Defining Restorative IIRP President and Founder

International Institute for Restorative Practices a graduate school by Ted Wachtel, Defining Restorative IIRP President and Founder cific process, with defined protocols, The use of restorative practices 1. Purpose that brings together those who have helps to: 2. Overview caused harm through their wrongdo- • reduce crime, violence and 3. History ing with those they have directly or in- bullying 4. Supporting Framework 4.1. Social Discipline directly harmed. • improve human behavior Window Others have defined teen courts, • strengthen civil society 4.2. Restorative Justice youth aid panels or reparative boards • provide effective leadership Typology as restorative justice, while the IIRP • restore relationships 4.3. Restorative Practices defines those processes as communi- • repair harm Continuum ty justice, not restorative justice. Such 4.4. Nine Affects community justice processes do not The IIRP distinguishes between the 4.5. Compass of Shame include an encounter between vic- terms restorative practices and restor- 4.6. Fair Process tims and offenders, which provides ative justice. We view restorative jus- 5. Basic Restorative Processes 5.1. Restorative Conference an opportunity to talk about what tice as a subset of restorative practices. 5.2. Circles happened and how it has affected Restorative justice is reactive, consist- 5.3. Family Group them (Van Ness & Heetderks Strong, ing of formal or informal responses to Conference/Family 2010). Rather, these courts, panels and crime and other wrongdoing after it Group Decision Making boards are comprised of appointed occurs. The IIRP’s definition of restor- 5.4. Informal Restorative community members who have no ative practices also includes the use Practices real emotional stake in the incident. of informal and formal processes that 6. References These bodies meet with offenders, precede wrongdoing, those that pro- but victims, their families and friends actively build relationships and a sense 1. Purpose are not generally invited. Restorative of community to prevent conflict and The International Institute for Re- justice, in contrast, offers victims and wrongdoing. storative Practices (IIRP) has a particular their supporters an opportunity to talk Where social capital—a network of way of defining restorative and related directly with offenders. relationships—is already well estab- terms that is consistent throughout Our purpose is not to label other lished, it is easier to respond effectively our courses, events, videos and pub- processes or terms as positive or nega- to wrongdoing and restore social or- lications. We have developed our defi- tive, effective or ineffective. We respect der—as well as to create a healthy and nitions to facilitate communication the fact that others may define terms positive organizational environment. and discussion within the framework differently and, of course, have every Social capital is defined as the con- of our own graduate school and for right to do so. Rather, we simply want nections among individuals (Putnam, those who participate in our Restor- to define and share a consistent termi- 2001), and the trust, mutual under- ative Works learning network. nology to create a unified framework standing, shared values and behaviors For example, at one of our symposia of understanding. that bind us together and make coop- a young man insisted that his school erative action possible (Cohen & Pru- already held conferences with students 2. Overview sak, 2001). and their families, not realizing that Restorative practices is a social sci- In public health terms, restorative most of the other participants at the ence that studies how to build social justice provides tertiary prevention, event were not referring to a generic capital and achieve social discipline introduced after the problem has oc- conference, but to a restorative confer- through participatory learning and de- curred, with the intention of avoiding ence. A restorative conference is a spe- cision-making. reoccurrence. Restorative practices ex- © 2013 IIRP Graduate School www.iirp.edu Defining Restorative 2 pands that effort with primary preven- ative justice” (Zehr, 1990); in social work 2006; Haarala, 2004; Mbambo & Skel- tion, introduced before the problem the term employed is “empowerment” ton, 2003; Mirsky, 2004; Roujanavong, has occurred. (Simon, 1994); in education, talk is of 2005; Wong, 2005). The social science of restorative “positive discipline” (Nelsen, 1996) or Eventually modern restorative jus- practices offers a common thread to “the responsive classroom” (Charney, tice broadened to include communi- tie together theory, research and prac- 1992); and in organizational leadership ties of care as well, with victims’ and tice in diverse fields such as educa- “horizontal management” (Denton, offenders’ families and friends partici- tion, counseling, criminal justice, social 1998) is referenced. The social science pating in collaborative processes called work and organizational management. of restorative practices recognizes all conferences and circles. Conferencing Individuals and organizations in many of these perspectives and incorporates addresses power imbalances between fields are developing models and them into its scope. the victim and offender by including methodology and performing empiri- additional supporters (McCold, 1999). cal research that share the same im- 3. History The family group conference (FGC) plicit premise, but are often unaware Restorative practices has its roots in started in New Zealand in 1989 as a re- of the commonality of each other’s restorative justice, a way of looking at sponse to native Maori people’s con- efforts. criminal justice that emphasizes re- cerns with the number of their children For example, in criminal justice, re- pairing the harm done to people and being removed from their homes by storative circles and restorative con- relationships rather than only punish- the courts. It was originally envisioned ferences allow victims, offenders and ing offenders (Zehr, 1990). as a family empowerment process, not their respective family members and In the modern context, restorative as restorative justice (Doolan, 2003). In friends to come together to explore justice originated in the 1970s as me- North America it was renamed family how everyone has been affected by an diation or reconciliation between vic- group decision making (FGDM) (Bur- offense and, when possible, to decide tims and offenders. In 1974 Mark Yantzi, ford & Pennell, 2000). how to repair the harm and meet their a probation officer, arranged for two In 1991 the FGC was adapted by own needs (McCold, 2003). In social teenagers to meet directly with their an Australian police officer, Terry work, family group decision-making victims following a vandalism spree O’Connell, as a community policing (FGDM) or family group conferencing and agree to restitution. The positive strategy to divert young people from (FGC) processes empower extended response by the victims led to the first court. The IIRP now calls that adap- families to meet privately, without pro- victim-offender reconciliation program, tation, which has spread around the fessionals in the room, to make a plan in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada, with world, a restorative conference. It has to protect children in their own fami- the support of the Mennonite Central been called other names, such as a lies from further violence and neglect Committee and collaboration with the community accountability conference or to avoid residential placement out- local probation department (McCold, (Braithwaite, 1994) and victim-offender side their own homes (American Hu- 1999; Peachey, 1989). The concept conference (Stutzman Amstutz & Zehr, mane Association, 2003). In education, subsequently acquired various names, 1998). In 1994 Marg Thorsborne, an circles and groups provide opportuni- such as victim-offender mediation and Australian educator, was the first to use ties for students to share their feelings, victim-offender dialogue as it spread a restorative conference in a school build relationships and solve problems, through North America and to Europe (O’Connell, 1998). and when there is wrongdoing, to play through the 1980s and 1990s (Office of The International Institute for Re- an active role in addressing the wrong Victims of Crime, 1998). storative Practices (IIRP) grew out of and making things right (Riestenberg, Restorative justice echoes ancient the Community Service Foundation 2002). and indigenous practices employed in and Buxmont Academy, which since These various fields employ different cultures all over the world, from Native 1977 have provided programs for delin- terms, all of which fall under the rubric American and First Nation Canadian to quent and at-risk youth in southeastern of restorative practices: In the criminal African, Asian, Celtic, Hebrew, Arab and Pennsylvania, USA. Initially founded in justice field the phrase used is “restor- many others (Eagle, 2001; Goldstein, 1994 under the auspices of Buxmont © 2013 IIRP Graduate School www.iirp.edu Defining Restorative 3 Academy, the Real Justice program, now an IIRP program, has trained pro- fessionals around the world in restorative conferencing. In 1999 the newly created IIRP broadened its training to informal and proactive restorative practices, in addition to formal restorative conferencing (Wachtel, 1999). Since authoritarian authoritative then the IIRP, an accredited graduate school, has developed a comprehen- sive framework for practice and theory

Load more