TIMELY MANNER THANK YOU……………
ABOVE IS THE ASSIGNMENT AND INSTRUCTIONS AND I HAVE ALSO ATTACHED 2 PIECES OF READING MATERIAL TO HELP YOU FOR YOUR WORK IF NEEDED….
STUDENT REPLY #1 Edgar Etienne The article Controversies around Restorative Justice by
STUDENT REPLY #1 Edgar Etienne
The article Controversies around Restorative Justice by David Belden states that one political factor that might impact a community’s receptiveness to a restorative justice approach is the cost. The article gives the example of the San Francisco Bay Area, where it costs around $50,000 to run a juvenile offender through the justice system instead of about $4,500 for a restorative process (Belden, 2012). Seeing those numbers, the community might be more receptive to the restorative justice approach as the funds saved could be utilized in other ways. The article also mentions social and cultural factors such as keeping young people of color out of the prison to school pipeline and religion such as traditional Christianity, which supports genuine accountability and the redemption of an individual (Belden, 2012).
I do not believe my community is receptive to a restorative justice approach, but I think it would benefit from it. From middle school, I have seen peers and other young people go to juvenile detention centers for non-violent crimes that could have benefitted from a restorative process. From my perspective growing up here, there are not enough programs for the youth to prevent them from getting into mischief and once you get into that scene, there are not many avenues for you to take to get out. Many of the kids I grew up with that got criminal charges early in life were unable to reintegrate into society and ultimately reoffended. If I were to run into a community member who had that “tough on crime” approach, I would probably share that with them to show that approach is not working in stopping people from re-offending and does nothing for the victims who were affected by the crime. No one is winning in that approach. Then we can chat about restorative approaches that could assist both parties and the community.
Reference
Belden, D. (2012). Controversies Around Restorative Justice. Retrieved on August 17th, 2022. At https://web.s.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=3465bcbc-c40b-4dad-a8b2-aac644ce70b2redis&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPXNoaWImc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZlJnNjb3BlPXNpdGU#AN=87048918&db=tsh
STUDENT REPLY #2 Samuel Nagy
I think the political, social, and cultural factors of a community, can affect its receptiveness to a restorative justice approach. I think the biggest affect would be the way that justice was perceived. I truly feel that the outcomes of the high-profile cases would be judged by the community’s apparent receptiveness to the restorative justice approach, good, bad, or indifferent. I do feel that the political, social, and cultural factors of each community can weigh heavy on the justice system, but within a well-balanced system, these factors are more complimentary rather than affecting the justice system in a negative fashion.
I do feel my community is receptive to a restorative justice approach, as there are already several diversion and specialty courts in existence here in Pima County, including Mental Health Courts, Drug Courts and Diversion based courts. We have a large direction on probationary type of justice here in Pima County. And for these reasons, I feel this community would also be open to restorative justice.
I feel if I was confronted by a community member who insisted that a “tough on crime” approach works best, that I would respond in a certain way, given what I have learned from this course. I would emphasize the number of jail days on average for the “tough on crime” approach and explain briefly about reconciliation and restoration through the restorative approach and how my life was changed also due to the court system pushing rehab rather than hard time (Prison). I feel I could really get behind this restorative justice approach.
STUDENT QUESTION FROM YOUR WEEK 6 DISCUSSION THAT I HAVE REPOST AND HIGHLIGHTED BELOW PLEASE ANSWER BACK TO ALL 3 STUDENT REPLIES WITH 150 TO 200 WORD COUNT WITH OUTSIDE REFERENCE THANKS….
Community receptiveness to restorative justice
Given the numerous objectives and aims of eradicating crimes in a community, members have proposed different rationales when punishing offenders. Initially, the extent to which offenders were punished was determined by the nature of the crime, hence the “tough on crime” approach (Moss et al., 2019). However, a new approach, restorative justice,’ has emerged over time, and numerous communities are using it. However, the community’s receptiveness to the approach is affected by cultural, social, and political factors; hence it compares to the initial approach.
Factors affecting the community’s receptiveness to the restoration of justice
In any community, a restorative justice approach should maximize the participation and input of offenders and victims to search for healing, prevention, responsibility, and restoration. However, the members are affected by various factors when receiving the restoration process. For instance, politicians pass laws and bills that instill fear among community members. Similarly, the rule of law may affect the readiness to accept the harm caused (Willis and Hoyle, 2022). Social factors affecting the receptiveness include taboos and public opinion, affecting the victim’s willingness to restore the committed crime. Moreover, cultural factors such as different norms and languages determine the readiness of the offender and the victim to receive the restoration process.
My community: An overview of receptiveness to the restorative justice approach
In my community, members highly regard the restorative justice approach. Undoubtedly, any home, workplace, and other critical environments can encounter injustices at any time. Therefore, there is always a need to respond to small and large grievances to avoid conflict and violence escalation. Also, the community percepts conflict as its property at large, and solving them while utilizing the approach ensures more peace in the community.
The best approach: A response to a community member
Although the “tough on crime” was widely used by many communities, it would not compare with the restorative justice approach. The latter would be the most applicable since its views crimes as injuries to property and personal relationships of the involved community members (Sandwick et al., 2019). Essentially, the approach does not consider punishment of offenders as the best tactic, hence replacing it with attempts and efforts to heal the victims and offenders’ injuries and the overall community. Thus, it is the best due when reaching agreements and maintaining peace in any community.
References
Moss, S. A., Lee, E., Berman, A., & Rung, D. (2019). When do people value rehabilitation and restorative justice over the punishment of offenders? Victims & Offenders, 14(1), 32-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2018.1539688
Sandwick, T., Hahn, J. W., & Hassoun Ayoub, L. (2019). Fostering community, sharing power: Lessons for building restorative justice school cultures. Education policy analysis archives, 27(145), n145. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1235090.pdf
Willis, R., & Hoyle, C. (2022). The Good, The Bad, and The Street: Does ‘street culture affect offender communication and reception in restorative justice? European Journal of Criminology, 19(1), 118-138. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:6e79c495-30ef-4710-be1d-fc3c21320544/download_file?file_format=pdf&safe_filename=Willis_and_Hoyle_2019_the_good_the_bad_and_the_street.pdf&type_of_work=Journal+article
STUDENT QUESTION #3 Lydia Kelly
I have to disagree with your sentence that states “approach should maximize the participation and input of offenders and victim “I think the victim should have the maximum input and the offender minimum when it comes to restorative justice. When I was looking at articles for my posts this last six weeks, I came across so many articles about restorative justice in other cultures and countries. I wonder what they are doing to have the community to be so accepting with this method. How can we learn from them? I am happy to see your community thinks very well of restorative justice. Thank you for a great six weeks of thought-provoking discussions.