evaluation

• RJ's effectiveness has a growing body of compelling evidence.
• effectiveness evidence


  Sherman and Strang (2007) reviewed previous randomised control trials of RJ in the US, UK and Australia, finding that compared to traditional methods of justice, victims of crime had a higher rate of satisfaction, were less likely to develop PTSD and were less likely to desire revenge.
• effectiveness explain


  the lack of revenge has major positive social implications, as without RJ, the victim may seek retribution beyond the legal system. the "Eye for an eye," belief could potentially cause a spiral into more crime, creating more victims.
• effectiveness link


  however, with the success and effectiveness of RJ, displayed by this empirical evidence, it has the ability to stop this cycle of violence.
• one weakness of RJ is the ethical issue of free will.
• free will explain


  one of the key principles of RJ is that the entire process needs to be voluntary, but offenders in particular may feel forced into taking part, particularly if they are offered a reduced sentence in return for their co-operation.

  it is questionable if they really have the free will to take part.
• free will evidence


  the offering of a reduced sentence also can pose issues for the victim.

  Miers et al. (2001) found that a significant proportion are skeptical about the offender's motives, because of the possibility of a reduced sentence.

  they also found that some victims found that having direct contact with the offender to be an unsettling and intimidating experience.
• free will link


  whilst RJ may appear as a successful method of modification, it could be argued that the ethical costs, such as free will and the risk of psychological harm outweigh the wider benefits for society, as well as the fact that these ethical issues weaken the ecological validity, proving ineffective also.
• RJ can provide genuine benefits for wider society.
• social implications explain


  one of the key stakeholders in the RJ process is the community - the wider family and social circle not only of the victim, but the offender also.

  RJ can help heal any harm caused, and therefore benefit the community at large.
• social implications evidence


  the House of Commons Justice Committee report (2016) stated "we conclude that RJ, particularly victim-offender conferencing, has the potential to offer clear and measurable benefits to the CJS and to wider society."
• social implications link


  whilst RJ seems to be mostly successful, and have many positive applications in society, there still exists the prevalent ethical issues, as well as the social criticism that it is not treating the root cause of the crime. RJ does nothing to solve the problems of unemployment, poverty or a lack of education.