Restorative Justice: Reforming the Experience One Child at a Time Susan Hanley Duncan Dean & Professor of Law

Objectives Define Restorative Justice Understand the Values and Components of Restorative Justice Discuss why Restorative Justice Principles Are Part of the Solution for Schools and Juvenile CoURTS Wrote article in 2005 exploring whether Title IX or anti-bullying statutes were the solution to bullying.[1] At that time relatively few states had anti-bullying statutes.[2] The article concluded that both Title IX and anti-bullying statutes are necessary to protect our children because “Title IX does not require schools to adopt written policies prohibiting sexual harassment, it applies only to the most severe and egregious forms of harassment, and it is debatable whether it applies to sexual orientation harassment.”[3] Yet after analyzing the existing anti-bullying statutes, we concluded many of the statutes were flawed because they were too deferential to local schools.[4] The article did not reference restorative justice, the process of victims, perpetrators and the broader school community coming together to discuss the bullying and its aftermath. Five years later I realize this was a mistake and that any solution which fails to include restorative justice principles lacks perhaps the most important and promising component for addressing the bullying problem.

"Peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of creative alternatives for responding to conflict -- alternatives to passive or aggressive responses, alternatives to violence."   -Dorothy Thompson

What is Restorative Justice? Restorative justice is a broad term used to describe a way of thinking, a philosophy or a social movement to institutionalize peaceful approaches to harm, problem-solving and violations of legal and human rights instead of, or in addition to, using retributive models.

Retributive System Questions Who did it? What laws were broken? How will we punish the offender? Dr. Howard Zehr Eastern Mennonite University

Restorative Justice Questions What is the harm? What needs to be done to repair the harm? Who is responsible for the harm? Dr. Howard Zehr Eastern Mennonite University What is the harm? An injury to the victim, community, even the offender Broken relationships We must recognize crime as an interpersonal conflict What needs to be done to repair the harm? Identify and clarify the harm that’s been done. Include the victim Include the community Assess the offender’s capacity to make reparation Facilitate opportunities for the reparation to take place Who is responsible for the repair? The offender, not the state, has primary and personal responsibility for making things right with the victim and the community. The responsibility is shared by the agency, the offender, their family, the community & the victim.

How Alaska depicts RJ

RJ Practices at a Glance Victim Impact Panels/Classes Restitution Restitution Circle Sentencing Victim/Offender Mediation CONFERENCING MODELS All of these practices are discussed in the Little Book of Restorative Justice. What is already in place in your community? The conferencing models are examples of bringing people together. The most common might be victim/offender mediation. In other conferences family members are invited to a family group conference. Both parties must be willing and able. Other practices to increase empathy and understanding are Victim Impact classes, letters of apology. Circle sentencing can include all stakeholders to speak before sentencing or actually decide the sentence. Reparation Boards can meet locally to determine what needs to be done to repair the harm of local crime. Can also take the form of Neighborhood Accountability Boards. Community Work Service, try to make it fit the harm done and include learning and competency development. Family Group Conferencing Reparation Boards Letters of Apology Community Service

How Schools Deal with Bullying Today? Parents informed Students referred to counseling or mediation A penalty imposed Freedom of movement restricted Suspension Expulsion Ken Rigby & E. Barrington Thomas How Schools Counter Bullying Consequences is the key word that cam e to mind when schools considered what to do with students engaged in bullying Some policies describe a highly legalistic approach, reminiscent of the three strikes and you’re out method of dealing with offenders. Not all used consequences …some used a more problem solving approach (RJ techniques) Some had a combination of problem-solving and punitive approaches

Click for Video

Does it Work? Victim Satisfaction Offender Satisfaction Restitution Compliance Recidivism

Client Satisfaction Typically 60% - 90% are satisfied In some studies, satisfaction is higher for offenders than for victims FGC satisfaction rates for both victims and offenders are typically higher in the U.S. than in New Zealand

Client Satisfaction: Meta-Analysis Study pooled data: 27 VOM and 8 FGC studies Victims were more satisfied in restorative programs than in traditional justice Victims were slightly more satisfied in VOM than in FGC Offenders were slightly more satisfied in restorative programs than in traditional justice

Fairness Both victims and offenders feel they were treated fairly and had a say in the outcome 85% to 90% of participants would recommend the process to others in similar situations

Restitution Restitution may include apology, monetary payment, personal service and/or community service Apology rates average about 70% and are higher than in traditional court proceedings Agreement completion averages 85%

Diversion Has greatly reduced court loads in New Zealand since being mandated in 1989. Has also imposed greater sanctions in New Zealand than was the case before implementation, strengthening the net of social control. Has not reduced court loads in other jurisdictions.

Recidivism Studies of five programs report reduced recidivism ranging from slight to significant One large study found reduced rates for violent youth but not for drunk drivers or juvenile property offenders

Correlates of reduced recidivism A conference that is memorable Not being made to feel a bad person Feeling involved in conference decision making Agreeing with the outcome Completing tasks agreed to Feeling sorry for what they had done Meeting the victim and apologizing Feeling they had repaired the damage

Pilot Project Restorative Justice Louisville began in October 2009

Key Players KY Administrative Office of the Courts Louisville Metro Human Relations Commission Clifton Universalist Unitarian Church Louisville Metro Police Department KY Department of Juvenile Justice Louisville Metro Public Defender’s Office Disproportionate Minority Confinement Advisory Board Luther Luckett Christian Church Newburg Ministerial Association Jefferson County Attorney’s Office Peace Education Jefferson County Circuit Court Clerk Peace Works Jefferson County Public Schools Spalding University Jefferson District Court Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC Just Solutions, Inc. University of Louisville Louisville Bar Foundation Louisville Metro Criminal Justice Commission

Criteria Usually first or second offenses No transfer or waiver eligible offenses No offenders who have been committed to Department of Juvenile Justice No prior felony adjudication No felony cases with the exception of Thefts or Assault Third Degree or written approval of Assistant County Attorney No sexual offenses All treatment or other requirements reached during Family Group Conferencing to be completed within 11 months.

Lessons Learned Funding Education Managing the Case Collecting and Analyzing Data

Sources for this PowerPoint http://www.hss.state.ak.us/DJJ/pdf/restorative101. ppt#430,27,RJ Practices at a Glance