Community involvement in restorative justice: lessons from an English and Welsh case study on youth offender panels

Rosenblatt, Fernanda Fonseca

doi:10.5235/20504721.2.3.280

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The court does not decide upon the content of the order, only upon its appropriate length. Young people are subsequently referred to a youth offender panel within the local YOT, and it is this panel that decides the content of the order (Rosenblatt, 2014).…”

Section: Restorative Justice In the Uk Over 15 Years: Continuity Not mentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking Back to the Future: Threats to the Success of Restorative Justice in the United Kingdom

Hoyle

Rosenblatt

2015

Victims & Offenders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent years have witnessed an entrenchment of restorative justice principles and practices in the youth and adult criminal justice systems of the UK. This research presents a comparative analysis of the findings of two empirical studies-one of a police restorative cautioning scheme conducted fifteen years ago, and the second a contemporary study of youth offender panels. In this research, we argue that restorative justice practices in the UK are repeating history, rather than learning from it. Specifically, we argue that if restorative justice programmes continue to proliferate with the same shortcomings-most notably, inadequate victim involvement, failure to provide a genuine role for the community, and targeting only relatively low-level crime-the future for restorative justice in the UK is likely to be bleak.

show abstract

Section: Restorative Justice In the Uk Over 15 Years: Continuity Not mentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking Back to the Future: Threats to the Success of Restorative Justice in the United Kingdom

Hoyle

Rosenblatt

2015

Victims & Offenders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, when no direct victim participation occurred as part of the same participant's Youth Referral Order, there were no 'magical' moments of 'understanding', 'forgiveness' or 'empathy'. Furthermore, the volunteer representatives on the Referral Order panel did not represent the offender's local community nor was any 'relationship' seen to develop between that group and the offender (Rosenblatt, 2014;Willis, 2016: 184-185).…”

Section: Discussion and Conclusion: Accountability Versus Harm Restormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is acknowledged at this point, however, that in attempting to increase the principle of accountability within case discussions, panellists need to tread carefully within restorative parameters and achieve the correct balance between rehabilitating the offender and successfully restoring and repairing the harm caused by the criminal act. This blurring of the lines between rehabilitation and reparation, and between 'responsibilisation' and restoration, is a common criticism of restorative justice practice and procedure (Gray, 2005;Rosenblatt, 2014;Willis, 2016). In UK prison-based programmes, for example, 'restorative' schemes were labelled as such even though the work carried out was confined to within prison walls without any form of victim input or redress (Wood & Suzuki, 2016: 152) whilst Daly (2016: 11) has further argued that the very term 'restorative justice' is generally misunderstood and misconceived when the label is attached to any process resulting in a non-custodial sanction.…”

Section: The Meso-community Of Accountabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ideal of community and the importance of communitarian values are one of the most quoted principles within restorative justice literature. However, many restorative advocates have noted difficulties in clearly and concisely defining the concept and the true nature of its practical and theoretical role within restorative justice practices (Petrich, 2016;Rosenblatt, 2014;Rossner & Bruce, 2016). Confu-sion over perceived roles and responsibilities inherent within this important concept has the potential to undermine and weaken underlying restorative values and the respective aims of restorative justice models generally, including the model under investigation for the purposes of this research study, the Irish adult reparation panel.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adult reparation panels and offender-centric meso-communities: an answer to the conundrum

McStravick¹

2018

The International Journal of Restorative Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The community paradigm is continually cited as an important influence within restorative practices. However, this influence has not been sufficiently clarified. This article seeks to answer this conundrum by identifying a novel meso-community of care, concern and accountability that has been emerging as part of adult reparation panel procedures. This offender-centric community consists of traditionally secondary justice stakeholders led by criminal justice representative professionals including police officers and probation officials. It also includes lay volunteers and reparation programme officials dependent on state funding and cooperation. Professionalised panellists have led the development of surrogate familial bonds with offenders through the incorporation of a welfare ethos as part of case discourses. This care and concern approach has increased opportunities within case agreements for successful reintegration and rehabilitation. However, this article also acknowledges some concerns within panel processes in that, by attempting to increase accountability for harms caused, there is a danger that panellists are blurring the restorative lines between rehabilitation and genuine restoration and reparation.

show abstract

“…Panels aim for the young person to make up for harms caused by their offending and address their offending behaviour. Although not unproblematic, by involving volunteers these panels can enable a distinctive dialogue to occur in response to crime (Crawford ), and are a recognised ‘significant milestone in the history of restorative justice’ (Rosenblatt , p.291).…”

Section: Statutory Volunteers: Organised By State Agenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Criminal Justice Voluntary Sector: Concepts and an Agenda for an Emerging Field

Tomczak

Buck

2019

Howard J Crime Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volunteers and voluntary organisations play significant roles pervading criminal justice. They are key actors, with unrecognised potential to shore up criminal justice and/or collaboratively reshape social justice. Unlike public and for-profit agents, criminal justice volunteers and voluntary organisations (CJVVOs) have been neglected by scholars. We call for analyses of diverse CJVVOs, in national and comparative contexts. We provide three categories to highlight distinctive organising auspices, which hold across criminal justice: statutory volunteers, quasi-statutory volunteers, and voluntary organisations. The unknown implications of these different forms of non-State, nonprofit justice involvement deserve far greater attention from academics, policymakers and practitioners.

show abstract

Community involvement in restorative justice: lessons from an English and Welsh case study on youth offender panels

Cited by 13 publications

References 22 publications

Looking Back to the Future: Threats to the Success of Restorative Justice in the United Kingdom

Looking Back to the Future: Threats to the Success of Restorative Justice in the United Kingdom

Adult reparation panels and offender-centric meso-communities: an answer to the conundrum

The Criminal Justice Voluntary Sector: Concepts and an Agenda for an Emerging Field

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About