Gordon Bazemore

Rethinking the Sanctioning Function in Juvenile Court: Retributive or Restorative Responses to Youth Crime

Although juvenile courts have always administered punishment to youthful offenders, parens patriae and the individual treatment mission have historically assigned an ambivalent role to sanctioning. In the absence of a coherent sanctioning framework, a punitive model has recently gained dominance over dispositional decision making in juvenile court. This article examines the limitations of sanctioning choices presented by both the individual treatment mission and what some have referred to as a “retributive justice” paradigm. We then consider the implications of an alternative model—restorative justice—as a framework for a new approach to sanctioning consistent with a revitalized juvenile justice mandate.

Restorative Justice and Earned Redemption Communities, Victims, and Offender Reintegration

The author provides a comprehensive discussion of the roots of the new reintegrative and restorative justice theories as well as the success of current, preliminary applications of these theories. Arguing that the traditional and opposing theories of the retributive paradigm and the treatment model offer only a simplistic choice between helping or hurting offenders, the author contends that these systems fail to address adequately the needs of communities and victims. In place of these two paradigms, he suggests a new model that he terms reintegrative or restorative justice. This new theory, based on specific cultural approaches to crime found in New Zealand, Japan, and elsewhere, seeks to address the needs of communities and victims through apology and reparation, a process that hopefully leads to the reintegration of offenders into society.

BEYOND ZERO TOLERANCE Restoring Justice in Secondary Schools

Zero tolerance policies in secondary schools now embrace an array of misbehaviors varying widely in seriousness. Their utility has therefore come into question, especially because they do not address causal factors and generally maintain an emphasis on suspension and expulsion. In contrast, responses based on a restorative justice philosophy embrace stakeholders in an interactive process to repair harm by addressing the nature of the misbehavior and resulting damages. In an effort to examine the applicability of restorative justice principles to disciplinary policies in educational settings, the explorative results of a pilot project are presented. Quantitative outcomes indicate reduced behavioral referrals and suspensions. Qualitative descriptions likewise point toward positive directions. Overall, findings are supportive of employing restorative justice principles in response to school-related misbehavior, which could be combined with traditional practices (for more serious offenders) in a synergistic approach to restoring order in our schools, responsibility in our students, and, ultimately, hope in our communities.

Explaining detention worker orientation: Individual characteristics, occupational conditions, and organizational environment

Abstract In the past two decades, research on correctional officer attitudes has moved toward development of explanatory models of professional orientation, or attitudes toward immates and the correctional role. This article presents exploratory findings intended to describe the professional orientation of a group of correctional workers which has received little attention in the empirical literature, juvenile detention care workers (DCWs). Using survey data based on samples of workers in two detention facilities in a Southeastern state (N = 109), this study follows the recent concern in correctional officer research to account for the combined and relative effects of individual worker background, occupational conditions, and organizational environment on professional orientation. Descriptive findings indicate very strong support among DCWs for a treatment/services orientation, but at the same time they reveal strong support for a punishment/control emphasis. Explanatory findings suggest that distinct regression models are required to account for variation in the two orientations. Implications for juvenile justice policy as well as for future research on DCW professional orientation are discussed.

Scared smart or bored straight? Testing deterrence logic in an evaluation of police-led truancy intervention

Student truancy in secondary schools has increasingly been identified as an issue that merits the attention of the criminal and juvenile justice systems. This paper presents evaluation results from a recent study of a truancy intervention collaborative initiated and administered by a local sheriffs department in a large urban county in the southeastern United States. Findings provide a provisional test of a deterrence approach to truancy intervention. Implications are considered in the context of expanded criminal justice boundaries and an increasingly dominant role for law enforcement in what has traditionally been considered the informal responsibility of public educators.

The “Community” in Community Justice: Issues, Themes, and Questions for the New Neighborhood Sanctioning Models

In the past few years, interest in “restorative justice,” “community justice,” and other alternatives to adversarial/retributive paradigms have captured the imagination of a number of criminal justice professionals and community members. But while much attention has been devoted to programs associated with these movements, such as restitution and community service, community policing, community courts, and community corrections, citizen involvement as decision makers in the sanctioning process remains unexplored. This article compares four neighborhood decision-making models now being used with some frequency in the U.S. and Canada. In doing so, I examine several questions about how each model defines the role of the community in the sanctioning process and consider the influence of three theoretical themes in establishing priorities and focal concerns of each model.

The Fork in the Road to Juvenile Court Reform

Juvenile justice reform efforts seeking a more criminalized juvenile court and justice system, as well as those aimed at revitalizing the individual treatment mission, have been one-dimensional in their failure to address the multiple justice needs of communities associated with youth crime, and they have been insular in their singular focus on the needs and risks of offenders. In the late 1990s, a growing number of juvenile justice professionals began to embrace a third, more holistic vision for reform based on a normative concern with repairing the harm caused by crime to individuals and relationships and a commitment to victims, communities, and offenders as primary stakeholders in the justice process. This article considers the implications of emerging practice based on a restorative community justice model for systemic reform in the context, content, and structure of juvenile justice and the response to youth crime.

Restorative Justice in the Reentry Context: Building New Theory and Expanding the Evidence Base

Abstract Although there is currently considerable activity around improving the reentry process for former prisoners returning to society, much of this work lacks a strong theoretical and empirical foundation. With its well-developed theoretical grounding and its growing evidence base, the restorative justice movement provides an obvious place to start when thinking about reintegration. Yet there has been relatively little application of restorative models in the reentry context. We argue that restorative justice interventions are too often focused on the “soft end” of the justice process, when a growing body of evidence suggests that restorative practices might be more effectively focused on the reintegration process for more serious offenses. We provide examples of Canadian and U.S. programs that could be considered emerging models of “restorative reentry.”

Juvenile Justice Reform and the Difference it Makes: An Exploratory Study of the Impact of Policy Change on Detention Worker Attitudes

Despite increasing interest in policy implementation and reform, few studies have examined the impact of criminal justice reforms on staff attitudes. This article compares several dimensions of staff attitudes in two similar juvenile detention facilities: one that has undergone significant reform in policy and practice governing staff/detainee interaction and one that has not. Based on survey data gathered from workers in both facilities in the fall of 1991 (N = 109), exploratory findings reveal significant differences between workers in the two facilities in punitive attitudes, but few differences in other attitudes. Implications for understanding both behavioral and cognitive impacts of reforms are discussed.

Police reform, restorative justice and restorative policing

When it has not been focused on addressing corruption and allegations of bias, harassment, and brutality, much police reform since the 1960s can be characterized as a slow movement away from the professional model of policing (Kelling and Moore, 1988). Specifically, much of this reform can be seen as an attempt to escape the rigidity associated with the paramilitary organizational structures, and to overcome the limits these bureaucratic structures have imposed on flexible, effective, long-term solutions to crime. A significant focus has also been an effort to promote greater citizen participation and community partnerships in crime resolution and prevention. In essence, a new relationship between police departments and the communities they serve (Skolnick and Bayley, 1986; Bayley, 1994). Such reform has moved along two separate but related problem-oriented and community-oriented policing tracks.