Implementing balanced and restorative justice : victim, offender, community : a guide for juvenile detention /

This publication is one in a series of guides designed to assist in the statewide promotion of balanced and restorative justice. BARJ is a philosophy of justice that can guide the work of individuals who deal with juvenile offenders, their victims, and the communities in which they live.

Direct restorative materials use in Australia in 2002

Background: This study aimed to determine the reasons for dentists' choice of materials, in particular amalgam and resin composite, in Australia. Method: A questionnaire was developed to elicit this information. The names and addresses of 1000 dentists in Australia were selected at random. The questionnaire was mailed to these dentists with an explanatory letter and reply-paid envelope. Results: A total of 560 replies were received. Regarding choice of material, 99 per cent of respondents cited clinical indication as an influencing factor, although patients' aesthetic demands (99 per cent), patients' financial situation (82 per cent), and lecturers' suggestions (72 per cent) were also reported to influence respondents' choice of materials. Twelve per cent of respondents used composite 'always', 29 per cent 'often', 32 per cent 'sometimes', 23 per cent 'seldom' and 4 per cent 'never' in extensive load-bearing cavities in molar teeth. For composite restorations in posterior teeth, 84 per cent 'always', 'often' or 'sometimes' used the total etch technique, 84 per cent used a thick glass-ionomer layer and 36 per cent never used rubber dam. Fifty-nine per cent of respondents reported a decreased use of amalgam over the previous five years. Sixty-eight per cent of respondents agreed with the statement 'discontinuation of amalgam restricts a dentist's ability to adequately treat patients'. Seventy-five per cent considered that the growth in the use of composites increased the total cost of oral health care. Conclusions: Of the respondents from Australia 73 per cent place large composite restorations in molar teeth and their choice of material is influenced greatly by clinical indications, and patients' aesthetic demands.

A faithful compass: rethinking the term restorative justice to find clarity

In the field of restorative justice (rj) there is regular debate regarding the terms restorative and justice. In spite of efforts to come to a common vision, this ongoing discussion illustrates how theoretical and practical disagreements have resulted in rj being characterized as ambiguous and inconsistent within the judicial context and beyond (Gavrielides, 2008; Sullivan & Tifft, 2005; Johnstone & Van Ness, 2007). Arising out of research conducted in an education context (Vaandering, 2009), this paper identifies the impact of this ambiguity on educators. More importantly, however, it examines the term justice and discovers that an overemphasis on justice as fairness and individual rights has pulled the field off-course. The paper identifies that what is needed is a broader understanding of justice than that given in the judicial context and makes the case for justice as honouring the inherent worth of all and enacted through relationship. If understood as such, I argue that the terms restorative and justice must remain paired and in place in order to serve as a muchneeded compass needle that guides proponents of rj in the field to their desired destinations.

The Significance of Critical Theory for Restorative Justice in Education

Restorative Justice (rj), a distinctive philosophical approach that seeks to replace punitive, managerial structures of schooling with those that emphasize the building and repairing of relationships (Hopkins 2004) has been embraced in the past two decades by a variety of school systems worldwide in an effort to build safe school communities. Early studies indicate rj holds significant promise, however, proponents in the field identify that theoretical and evidence-based research is falling behind practice. They call for further research to deepen the current understanding of rj that will support its sustainability and transformative potential and allow it to move from the margins to the mainstream of schooling (Braithwaite 2006; Morrison & Ahmed 2006; Sherman & Strang 2007).

Relational restorative justice pedagogy in educator professional development

What would a professional development experience rooted in the philosophy, principles, and practices of restorative justice look and feel like? This article describes how such a professional development project was designed to implement restorative justice principles and practices into schools in a proactive, relational and sustainable manner by using a comprehensive dialogic, democratic peacebuilding pedagogy. The initiative embodied a broad, transformative approach to restorative justice, grounded in participating educators’ identifying, articulating and applying personal core values. This professional development focused on diverse educators, their relationships, and conceptual understandings, rather than on narrow techniques for enhancing student understanding or changing student behaviour. Its core practice involved facilitated critical reflexive dialogue in a circle, organized around recognizing the impact of participants’ interactions on others, using three central, recurring questions: Am I honouring? Am I measuring? What message am I sending? Situated in the context of relational theory (Llewellyn, 2012), this restorative professional development approach addresses some of the challenges in implementing and sustaining transformative citizenship and peacebuilding pedagogies in schools. A pedagogical portrait of the rationale, design, and facilitation experience illustrates the theories, practices, and insights of the initiative, called Relationships First: Implementing Restorative Justice From the Ground Up.

Implementing restorative justice practice in schools: what pedagogy reveals

In the ongoing pursuit for creating safe, nurturing and relational school cultures, educators continue to turn to restorative justice (rj) principles and practice. Predominantly, schools begin to engage with rj in an effort to address harm done, causing its discourse to be situated in literature tied to classroom management and behaviour. However, in this location, the effectiveness of rj can be limited because the power relationships underlying the original punitive, managerial structures maintain their grip. Drawing on a qualitative study that examines the experiences of educators committed to implementing rj principles, this article explores how placing rj in the context of engaged, productive pedagogies better nurtures the hoped for relational and peaceful school culture.

A window on relationships: reflecting critically on a current restorative justice theory

Inherent in the task of theorising is a responsibility for ongoing critical reflection of the ideas presented (Steele, 2010). To that end, this article responds to the invitation extended by McCold and Wachtel to examine the conceptual theory of restorative justice they first presented in 2003 and which continues to be promoted globally. One particular aspect of their theory, the Social Discipline Window, is examined. Drawing on a qualitative, critical case study conducted in schools in Ontario, Canada, the article illustrates: (a) how unexamined theory can be problematic and promote practice that counters the principles of restorative justice; and (b) how people's lives can be impacted by power dynamics inherent in the theory presented (Woolford, 2009). In response, a revised Relationship Window is presented along with examples of how it can affect practice that is more consistently aligned with the philosophical foundations of restorative justice.

Restorative Justice and Political Forgiveness: A Comparative Study of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions

This research project involves a comparative, cross-national study of truth and reconciliation commissions (TRCs) in countries around the world that have used these extra-judicial institutions to pursue justice and promote national reconciliation during periods of democratic transition or following a civil conflict marked by intense violence and severe human rights abuses. An important objective of truth and reconciliation commissions involves instituting measures to address serious human rights abuses that have occurred as a result of discrimination, ethnocentrism and racism. In recent years, rather than solely utilizing traditional methods of conflict resolution and criminal prosecution, transitional governments have established truth and reconciliation commissions as part of efforts to foster psychological, social and political healing.

The primary objective of this research project is to determine why there has been a proliferation of truth and reconciliation commissions around the world in recent decades, and assess whether the perceived effectiveness of these commissions is real and substantial. In this work, using a multi-method approach that involves quantitative and qualitative analysis, I consider the institutional design and structural composition of truth and reconciliation commissions, as well as the roles that these commissions play in the democratic transformation of nations with a history of civil conflict and human rights violations.

In addition to a focus on institutional design of truth and reconciliation commissions, I use a group identity framework that is grounded in social identity theory to examine the historical background and sociopolitical context in which truth commissions have been adopted in countries around the world. This group identity framework serves as an invaluable lens through which questions related to truth and reconciliation commissions and other transitional justice mechanisms can be explored. I also present a unique theoretical framework, the reconciliatory democratization paradigm, that is especially useful for examining the complex interactions between the various political elements that directly affect the processes of democratic consolidation and reconciliation in countries in which truth and reconciliation commissions have been established. Finally, I tackle the question of whether successor regimes that institute truth and reconciliation commissions can effectively address the human rights violations that occurred in the past, and prevent the recurrence of these abuses.

A Restorative Theory of Criminal Justice

In this project, I defend a restorative theory of criminal justice. I argue that the response to criminal wrongdoing in a just society should take the form of an attempt to heal the damage done to the community resulting from crime. I argue that the moral responsibilities of wrongdoers as wrongdoers ought to provide the framework for how a just society should respond to crime. Following the work of R.A. Duff, I argue that wrongdoers incur second-order duties of moral recognition. Wrongdoers owe it to others to recognize their wrongdoing for what it is, i.e. wrongdoing, and to shoulder certain burdens in order to express their repentant recognition to others via a meaningful apology. In short, wrongdoers owe it to their victims and others in the community to make amends. What I will deny, however, is the now familiar claim in the restorative justice literature that restoring the normative relationships in the community damaged by criminal forms of wrongdoing requires retributive punishment. In my view, how we choose to express the judgement that wrongdoers are blameworthy should flow from an all things considered judgment that is neither reducible to the judgement that the wrongdoer is culpably responsible for wronging others, nor the judgement that the wrongdoer in some basic sense “deserves to suffer” (or “deserves punishment,” etc.).

The restorative role of annexin A1 at the blood–brain barrier

Annexin A1 is a potent anti-inflammatory molecule that has been extensively studied in the peripheral immune system, but has not as yet been exploited as a therapeutic target/agent. In the last decade, we have undertaken the study of this molecule in the central nervous system (CNS), focusing particularly on the primary interface between the peripheral body and CNS: the blood–brain barrier. In this review, we provide an overview of the role of this molecule in the brain, with a particular emphasis on its functions in the endothelium of the blood–brain barrier, and the protective actions the molecule may exert in neuroinflammatory, neurovascular and metabolic disease. We focus on the possible new therapeutic avenues opened up by an increased understanding of the role of annexin A1 in the CNS vasculature, and its potential for repairing blood–brain barrier damage in disease and aging.