No abstract

No abstract

This article reports on the first cross-site analysis of victim-offender mediation programs in the United States, working with juvenile courts in Albuquerque, Austin, Minneapolis, and Oakland. A total of 1,153 interviews were conducted with victims and offenders. These included pre- and postmediation interviews and the use of two comparison groups. Court officials were interviewed and 28 observations of mediations were conducted. The vast majority of victims and offenders experienced the mediation process and outcome as fair and were quite satisfied with it. Mediation resulted in significantly greater satisfaction and perceptions of fairness for victims, as well as significantly higher restitution completion by offenders, than found in comparison groups. Some implications for juvenile justice policy are offered.

The field of victim‐offender mediation, now in its third decade, has grown extensively throughout North America and Europe, with programs in more than twelve hundred communities. This article reports on results from three related studies on the consequences of participating in victim‐offender mediation, including programs in four of the United States (Umbreit, 1996, 1994a, 1994b; Umbreit and Coates, 1993), four provinces of Canada (Umbreit, 1999, 1995c), and two cities in England (Umbreit and Roberts, 1996). VOM is implemented differently in various places, reflecting cultural norms and mores. Given innumerable ways of doing victim‐offender mediation, are there common experiences shared among participants that can inform program delivery and justice policy? The VOM model was found to be a highly transportable and flexible program in diverse settings. High levels of client satisfaction with both the process and outcome were found, and a high level of fairness was expressed. VOM continues to be a promising model, reflecting the principles of the restorative justice movement and offering a firm foundation of practice wisdom and research from which other newer forms of victim‐offender dialogue, such as family group conferences, circles, and boards, can benefit (Bazemore and Umbreit, 1999).

A small but growing number of jurisdictions across the U.S. offer victims of severe violence, including homicide, the opportunity to meet in a mediated dialogue session with their offender if they so desire. Such meetings are victim initiated and involve extensive preparation of the parties. This article reports on an intensive qualitative five-year study of mediated dialogue participants in two of the first states in the U.S. to do so, Texas and Ohio. Descriptions of the two programs and key characteristics of participants are provided, along with outcome data related to the experience of both crime victims and offenders in mediated dialogue in the context of severely violent crime.