It's hard to know what's on somebody's heart, so I can't judge whether Mark McGwire's "apology" for steroid use was heartfelt. If it was, it's unfortunate that he waited for several years then "apologized" at a time when self interest was likely a motivating factor. (He'd just taken the hitting instructor job in St. Louis.) It's also unfortunate that his "apology" was coordinated by a PR firm and backed up by immediate statements of support by two others with apparent sel interest in seeing McWire forgiven by the public: his new employer (Tony LaRussa)and the baseball commissioner. To further undermine the authenticity of his apology, McGwire followed it up with obvious untruths, saying that he only used steriods to recover from injuries and that steriod use did not help his power hitting. This whitewashing of his past actions suggests that McGwire failed to meet the basic requirements of your restorative-justice based criteria for a real apology. It's clear that many sport stars, celebrities, and politicians could learn much from understanding the basic tenets of restorative justice prior to making public apologies for their actions.

These are good points, Roger. Thank you for your comments. When attempting to make amends or when an offender attempts to take responsibility for one's actions through making an apology it is honesty that is critical. You are right.

I agree with you when looking at McGuire's timing of his apology and how it was handled (PR firm, etc.). Hard to see it looking legitimate. It should remind us of how important motives are when making an apology.
That is true when looking at criminal cases and restoraive justice. Why does an offender apologize? Heart felt or believing that the apology might get him/her something in exchange?
Sometimes it is hard to decipher motives.

McGuire also could have offered up something to "atone," if you will, for his past steroid use and the impact that use has had on others (i.e. the public, professional baseball's standards, the youthful fans who look up to baseball "giants" like him and others). Maybe he could have been willing to do public service announcements denouncing steroids in professional baseball. That would have been consistent with a restorative justice process that includes having the offender agree to a contract or an agreement that is meaningful to the victim or victims. In this case, maybe this type of idea would be appropriate and would include those who have power inside professional baseball (i.e. the commissioner of baseball).

Lisa Rea

Lisa opens the field to larger issues when discussing the application of restorative justice to settings outside of traditional practice venues such as justice systems and schools. Rather trying to assess the authenticity of Mark McGwire's recent admission, I want to move in a slightly different direction, perhaps somewhat against the grain of my own advocacy experiences in this field.

Having applied restorative practices in several athletic related "off-field" violations both at the collegiate and professional level, my experience has been that the institutional aims, environmental forces, the advocacy associated with and adversarial nature of the discipline/ sanctioning process - some or all often impede the introducing of restorative approaches that may be as simple as apologies. In athletic related incidents which Jeff Seagrave from Skidmore College and I write about in Restorative Justice on the College Campus (Karp and Allena, 2005), traditional stakeholders (athletes, athletic directors, agents, team owners, agents, attorneys, league officials, et al) all play their roles vis-a-vis the way of responding to any violation. And, where the rule of thumb is often: "no apology before its time". In other words, before something can be gained. In this case, as Roger accurately points out, as Mr. McGwire takes his place as a batting coach for the Cardinals. When you think about it, its not remarkably different than the criminal justice process.

In recent column in the LA Times by columnist Kurt Streeter ("Restorative Justice Could Be Answer to Doping Problem", August 2009) Streeter ponders a restorative practice involving high profile MLB steroid violator, Manny Ramirez, were asked to participate in a restorative justice circle or conference rather than simply offering the typical spun response we have come to expect. Prior to writing this piece, Streeter had covered the story for several months as it unfolded and interviewed fans, players, league officials to better understand the impact on a variety of constituents and consumers. Eventually he imagines Manny having to sit with a few of the young fans who sit along the left field foul line who Streeter has personally interviewed following the revelation of Manny's use. Or perhaps hearing from a minor league veteran who never made it to the majors AND chose not to use 'roids and human growth hormones. What I like about Streeter's treatment of the subject was his imaginal capacity to see a different set of possibilities.

What also strikes me are the reintegrative values of restorative practices when applied to athletic (and many other types) of social transgressions. Like all of us, when athletes violate the norms of their tribe/industry/community there need to be opportunities for them to rebuild the trust that was breached through the violating behavior. Recently I met with the coaching staff of a university to build a reintegrative strategy for a player who was suspended from the team for an on-field incident during intercollegiate play. While the sanctions in this incident were substantial they did not address the reintegrative needs of the suspended athlete, teammates or the coaching staff.

What I appreciate about Lisa's delving into this area of applying restorative justice to sports-incidents like McGwire's admission is that it expands widens the horizons of the restorative field and creates opportunities for all of us to be more than simply strategic and empirical, rather more imaginative and creative as well. Like any system or paradigm, without a lens that is reflective, creative and evolving the effectiveness of restorative justice that derives from being a "living system" can evaporate.

 

Thanks, Thom, for these comments. Very interesting and thought provoking. I particularly liked your comment related to the timing of an apology. As you said, we (society) often set it up to make sure that the guilty party does not apologize since the counsel that party is receiving is often "don't apologize until the time is right". Certainly a sad state of affairs!

And yes, in the criminal justice field so often attorneys are counselling their clients NOT to apologize or take responsibilty because it could hurt them (especially before sentencing).
That' s a problem. The guilty party might want to confront his victim(s) and take responsibilty but those who are advising him say "I wouldn't do that ...yet." And then it might become...if ever.

Your last comment reminds me of the need to continually think of restoraive justice in a way that pushes the envelope. We have to think outside the box. The principles of RJ can be applied in so many contexts. From the macro to the micro, from the justice system to the personal: between human beings in any type of conflict.

Lisa Rea