What are ethical dilemmas that arise in restorative justice interventions for survivors?
Restorative justice is an approach to criminal justice that focuses on repairing the harm caused by crime through processes that bring together victims and perpetrators to discuss their experiences, take responsibility for their actions, and develop solutions that meet everyone's needs. This process can be used to handle cases where traditional punitive justice approaches have failed or where it would not be appropriate, such as minor crimes committed by young people.
There are some challenges associated with this approach when applied to situations involving sexual violence. In this essay, I will discuss what ethical dilemmas might arise in restorative justice interventions for survivors of sexual assault.
One major issue is the potential for retraumatization during these interventions. Survivors may find themselves reliving trauma or feeling pressured into participating in ways that cause them distress.
They may be asked to confront their attackers face-to-face without adequate preparation or support, which could trigger anxiety or panic attacks. They may also feel pressure to forgive their assailants, even if doing so does not align with their values or emotional state.
Survivors may feel coerced into accepting a mediated resolution rather than pursuing legal action, which could leave them vulnerable to future attacks. These issues highlight the importance of providing adequate support before, during, and after restorative justice interventions.
Another challenge is the need for cultural sensitivity. Some cultures place more emphasis on collectivism, while others prioritize individual rights. In some contexts, victims may feel obligated to participate in restorative justice despite their own wishes because of societal expectations.
Certain groups may hold different beliefs about what constitutes appropriate reparations or accountability.
Indigenous communities often value healing ceremonies over punishment as a way to restore balance and harmony within a community. This can create tension when working with non-Indigenous people who believe that criminal convictions are necessary for justice to be served.
There is the question of who should be involved in restorative justice processes. Should all parties have an equal voice? Should perpetrators be given a platform for self-reflection and apology? How much power do survivors deserve in shaping these conversations? These questions can be difficult to answer without clear guidelines or consensus among stakeholders.
Restorative justice must strike a balance between meeting everyone's needs while also ensuring that no one's voice is silenced or dismissed.
Restorative justice has the potential to offer many benefits to both survivors and offenders by promoting healing and preventing further violence.
It requires careful planning and implementation to avoid unintended consequences such as retraumatization, cultural insensitivity, and power imbalances. By addressing these issues proactively, we can ensure that this approach remains accessible and effective for all those affected by sexual violence.
What ethical dilemmas arise in restorative justice interventions for survivors?
Restorative Justice Intervention is an alternative approach to traditional retributive justice which is based on the idea that punishment does not solve any crime problem effectively and has more negative effects than positive ones. The aim of Restorative Justice (RJ) is to restore harmony between individuals who have been affected by a certain offense. RJ seeks to rehabilitate criminals rather than punish them by giving them opportunities to understand their actions and repairing the harm they caused.