The Impact of Restorative and Conventional Responses to Harm on Victims: A Comparative Study
| Author | Avery Calhoun, William Pelech |
| Pages | 63-84 |
63
THE IMPACT OF RESTORATIVE AND CONVENTIONAL R ESPONSES
TO HARM ON VICTIMS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
Avery Calhoun PhD & William Pelech PhD, Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary
Abstract
This article presents the results of inte rvention research that compared the impact on
victims of restorative and conventional approaches to juvenile justice. Using a quasi -
experimental design that allowed for statistical control of select pre-intervention
differences, victims were compared on nine variables across the domains of accountability,
relationship repair, and closure. A b rief review that describ es and locates each variable in
the literature is offered to provide clarity about their conceptual meaning. The findings
support the conclusion that restorative responses in the aftermath of harm are
significantly more beneficial for victims than conventional approaches.
The research reported in the article was funded by the Alberta Law Foundation.
Key words: restorative justice; group conferencing; diversion; victims; comparative
British Journal of Community Justice
©2013 Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield
ISSN 1475-0279
Vol. 11(1):63-84
Calhoun & Pelech
64
Introduction
Over the past two decades there has been increasing att ention paid by North American
and European Union governments to public concerns about the youth criminal justice
system. Despite considerabl e evidence of an actual decreasing incidence of youthful
harms over this period (Thornton, Craft, Dahlberg, Lynch, & Baer, 2002), selective media
coverage of sensational harms caused by youth have served to p roduce chronic pressure
on policy makers in both educational and justice institutions to react with a “get tough” or
“just-desserts” mentality to youthful wrongdoers (Ghetti & Redlich, 2001; Roberts, 2003).
Seemingly lost in this punitive focus are the needs and voices of victims, where despite
considerable personal and financial cost, victims continue to be marginalized in the youth
justice system (Zehr, 1990). As Choi and Severson (2009) note:
Many crime victims face insensitive treatment in the criminal justice
system. They often rec eive no restitution and rarely do they hear
genuine expressions of remorse from the offender when the case is
processed within traditional criminal justice system proceedings. (p.
813)
Dissatisfaction with the treatment of victims under the current retributive regime may
have in part contributed to the emergence of restorative approaches (Zehr, 1990, 2002).
Unlike youth justice policy in New Zealand and Australia, where legislation mandates
restorative approaches, and in some We stern European nations, where child welfare
models predominate (Arthur, 2004; Pitts, 2005), Canada’s Youth Criminal Justice Act
includes both ‘get tough’ measures and opportunities for restorative responses (Denov,
2004; Erickson & Butters, 2005; Hillian et al 2004). Like their counterparts in the United
States (Bazemore & Schiff, 2005; Varma, 2006) and Britain (Arthur, 2004; Barnett &
Hodgson, 2006; Field, 2007; Gillen & McCormack, 2007), Canada’s youth justic e policy
makers may be attempting to reconcile public pressure to “get tough” on youth crime
with simultaneous but contradictory pressure to protect “the best interests of the child”
(Denov, 2004; Roberts, 2003). In the face of negative public perception and generally
“political and reactive” responses, there is urgent need to examine and document the
outcomes of the few opportunities afforded by governing legislation for “exemplary and
promising” (Merlo & Benekos, 2003) alternatives to the increasingly dominant punitive
sanctioning approaches.
To contribute to the d iscourse on finding more appropriate responses to needs of victims,
the primary purpose of this study is to compare the effects of restora tive versus
conventional justice approaches on people who had been harmed by a young person. The
research was conducted in collaboration with a restorative justice program in Calgary.
Following a brief description of retributive and restorative paradigms as well as pertinen t
research, we will describe the restorative justic e program undertaken by Calgary
Community Conferencing, the process of specifying variables for the study, and finally the
methods, results, and implications of this research.
To continue reading
Request your trial