A Naturalistic Qualitative Study of Restorative Justice: The Experiences of Participants in a Victim Offender Mediation Program

In an era in which public opinion dictates that society should be getting tough with young criminals, restorative justice has begun to provide a framework for social workers to better meet the needs of crime victims and juvenile offenders. However, a paucity of research examining the process of the practice has created a gap between the existing outcome-focused research and knowledge of the procedures of local practitioners.

To develop an in-depth understanding of restorative justice process, this study examined multiple perspectives of the participants' experiences of a Victim Offender Mediation (VOM) program operating in a city in Midwest. The primary source of data included 34 face-to-face interviews conducted with 37 participants including eight juvenile offenders, eight offenders' parents, eight victims, 10 mediators, and three referral sources from four completed VOM cases, as well as observations of the program over a one year period. To select information rich cases, both typical and critical case sampling methods were followed. Four cases were selected, with one involving theft, two cases concerning criminal damage and one case regarding involuntary manslaughter. All of the interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis was conducted by following the constant comparative analysis method as well as using ATLAS.ti for open, focused, and axial coding.

Analyses yielded insight into the natures of the experiences of the participants of the VOM program. The findings highlight that VOM helped them put a human face on crimes; this resulted in a greater understanding of the unseen impacts of the crimes, especially for the juvenile offenders and their parents. In general, the participants, including the victims, overwhelmingly indicated having had positive experiences in the VOM. While appreciating having a “second chance”, the juvenile offenders and parents described that VOM provided an opportunity 1) to apologize to victims, 2) to understand victims better, 3) to help victims to move on, 4) to understand themselves better, and 5) to learn a valuable lesson. The crime victims appreciated the opportunity to voice their own opinions in the decision-making process as well as to tell their unheard experiences of victimization. However, some insensitive approaches toward the victims occurred, which reflects upon the offender-focused mind-set of the practitioners.

This study contributes in several ways. First, with an emphasis on the procedural aspect of the restorative justice approaches, this study provides an in-depth understanding of a VOM program from the participants' perspectives, which also promotes the possibility of the successful application of VOM in a variety of environments. Second, the findings have implications for social work practice. For example, the findings suggest that there is compatibility between the values of the restorative justice process and social work values. The realization of this compatibility may prompt social workers to return to the justice field to serve the unmet needs of victims of crimes and offenders without experiencing a conflict regarding values. Consequently, the study identifies some opportunities for social work practitioners regain their voices and find their fit within the criminal justice field.