Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools

Navigation

Not Just an Apology

Aug 26, 2010

by Lynette Parker

Recently, I read the headline Apologising to victims will not reduce reoffending rates in a Google news alert. I quickly scanned the article. The author was very critical of restorative justice, questioning the possibility that restorative processes could help lower reoffending rates. In describing the criminal justice system, Mark Johnson says, “The job of the criminal justice system is not to be victim-centric but to be detached, clinical and fair.” He goes on to say, “…how can empowering victims cut reoffending? Only working with offenders can do that.”

As I finished reading his arguments, I had to agree with part of what Johnson said. But, I also realised that some of the criticism has a lot to do with a misunderstanding of restorative justice.

In illustrating his points, Johnson refers to the story of a fifteen year-old girl who came from a very bad family situation that included addictions and abuse. When she eventually became an offender by passing on the violence she had experienced to someone else, the teen was arrested and charged with a crime. She was then told that she could get a shorter sentence by writing an apology letter to the victim.  Johnson describes the event with:

It was no surprise to anyone that ……. had offended. But now, surely, was the moment for the system to recognise her needs and help her to change. Instead, she was asked to write a letter of apology to her victim. I watched an RJ lobbyist ask her how she felt about that. [The young offender] looked confused. She said: "But what about me?"

He goes on to argue that the system failed the young offender by not recognising the drivers that led to her offending or providing the services to address those needs. I have to agree, but that is because restorative justice is about much more than simply giving victims an apology. 

While restorative justice is about empowering the victim, it also helps to empower offenders as well. Part of that comes in helping the offender understand the impact of his/her actions on the victim, but also giving them the ability to “make amends” in some way. There is also an opportunity for an offender see that he/she has a place in the community and can be a part of that community.  The “detached, clinical, and fair” criminal justice system has a difficult time doing this as it is based on exclusion and stigmatising shame. 

I remember a young man convicted of armed robbery describing his conferencing experience with, “You don’t know what it means to have a member of the community listen to my story before making his decision.” The experience gave him some hope.  It was also an opportunity to have someone listen to him. I think this is what the young offender from Johnson articles was crying out for when she asked, “But what about me?” 

Being heard can be the first step in receiving the care and treatment an offender needs. Often, in my experience, those meeting in a restorative conference – offender, victim, family members, community representatives, etc – will discuss underlying issues to the offense.  This is especially true for addictions. I’ve watched individuals who had a substance abuse problem admit that in conference and volunteer to seek treatment through AA or similar groups. I’ve also seen victims stop offenders from glossing over such issues and help dive into a much needed discussion.

At the same time, the understanding of impact of behaviour can be a motivator to identify and address underlying causes to offending.  Anecdotal evidence from the Sycamore Tree Project® in New Zealand indicated that prisoners who had who had resisted rehabilitation programmes such as goal setting and drug treatment feel more ready to take part in them after participating in the in-prison restorative justice programme. The focus on accountability is not about telling the offender what to do. It is about helping him/her take understand that there are options both for making things right and for future decision making. 

However, as Johnson points out, options have to be available. It’s one thing to recognise the underlying issues or talk about addictions. It is another to provide services and treatment to help offenders address those needs.  Justice responses – whether a community sanction, incarceration, or even a restorative process – cannot help the individual if needed services are not available. This may mean effective and affordable substance abuse treatment. In some cases, it may mean trauma healing as well as other programmes such as anger management classes.  Those support and rehabilitative services need to be provided as they will help offenders fulfil their agreements and desire for change. The strength of a restorative process lies in the offender being a part of the process that both identify the need for services and the decision to participate in them.

Unfortunately, restorative justice is often seen as simply an apology or a restitution payment. The relational elements that help build mutual understanding between victim and offender and community members can be left out. This is one reason we must be very careful how we describe restorative justice or define the outcome of a restorative process. When things become formulaic –such as simply writing the apology letter – then both the victim and the offender can be left asking, “But what about me?”

Document Actions

Michael Cockram
Michael Cockram says:
Sep 06, 2010 12:43 PM

Restorative Justice cannot operate in a situation in which one person is simply labelled &quot;Victim&quot; and the other is labelled &quot;Offender&quot;. For a start each of those labels is an attempt to apply an identity to the person concerned which is wholly inadequate and intensely resented - it is in fact plain &quot;wrong&quot;. Noone is just a label and to attempt to apply this to a human being makes that person into a misleading caricature. <br />&nbsp; <br />That was what happened to the 15 year old girl in the story and her reaction (and the writer's) is entirely predictable and justified. One must always deal with the whole truth in the situation and not just one tiny piece of a larger story.

lparker
lparker says:
Sep 06, 2010 12:47 PM

Michael, <br /> <br />Thank you for your thoughts on the problems of labels. I think you raise a good point for this application of labels can affect the way that we work with those who have been affected by crime. If I think in terms of victims and offenders then it becomes very easy to conflate restorative justice into a simple apology owed to the victim by the offender. But if I think in terms of human beings affected by crime -- either by causing harm or being harmed -- then it becomes easier to listen to those stories and provide the space for parties to find solutions and their own paths for moving forward. <br /> <br />Regards, <br />Lynette

Add comment

You can add a comment by filling out the form below. Plain text formatting. Comments are moderated.

RJOB Archive
View all

About RJOB

Correspondents

LN-blue

 lp-blue

lr

dv-blue

kw-blue

mw-blue