Conclusion
Recent years have witnessed considerable interest in restorative justice approaches in general and conferences in particular. The current study and earlier research provide support for continued development of the restorative justice conference approach and experimentation with its use.
One of the basic findings of the experiment described in this Bulletin is that restorative justice conferences can be successfully implemented in an urban U.S. setting. More than 80 percent of youth who were referred to a conference attended the conference and completed the terms of their reparation agreement. For Indianapolis, this rate compares very favorably with that of other court-related diversion programs.
Trained observers reported that conferences in Indianapolis appeared to incorporate restorative justice principles such as inclusion of affected parties, respect for all participants, and emphasis on problem solving. Victims received apologies, and reparation agreements included other mutually agreed-upon actions. These characteristics translated into high levels of satisfaction among victims.
Interesting patterns emerge in this study's interview data. Overall, the data indicate reasonably high levels of satisfaction among participants in both conferences and other court-ordered diversion programs (i.e., control group programs). Thus, the Indianapolis experiment does not involve a comparison of restorative justice programs and court-ordered programs that are perceived as failing.
The interview data suggest that the conference approach makes a positive difference for victims. When compared with victims participating in other diversion programs, victims in the conference program were more satisfied with how their cases were handled and much more likely to recommend the program to a friend. Victims in the conference program also felt they were treated with respect. Consistent with the principles of restorative justice, victims participating in conferences were much more likely than those participating in other programs to report that they were involved in the process and that they had the opportunity to express their views.
The conference approach also appears to make a difference for parents and youth. Although responses to some interview questions revealed no differences between those who participated in conferences and those who participated in other diversion programs, responses to questions relating to the core principles of restorative justice revealed significant differences. For example, youth and parents who participated in conferences were more likely than control group participants to feel they were involved, had a "say in the matter," and had problems solved.
Study results relating to reoffending are similarly promising. In comparisons for the total sample and for youth who successfully completed their diversion program, youth who attended conferences were significantly less likely than youth who attended other diversion programs to be rearrested during the 6 months after the incident that initially brought them to the attention of the court. Similar findings were observed at 12 months for the total sample; 12-month findings for program completers were limited by small sample sizes and were less conclusive.
In subsequent stages of this project, researchers will seek to confirm initial results with larger samples. Larger samples will also allow researchers to address theoretical questions by relating findings from reoffending rates to interviews of youth, parents, and victims. For example, such questions may address whether it is the deterrent effect of increased accountability, the reduced stigmatization, or a combination of the two that is generating decreases in offending (Braithwaite, 1989). In addition, larger samples will allow a more thorough examination of results for various subgroups of offenders (e.g., those based on sex, race, age, and offense type). Researchers plan to address the issue of the role of police as conference facilitators, including the related question of whether it makes a difference for victims or offenders if the facilitator is a uniformed police officer or a civilian. Finally, the Hudson Institute hopes to extend its experiment to a broader range of offenses and to youth with prior court experience, thereby allowing the Institute to measure the extent to which these promising initial results apply to more serious offenders. The Institute also perceives a clear need to extend the research to the use of conferences with older youth.
Consistent with earlier research, the findings
of the Indianapolis study suggest
that restorative justice conferences successfully
address the needs of many victims
of offenses committed by youth. In
addition, findings show that conferences
are a promising early intervention for
young, first-time juvenile offenders. Given
the high rate of reoffending among very
young children who enter juvenile court,
these findings are encouraging and support
the need for continued experimentation
with and assessment of the restorative
justice conference approach.
| Previous | Contents | Next |
 |
|
| Restorative Justice
Conferences as an Early Response to Young Offenders |
|