FrançaisEnglish

Érudit | Dépôt de documents >
CICC - Centre international de criminologie comparée >
Résultats de recherche >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

https://depot.erudit.org//id/003511dd

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWemmers, Jo-Anne-
dc.contributor.authorVan Camp, Tinneke-
dc.date.accessioned2011-08-10T15:39:10Z-
dc.date.available2011-08-10T15:39:10Z-
dc.date.issued2011-06-
dc.identifier.isbn978-2-922137-35-4-
dc.identifier.urihttps://depot.erudit.org/id/003511dd-
dc.description.abstractRestorative justice favours the participation of both victims and offenders and promotes dialogue between these two parties to deal with the consequences of victimization. Research has shown that victims are generally very pleased with restorative justice. The main question is, therefore, not whether restorative justice should be offered to victims but how this should be done. In general, two divergent approaches exist: the protective model, which seeks to protect victims from possible secondary victimization and the proactive model, which seeks to inform victims about their options so that they can decide for themselves what they want to do. The present study is a qualitative study with victims of violent crime who participated in restorative justice programs, which followed either of these approaches. Based on victims’ experiences and views, the authors present a model procedure on how to offer restorative justice to victims.en
dc.description.sponsorshipVictims Fund of the Canadian Department of Justice / Bureau d’Aide au Victimes d’Actes Criminels, Québecen
dc.description.tableofcontents1.Background and Research Design; 1.1.Background; 1.2.Trauma and secondary victimization; 1.3.The protective and proactive models; 1.4.Research objectives; 1.5.Design; 2.The Views of Victims Regarding the Offer of Restorative Justice 10; 2.1.From protective to proactive; 2.1.1. The protective approach N=14); 2.1.2. The proactive approach (N=19); 2.2.Victims’ Views; 2.2.1. Appreciation of the protective offer; 2.2.2. Appreciation of the proactive offer; 2.3. Summary; 3. When (Not) To Offer Restorative Justice to Victims of Serious Crime; 3.1. Contra-indicators – when not to offer restorative justice; 3.1.1. Seriousness of the crime; 3.1.2. Trauma; 3.1.3. Victim’s age; 3.2. Indicators – when to offer restorative justice; 3.2.1. Type of offence; 3.2.2. Age offender; 3.2.3. Relation between victim and offender prior to victimization; 3.3. Summary; 4. A Model Procedure for the Offer of Restorative Justice to Victims of Serious Crime; 4.1. Conditions proposed by victims of serious crime; 4.1.1. Timing and flexibility of the offer; 4.1.2. Voluntary participation; 4.1.3. Clear and complete information; 4.1.4. Outreach; 4.2. Discussion; 4.3. Model procedure; 4.4. Conclusion; 5. Conclusion; 6. Bibliography;en
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherCentre international de criminologie comparéeen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesRésultats de recherche;4-
dc.subjectRestorative justiceen
dc.subjectVictims of violent crimeen
dc.subjectProactive offeren
dc.subjectProtective Offeren
dc.subjectVictim supporten
dc.subjectQualitative researchen
dc.subjectBelgiumen
dc.subjectCanadaen
dc.titleThe Offer of Restorative Justice to Victims of Violent Crime: Should It Be Protective or Proactive?en
dc.typeWorking Paperen
Appears in Collections:Résultats de recherche

Files in This Item:

Rapport de recherche n4 Wemmers Final.pdf, (Adobe PDF ; 1.46 MB)

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

About Érudit | Subscriptions | RSS | Terms of Use | Contact us |

Consortium Érudit ©  2016