Shadd Maruna - Rethinking Crime and Punishment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Who Owns Resettlement? 10presumption of moral contamination‖ (p. 319). In the face of such social exclusion, hesuggests, reintegration requires ―a mutual effort at reconciliation, where offender andsociety work together to make amends—for hurtful crimes and hurtful punishments—andmove forward‖ (p. 328).Yet, what would such a restorative reentry look like in practice? I would argue thatrestorative re-integration would require four, key elements, outlined below.1. Restorative Re-Integration is Community-ledTo say restorative re-integration needs to be community-led is almost a tautology. If reintegrationis not community-based it isn‘t re-integration frankly. Yet, whereasresettlement is typically characterised by an insular, professionals-driven focus on theneeds and risks of offenders, restorative re-integration would instead seek to draw on andsupport naturally occurring community processes through which informal support andcontrols traditionally take place (see e.g., Farrall, 2004). Citizens, not professionals, wouldbe the primary agents of reintegration.To this end, what are sometimes known as ―citizen circles‖ or ―circles of support‖involving community volunteers befriending a returning prisoner have been formed in avariety of contexts (Petrunik, 2002). This sort of community support, provided bymembers of various religious congregations, may help to explain some of the documentedsuccess of faith-based initiatives in prisons (Johnson and Larson, 2003). That is, the higher
Who Owns Resettlement? 11power at work in such interventions may have less to do with the religious content of theactivities and more to do with the commitment and perseverance of volunteer members ofthe religious congregations in welcoming and integrating returning prisoners into theirflock (Maruna and Toch, 2005). Such supports ideally begin before or during theindividual‘s incarceration and carry on post-release. Mentoring schemes (e.g., Newburnand Shiner, 2005) are another example of this non-professional, community-basedapproach to real re-integration. Likewise, efforts by NIACRO and other organizations tooffer direct support and assistance to the families of offenders before and afterincarceration is also central to restorative re-integraton (Sullivan, et al., 2002). After all, itis these family members (and not the over-worked probation officer with an over-stretchedcaseload) who will be counted on to do the real work of aiding and befriending the exprisonerupon release (Bobbitt and Nelson, 2004).2. Restorative Re-Integration is Reparation-basedWhenever I talk about restorative reentry, the first thing listeners tend to assume is that thisis some reference to restorative conferencing, and that restorative reentry must thereforeinvolve bringing ex-prisoners face-to-face with their victims, victims‘ family members orvictims representatives in a mediation ceremony. This could certainly be a part ofrestorative reentry, and of course this sort of peace-making needs to begin almostimmediately in any restorative framework (Marshall, 1999). The fact that so many victimsare still angry, afraid or punitive toward their assailants 5-10 years after the event, at thepoint of the prisoner‘s release show just how much more work needs to be done to this
Page 1: Who Owns Resettlement? 1Who Owns Re
Page 4 and 5: Who Owns Resettlement? 4and others)
Page 6 and 7: Who Owns Resettlement? 6sarcasm is
Page 8 and 9: Who Owns Resettlement? 8And one nee
Page 12 and 13: Who Owns Resettlement? 12regard in
Page 14 and 15: Who Owns Resettlement? 14facet for
Page 16 and 17: Who Owns Resettlement? 16Last Words
Page 18 and 19: Who Owns Resettlement? 18Burnett, R
Page 20 and 21: Who Owns Resettlement? 20Multi-Agen

Shadd Maruna - Rethinking Crime and Punishment

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?