Link between Restorative Justice and Punishment - Literature review Example

Review of Related Literature Penal policy theory Restorative justice is one of the main theories which seek to explain crime and punishment. Crime under this theory is considered a conflict between individuals, not so much between the offender and the state. Under this context, there is a belief that the obligations in the management of security and should be shared with other members of society. Restorative justice is considered a more humanitarian consideration which highlights the importance of forgiveness, healing, and reintegration (Zehr, 1990). In effect, restorative justice seeks to gather the offender, the victims, their families and friends and help them reconcile with each other (Zehr, 1990). This theory also emphasises the importance of victims and offenders meeting each other face to face, allowing them to voice their issues and experiences in order to eventually achieve mutually supported resolutions. Restorative justice is based on various indigenous cultures, cultures which apply traditions relating to spirituality and holistic healing (Sharpe, 1998). It also uses the non-retributive obligations relating to harm, supported by other faiths and cultures. In general therefore, penology based on this theory seeks to secure a balance between the offender and offended party (Cavadino and Dignan, 2006). Restorative justice therefore includes the concept of punishment. Penology designs by society include imprisonment, the payment of fines, and corporal punishment as a means of achieving the principles of restorative justice. Within the concept of restorative justice therefore, the perceptions of society and of incarcerated individuals shall be anchored, especially in terms of the actual impact of incarceration on prisoners. (link between restorative justice and punishment) In understanding restorative justice, however, it is important to understand the criminal justice system and its initial applications in the UK society. Penal policy in the UK went through various transitions in an effort to support the Church of England against nonconformists, mostly by implementing forfeitures, civil provisions, and civil disabilities (Morrill, 1996). From the nineteenth century, significant changes have been identified in the criminal justice system. During Queen Victoria’s reign, major theorists like Edwin Chadwick considered the criminal offender as individuals belonging to the working classes who did not want to enter an honest full day’s work, and who preferred to drink and be idle (Mantle, et.al., 2005). The mid-19th century welcomed the term criminal classes, mostly as a means of referring to the groups of people who were poor and who were highly involved in crime (Mantle, et.al., 2005). By the end of the 19th century, other theories emerged such as anthropological criminology where Casare Lombrosso identified individuals who were prone to abnormalities, inherited or acquired from criminal and dissolute parents as deviant (Mantle, et.al., 2005). These perceptions supported the means by which criminals were managed within the justice system. The rise of crimes in the UK led to more punitive approaches to crime. The welfare approach to crime or penal welfarism fell through in the 1970s and from then, changes in penal policy, prison practices, probation, parole, and sentencing were seen (Garland, 2001). Penal welfarism was popular in the 1970s as the basis of crime control, mostly founded on the simple perception of crime as a social issue, thereby highlighting the application of rehabilitation for the offender. Penal welfarism included the application of individualised solutions and indeterminate penalties. Various elements contributed to the end of penal welfarism, especially with cultural factors like politicisation of crime policies and more specific focus given to control, social order, and the victims (Garland, 2001). This ideology did well in the 1950s as people were soon able to gain economic progress. However, the 1970s economic crisis increased social sensitivity to the commission of crimes. The media, through the television and newspapers regularly reported crimes and further painted a graphic picture of criminality. Eventually, the clamour of society for changes became more apparent and conservatives soon demanded the imposition of more punitive approaches to crime. This led to neoliberalism, considered to be politically conservative free market capitalism. The concept of neoliberalism refers to a greater focus on individualism, with the welfare state having a limited role in penology. The concepts of social equality were highlighted by neoliberalism as laws were passed to suppress unions and decrease welfare benefits (Garland, 2001). Punitive approaches to punishment were also imposed through imprisonment and mandatory sentences. The focus under these conditions was now on public safety and on keeping the criminals apart from the rest of society. Based on the work of John Pratt (2007), penal populism was conceptualised through the work of criminologist Sir Anthony Bottoms. He came up with the term populist punitiveness in order to encapsulate the main influences on the contextualisation of the criminal justice system (Pratt, 2007). This term was meant to express the idea of politicians using the public’s punitive position on any person committing a crime. This term later became penal populism as Roberts (2005) declared that penal populists should promote electoral advantage of policy in order to have a greater impact on penal effectiveness. Penal populism was first started as an output of social change, mostly indicating a basic shift in the foundations of modern penology (Pratt, 2007). It is also considered a punitive regulation which imposes heavy prison terms. Penal populism was also used to express the idea of politicians taking advantage of the public’s punitive stance against crime (Pratt, 2007). It therefore was used as a means of gaining social change. New labour gained a place in the UK legal system in 1997 as the party applied penal populism and highlighted the need to strictly act against crimes (Downes and Morgan, 2007). This group faced the challenge of decreasing crime, and this meant veering away from the ideals of Old Labour and adopting instead the neo-liberalist ideals. Conservatives and liberal democrats admitted that more straightforward processes in sentencing would best serve the interests of justice, in this case, restorative justice (Downes and Morgan, 2007). The conservatives also pointed out that New Labour placed too much emphasis on expanding prisons, and not so much on preventing crimes; they also pointed out the importance of community punishments as well as prison education (Downes and Morgan, 2007). The changes seen from penal welfarism to the new punitiveness are based on the higher application of imprisonment in the UK and in other parts of the world. In the UK, crime rates saw a significant increase with prison populations from June 1993 to June 2012 increasing by 41,800 prisoners to about 86,000 (Ministry of Justice, 2013). MacAskill discussed that more criminals must be rendered community penalties, and not so much on short-term prison sentences because focusing on imprisonment would divert the prison system from working on the serious offenders as a means of reducing public risks (in BBC, 2012). Despite these increases, the incarceration rates are still higher in the US (King’s College London, 2010). The general issues coming from the dependency on imprisonment in the UK have not prompted the need to secure strong efforts to find solutions to minimise imprisonment (The Scottish Government Website, 2010). In 2007, the government announced their plan to establish 10, 500 prisons to accommodate the growing number of inmates. Government authorities supported this move by indicating that these new prisons would include favourable elements of other prisons while featuring centralised support services which will highlight the strong interrelations between prisoners and officers (Ministry of Justice, 2008). In the end, the new punitiveness in society is being managed through the improved provisions and policies on punishment and penology. The implementation of the prison system in the United Kingdom is supported by various criminological and penal processes which seek to secure restorative justice and new punitiveness in society. Neo-labour perceptions of punitiveness focus on imposing strict and punitive punishments on criminals. While the people perceive society to be riddled with criminals and criminal activities, some of these reports are not accurate and are instead a product of the media’s overzealous reporting. As a result, there may be a gap between public opinion and the actual prison experience for inmates. (link between punitiveness and topic) Public opinion The public opinion of prison is often inaccurate and exaggerated. Most of the time, their knowledge of prison life is not based on actual facts. According to the website Rethinking Crime and Punishment (2002), the public does not consider prison as an effective tool in decreasing the commission of crimes. The public is not highly aware about the sentencing choices which are being imposed by the courts (Rethinking Crime and Punishment, 2002; Cavendar, 2004). They also believe that most individuals are at situations worse than their conditions will be when entering into the prison system. The UK citizens also favour prison more than their Western European counterparts, but to a lesser extent than the Americans (Rethinking Crime and Punishment, 2002). Those who belong to the lower social classes also display more punitive attitudes as compared to those in the higher social classes. The public opinion is also founded on the idea that more intense and severe sentences must be imposed on young offenders. The media has a major role to play in the public opinion of prison life. Only few descriptions about crime and punishment are actually neutral (Prison Commission, 2007). Mostly, the delineation between entertainment and media has been blurred. Through media, which includes newspapers, television, books, music, films, and video games, the portrayal of crime is shocking, frightening, and entertaining (Prison Commission, 2007). Serial killers are popular criminals portrayed in TV shows and movies; depicting their life to be exciting and violent. Video and computer games also allow individuals to realistically participate in criminal activities (Jewkes, 2004). The general public has now realised the significant role of the media in the public’s opinion about crime, engagement in it, and punishment. The media has not dissuaded the public from these perceptions and beliefs, instead, it seems to have gloried in further perpetuating such beliefs (Jewkes, 2004). In the end, crimes have now been sensationalised to a significant degree. In Great Britain over half the population reads at least one newspaper a day and an overwhelming proportion of reported stories are on issues of crime and justice (King and Maruna, 2006). Yvonne Jewkes in Prisoners and the press (2002) describes how most media press coverage of prison life serves to inflame the readers’ moral outrage and confirm their prejudices (Jewkes, 2002, p.26). Prisoners are viewed as society’s detritus by large segments of the British press’s readership. Katz (1987) states that news reports are not engaged in dispassionate analysis but in fact passionate engagement is for the purposes of exercising moral sentiment. She continues to discuss that when the public reads newspaper articles it is for two purposes; confirmation of their existing views and for a further opportunity to be shocked and outraged (Katz, 1987). Unpopular yet serious prison issues such as suicide, assault and overcrowding are sparsely reported by the media, only reaching the public domain if involving a notorious prisoner with ‘celebrity status,’ or if an official inquiry is taking place (Jewkes, 2005). The majority of news stories focus on aspects likely to capture the readers’ interest. Stories often dwell upon extensive facilities that prisoners have access to, such as televisions or computers and the ‘holiday camp’ experience (Roberts and Hough, 2005). This fuels the tabloid reader’s view, creating a popular opinion of prison life with a central view that prison life is ‘easy’ and the criminal justice system is soft on crime, catering to the needs of offenders rather than victims (Jewkes, 2005). The media lends itself to sensationalising its reporting. ‘It is indicative of the inclination to pander to the most voyeuristic and punitive emotions of the audience’ (Jewkes, 2005 p150). When it comes to a realistic representation of imprisonment, public indifference prevails and some of the worst atrocities go unreported. For example when asking the public about the conditions in prison, almost 40% responded ‘don’t know’ (Glanz, 1994). Four out of five respondents stated that they had never been in a prison in any capacity, and those who had, only experienced restricted access leading to a second hand insight into the daily lives of prisoners (Hough and Roberts, 1998). In Britain Banks, Maloney and Wilcock (1975) found respondent’s perceptions of prisoners’ day to day lives were inaccurate, and the authors concluded that people were therefore misinformed about the conditions in prison (Banks, et.al., 1975 p235). The negative image of prisons can be explained by inaccurate media coverage (Bryant and Morris 1998). When asking the British public to identify what most influenced their views, news reporting was cited at 48% of respondents (Bryant and Morris 1998). Because of frequent media misrepresentations of prison life, it is apparent to note that the public knows less about this than any other stage of the justice system. A study by Dowds (1995) also concluded that two thirds of the British public agreed ‘prisoners have too much easy time.’ These studies and opinions indicate the extent of knowledge the public have about prisons and the prison system. With the development and widespread application of mass communication, violence and aggression has also increased (Williams and Dickinson, 1993). The media has supported the belief in media effects. For instance, as school killings unfold in the US, pop cultural practices and habits have often been cited as reasons for such violence (Williams and Dickinson, 1993). In the UK, papers have been quick to point out that the killing of Jamie Bulger can be laid at the feet of the horror film Child’s Play 3. These arguments are generally impossible to support and prove definitively in terms of how they support a specific moral belief (Sparks, 2000). In general, the actual occurrence of crime is not based on how the action would fall within the auspices of a specific moral belief, but it is often committed because of certain uncontrolled impulses. For which reason, some people also believe that crimes are committed by young people, mostly those who have not had adequate supervision and support from parents (Sparks, 2000). Based on the over reporting of crimes by the media, the public also believes that crimes are occurring at alarming rates, when they are actually infrequently committed (Rose, 2007). Moreover, majority of crimes being reported are those which cause much concern and fear among the public. As a result, people believe that crimes like murder and rape are being committed often. Within the prison system, the public also believes that rape within the prisons is highly common; however, these rates are not as alarming as perceived by the public (Prison Commission, 2007). The media may also portray prison life to be easy, but they are actually overcrowded and very much a grim experience for the inmates (Prison Commission, 2007; Blakely and Bumphus, 2005). Some sentences are often harsh, and the public may perceive it through the media as light. The media often chooses to show what can best serve its interests (Greer, 2003). If it serves its interests to portray prison life favourably then the media will make such portrayals to the public and vice versa (Mason, 2006). The public therefore usually perceives prison life based on what the media would choose to portray in news reports. The actual status and conditions in the prisons are therefore often not reported, or may be exaggerated (Marsh and Melville, 2008). The public also perceives prison life in terms of its four walls and bars; however, the rehabilitative program which is usually a part of the incarceration process is often not portrayed and understood well by the public (Mason, 2006). Some aspect of the program is known to exist to the public; however, they often believe that such programs are not effective because of the presence of recidivism. Nonetheless, the prison system which may include drug and alcohol rehabilitation, as well as psychological therapy is not fully understood and appreciated by the public (Cottle, 2005). Some people are actually not even aware of these rehabilitation programs exist. The public also perceives prisons as violent, dangerous places where inmates are often exposed to violence. To some extent, these reports have some truth to them, however, these reports also do not portray the systems in place which help prevent and minimise prison violence. These practices are infrequently reported to wider communities. Inmate’s experiences in prison Various studies discuss people’s experiences whilst in prison. In a study by Boys and colleagues (2002), the authors discussed how heroin and cocaine use is a common issue in British prisons. This study was carried out as a cross-sectional study of prisons in England and Wales with about 3000 inmates recruited to complete a structured questionnaire. The study revealed that about 60% of heroin and cannabis users indicated that they used these drugs in prison (Boys, et.al., 2002). This number represents a number larger than the general population. A quarter of these users actually started using drugs in prison. The study indicated therefore that prisons presented a high-risk environment where drugs like heroin have been initiated (Boys, et.al., 2002; Crewe, 2009). Psychiatric elements were not associated with the use of drugs in prison, as prison exposure itself played a bigger factor in the initiation of drug use. Inmates also express how they are often subjected to the gang experience in prisons, either as members or as victims of gang violence (Egan and Beadman, 2011). Some inmates express that they were not gang members outside of prison, and they only joined the prison gangs as a means of protecting themselves against rival gangs. Inmates who were not originally members of any gangs soon joined gangs in prison after being subjected to violence and bullying in prison (Egan and Beadman, 2011). Other prisoners who were already gang members before their imprisonment were also more likely to join existing gangs in jail or to establish their own gangs while in prison (Egan and Beadman, 2011). Jeffrey Archer (2003) also discusses his prison experience in A prison Diary: Bellmarsh Hell. He declares that he went through difficult and oppressing jail conditions which mostly included depressing living conditions. He admits however that the crimes he committed were shameful acts which deserved punishment. He described the emotional strength needed for each inmate to survive prison as he often heard of other inmates killing themselves in their cells (Archer, 2003). The self-worth which was stripped away from most inmates often led to acts of suicide, and he declares that some of the prison therapists did their best in rendering psychological assistance by declaring that they still had some value to contribute to the world (Archer, 2003). This led Jeffrey Archer to enrol on some courses whilst in prison, and he found that he had enough discipline to finish the course. Gaining access to these courses can help temper inmates’ tendencies towards guilt and anger (Archer, 2003). Prisoners also express the pain of losing their personal liberties (Stagni 2011). They feel the demoralising impact of having to be told when to urinate, when to bathe, when to dress, when to wake up, and when to eat (Hoskison, 2012). The fact that all activities have their specific time is a major curtailment of their personal freedom and this, more than anything impacts negatively on their emotional health. These experiences were however also considered humbling experiences (Hoskison, 2012). The inmates also felt the separation from their family as the most painful part of their prison experience. They missed their family and worried about what was happening to them. They also felt guilty for exposing their family to the prison experience as well (Listwan, et.al., 2013). Some of those who were fathers worried about their children being influenced by negative elements and being exposed to bad influences from society (Shaw, 2012). Ultimately, they were concerned about losing their children either through family members not allowing contact with their children or the government them to foster parents (Shaw, 2012). Violence is also a constant threat whilst incarcerated (Chancer, 2005). Violence mostly seems to emanate from gangs; some are however random acts of violence between inmates (Ireland and Power, 2011). Inmates also express how prison guards would sometimes subject them to bullying and threats with some incidents of violence (Ireland and Power, 2011). The inmates often exposed to these acts of violence and gang membership usually experience difficulty in being reintegrated into the general population following their incarceration (Wood and James, 2009). In the end, some of them who were not members of gangs before their incarceration soon became gang members after their release from prison (Wood and James, 2009). It is a culture which they have come to be familiar with and have come to rely on to function in society. Inmates also express that there were various health issues which they encountered and experienced in prison (Kipping, et.al., 2011). Some of them developed tuberculosis and other related respiratory diseases (Yogendran, et.al., 2012). Their mental health was also not adequately addressed by prison authorities, with some inmates often going through depression as well as drug and alcohol problems (Hassiotis, et.al., 2011). In general, these inmates declare that health conditions and care in prisons is not adequately managed by the prison authorities, often risking the manifestation of health issues among prisoners. Here it can be seen that there is already an apparent divide in the popular opinion of prison life and the reality of inmate’s experiences. References Archer, J. (2003) A prison diary: Bellmarsh Hell vol.1 Pan Books: London Banks, C. Maloney, E. and Willcock, H., 1975. Public attitudes to crime and the penal system, British journal of criminology, 15, pp.228-240 75 in J. Munice (2006) Criminology Three volume set. London: Sage Publications Ltd. BBC, 2012. Air gun owners will need licence in Scotland [online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20720203 [Accessed 29 March 2013]. Blakely, C. and Bumphus, V., 2005. The print media’s portrayal of the private prison. Probation Journal, 52(1), pp. 69-75. Boys, A., Farrell, M., Bebbington, P., Brugha, T., et.al., 2000. Drug use and initiation in prison: results from a national prison survey in England and Wales. Addiction, 97, pp. 1551 – 1560. Bryant, P. and Morris, E., 1998. What does the public really think? Corrections Today, 22, pp. 26-79 Cavadino, M. and Dignan, J., 2006. Penal policy and political economy. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 6(4), 1748–8958. Cavendar, G., 2004. Media and crime policy. Punishment and Society, 6(3), pp. 335 – 348 Chancer, L., 2005. Provoking assaults. Berkeley: California University Press Cottle, S., 2005. Mediatized public crisis and civil society renewal: The racist murder of Stephen Lawrence. Crime, Media, Society, 1(1), pp. 49 – 71. Crewe, B., 2009. The prisoner society: Power, adaptation, and social life in an English prison. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dowds, L., 1995. The long eyed view of law and order: A decade of British social attitudes London: Home Office Downes, D. and Morgan, R., 2007. No turning back: The politics of law and order into the millennium’ in M. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (4th edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Egan, V. and Beadman, M., 2011. Personality and gang embeddedness. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(6), pp. 748–753. Garland, D., 2001. The culture of control. Oxford: Oxford University Press Glanz, L., 1994. The Public’s attitude toward imprisonment and the release of offenders. Acta Criminology, 7, pp. 64-79 Greer, C., 2003. Sex crime and the media: Sex offending and the press in a divided society. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Hassiotis, A., Gazizova, D., Akinlonu, L., Bebbington, P., et.al., 2011. Psychiatric morbidity in prisoners with intellectual disabilities: analysis of prison survey data for England and Wales. BJPsych. Hoskison, J., 2012. Inside: One mans experience of prison. London: Routledge Hough, M. and Roberts, J., 1998. Attitudes to punishment: Findings from the British crime survey (Home office research study no179). London: Home office Ireland, J. and Power, C., 2012. Propensity to support prison gangs: its relationship to gang membership, victimisation, aggression and other disruptive behaviours. Psychology, Crime & Law. Jewkes, Y., 2002. Prisoners and the press. Criminal Justice Matters, 59, pp.26-29 Jewkes, Y., 2004. Media and crime. London: Sage Jewkes, Y., 2005. Creating a stir? Prisons, popular media and the power to reform’ in P. Mason (ed.) Captured by the Media: Prison Discourse in Media Culture. Cullompton: Willan Katz, J., 1987. What makes crime news? Media, Culture & Society 9:pp.47-75 in J. Munice (2006) Criminology Three volume set. London: Sage Publications Ltd King’s College London Website, 2010. Prison Brief for United Kingdom: England and Wales [online]. Available at: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/wpb_country.php?country=169 [Accessed 11 March 2013]. King, A. And Maruna, S., 2006. The function of fiction for a punitive public in P. Mason (ed) Captured by the Media: Prison Discourse in Media Culture. Cullompton: Willan Kipping, R., Scott, P. and Gray, C., 2011. Health needs assessment in a male prison in England. Public Health, 125(4), pp. 229–233. Listwan, S., Sullivan, C., Agnew, R., Cullen, F., et.al., 2013. The pains of imprisonment revisited: The impact of strain on inmate recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 30(1). Mantle, G., Fox, D., Dhami, M., 2005. Restorative justice and three individual theories of crime. Internet Journal of Criminology IJC pp. 1-36 Marsh, I. and Melville, G., 2008. Crime, justice and the media. London: Routledge. Mason, P., 2006. Lies, distortion and what doesn’t work: Monitoring prison stories in the British Media. Crime, Media, Society, 2(3), pp. 251 – 267 Ministry of Justice, 2008. Prison policy update: Briefing paper. London: Ministry of Justice Ministry of Justice, 2013. Story of the prison population: 1993 – 2012: England and Wales [online]. Available at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/statistics/mojstats/story-prison-population.pdf [Accessed 29 March 2013]. Morrill, J., 1996. The Oxford illustrated history of Tudor & Stuart Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pratt, J., 2007. Penal populism. London: Routledge Prison Commission, 2005. The role of the media in shaping penal sentiment: Briefing paper [online]. Available at: http://www.prisoncommission.org.uk/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Commission/mediabriefing1.pdf [Accessed 12 March 2013]. Rethinking Crime and Punishment, 2002. Rethinking crime and punishment: The report [online]. Available at: http://www.rethinking.org.uk/informed/pdf/RCP%20The%20Report.pdf [Accessed 12 March 2013]. Roberts, J. and Hough, M., 2005. The state of prisons: exploring public knowledge and opinion. The Howard Journal, 44(3), pp.286-306 Rose, D., 2007. Violation: Justice, race and serial murder in the Deep South. London: HarperCollins Sharpe, S., 1998. Restorative justice: A vision for healing and change. Edmonton, Canada: Mediation and Restorative Justice Centre. Shaw, R., 2012. 4 Imprisoned fathers and the orphans of justice. Prisoners Children: What are the issues?, 41. Sparks, R., 2000. The Media and Penal Politics. Punishment & Society, 2(1): 98 – 105. The Scottish Government, 2008. Statistical bulletin crime and justice series: Prison statistics Scotland, 2007/08. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government. Stagni, L., 2011. Letters from camp: One familys prison story. Minnesota: Good Life Creations. The Scottish Government Website, 2010. Prison projections ‘Not Unexpected’ [online]. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2010/01/22104514 [Accessed 11 March 2013]. Williams, P. and Dickinson, J., 1993. Fear of Crime: Read all about it? The Relationship between Newspaper Crime Reporting and Fear of Crime’, in British Journal of Criminology, 33(1), pp.33-56 Wood, J. and James, M., 2009. Prisoners’ gang-related activity: The importance of bullying and moral disengagement. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 15, pp. 569-581. Yogendran, A., Webb, A., Heetiarachchi, G., 2012. The trouble with incarcerating tuberculosis: Experiences of tuberculosis in a prison in the UK. CHEST, 212A-212A. Zehr, H., 1985. Retributive justice, restorative justice. Elkhart, IN: Mennonite Central Committee, U.S. Office of Criminal Justice. Read More