Towards A New Vision Of Restorative Practice Possibilities - Building Bridges Project

by Rosie Chadwick

Last week colleagues from around England and Wales - Blackley to Barry, Hull to Hotwalls (Portsmouth) and points between - came together for two days for a fascinating conversation about how restorative practice can become embedded in communities.

A previous set of dialogues, last November, explored how restorative practice can be embedded in organisations, rather than being seen as an add-on or flavour of the month.  

In each case it was good to have involvement from those outside our field, specialists in organisational and leadership development, systems and culture change or (most recently) local community members unfamiliar with restorative practice, helping keep our feet on the ground. Thanks are due to the Westhill Endowment, whose support made the dialogues possible.

Now comes the job of distilling the learning from the dialogues and sharing this more widely. There is a lot to digest, but also some clear emerging themes. These include:   

• the importance of not limiting restorative practice to a single process.

• the need to strengthen connections with others working in related fields.

• the contribution restorative practice can make to supporting service integration and giving communities more say in things that matter to them.

I’m struck by how closely these themes resonate with what David Moore and Alikki Vernon have to say in their book, Setting Relations Right in Restorative Practice, insights from which they will be sharing with us at a network event on 24 April. To quote David and Alikki:

• ‘restorative processes are more broadly applicable than is realised’

• ‘the restorative movement has not always adequately engaged with neighbouring ‘ecosystems’

• ‘restorative processes can be used to coordinate collaboration between agencies that provide complementary services’

• ‘the restorative movement has the potential to democratise decision-making in a very wide range of contexts where authorities currently manage social conflict by imposing decisions.’

It will be great to explore these issues with them. You can book your place at the event here:

Restorative justice and the asylum system - Post event reflection

Restorative justice and the asylum system - Post event reflection by Rosie Chadwick

It was good to welcome Dr Steve Kirkwood to a recent Mint House network event, where he shared findings from his recent research looking at the potential of restorative justice (RJ) in addressing the harms created by the asylum system?  

Steve gave contrasting examples from Scotland and Belgium, also drawing on interviews with restorative practitioners, refugee support organisations and refugees and asylum seekers. For me, the main takeaways were these:

• There is a lot of harm to be repaired!  Leaving aside the many and significant harms that may have led to someone seeking asylum in the first place, harms within the system include destitution, detention, the uncertainty that comes with being in prolonged legal limbo, racism and more. 

• This is challenging terrain for restorative approaches.  Barriers to overcome include language and cultural differences to which it is important to be sensitive, high levels of distrust, the impacts of traumatic experiences and (at a structural level) dehumanising rhetoric and institutions’ reluctance to engage. 

• For all the difficulties, restorative justice can make an important contribution to addressing harms created by the asylum system. The shape and form this takes can vary, ranging from community-led justice initiatives and formal restorative processes to less formal opportunities for people to share their stories and build mutual understanding. 

• The benefits are likely to be multiple, extending beyond refugees and asylum seekers to staff who are working in challenging conditions and society at large. In Belgium, more time invested in fostering connections between people made for a much better working and living environment. It also meant less time and money spent on punitive responses.

• Ample scope exists for restorative justice services to work collaboratively with refugee communities. We can usefully start by getting to know each other better.

• The true prize is ‘restorative integration’ – integration that begins with looking beyond the label, recognising common humanity and restoring each person’s rights and dignity.

If you’d like to watch the full talk by Steve, you can do so by follow the link below to our YouTube channel.

Building Bridges Project Progress Report, December 2023

The Mint House was grateful and delighted to receive funding from Westhill for a twelve-month programme of research and practice dialogues, exploring challenges and creative opportunities for embedding restorative practice across diverse sectors and in faith institutions.  We think there’s much to be done in this area that can help foster healthy relationships, strengthen connections and prevent and resolve conflict. 

The first two dialogues took place during 27th & 28th November when 20 people came together at Rewley House, Oxford University’s Department of Continuing Education. This number included 14 external guests, 5 Mint House trustees (two of whom were formal dialogue participants) and 1 facilitator. We had a rich mix of participants, combining some highly experienced restorative practitioners, leaders, trainers and researchers with others coming fresh to restorative practice but with expertise in areas including culture change, systems change and leadership development. 

We designed the dialogues with care to ensure equality of voice and good exchanges between people familiar with and new to restorative practice. The conversation was electric!! We are still digesting and processing the fantastic insights shared. However, both at the dialogues and since, participants have shared their appreciation of being part of the discussions, commenting in particular on how unusual – and helpful – they found it to be in conversation with others from diverse disciplines and who brought a fresh  perspective. Here are some examples:

thank you so much for including me and for collating such an interesting group of people

Thank you for the invitation to join the Dialogues. I really enjoyed meeting you, the Mint House team, the community of practitioners and wider critical friends. What a fabulous group of humans you gathered! I particularly enjoyed getting an insight into restorative practice work and its impact. I look forward to sharing my reflections in feedback.

I really enjoyed meeting everyone and getting to learn more about this world, and how it connects to mine!

Day 2 of the dialogue: Belinda Hopkins, restorative practice specialist and pioneer, demonstrates how restorative practice works to bridge gaps in understanding between people.

Thank you Westhill!

New Restorative Justice Article

A Systematic Review of Participant and Facilitator Experiences of Restorative Justice Interventions in the Forensic Secure Estate

Really good to see the recent publication of a systematic review looking at participant and facilitator experiences of restorative justice interventions in the forensic secure estate. The review was carried out by Kathryn Rowsell, Kirsty Pegg, Pete Wallis and Richard Barker, two of whom (Kathryn and Pete) are Mint House trustees.

The studies unearthed in the review aren't plentiful (only 9 in all) but they do use a mix of research designs, making for interesting comparisons. In a nutshell 'the result of this review supports the use of restorative justice within the forensic secure estate.'   Amongst its benefits, restorative justice can help shift  'unhelpful and inaccurate internal narratives' enabling participants to develop a more positive sense of themselves. The best effects are likely to be achieved where restorative justice is introduced with involvement and buy-in of staff at every level, and where the prevailing culture is trauma-informed.

To read the article, you can find it here, though it is behind a registration wall.

Restorative Quiz

BY Geoff Emerson (Mint House Trustee)

Can you imagine what a restorative pub quiz would look like? Well, having taken on the job of setting and running one, I am struggling. The problems are many. My enjoyment of a pub quiz comes from my competitive nature, the prospect of winning and the chance to show off my esoteric and admittedly useless, knowledge of trivia. These are not the aspects of my personality of which I am most proud.

I have to declare a secret from my past. I was hopeless at team sports at school. Yes, I was the one who was usually the last to be picked by the sporty team captains. Even worse when one of them said “I’ll have ‘im and you can have those three.” I was one of those three. So, for me the Pub Quiz has been the chance to try, often not very successfully, to get my revenge. Revenge is very problematic when it comes to restorative quizzing! Not surprisingly, in quizzes the Sport round was my weak spot. Carefully chosen team-mates could help cover the gaps in Science, Sport and Music. So, why are Pub Quizzes and Restorative Practice apparently antithetical? Ruthless competition is the number one problem. Creating winners and losers does not lead to harmonious relationships even if participants are advised not to take it too seriously.

Serious quizzers will wonder what the point is. Conflict is almost built into the format. I have faced many challenges to my authority as a quiz master. One contestant offered to supply me with academic papers to prove her point! To award a half point for an almost correct answer has been known to lead to ill feeling and on occasion to near riots.

Arguments within teams have caused my wife and I to face serious friction after I insisted that the Galapagos Islands were part of Peru and our team lost a point, my wife having rightly, but rather too politely, suggested the answer was Ecuador. Do you push your point, knowing, in my case erroneously, that you are right? Or, do you politely give way because of politeness and a wish for harmony and lose the point?

Prizes, does everyone win a prize? Valuable prizes can be divisive, particularly when you think your team has been denied one unfairly. Maybe we can accept that the honour of winning is what matters. A raffle is always a good idea because you can then have two sets of winners. My mother had a restorative view of competition. When we went to Whist drives and I lost, she would reassure me by saying “Well, if you are not lucky at cards you will be lucky in love.” She was right, my wife doesn’t hold a grudge about the Ecuador issue.

The answers to my difficulties in relation to designing a Restorative Pub Quiz lie in building a sense of shared endeavour; creating opportunities for collaboration; increasing understanding of how restorative processes work; and enabling participants to go home with a sense of shared achievement.

Come to the Mint House Quiz on Thursday 23rd November at 7.00pm in New Road Baptist Church and find out if a Restorative Pub Quiz works for you!

Reimagining Justice: Art Show - Interview

We recently shared on social media how restorative justice may be expressed through creative arts, and one of the resources mentioned was ‘Reimagining Justice,’ a virtual restorative justice art show hosted in 2020 by the National Center on Restorative Justice at Vermont Law School. 

Visitors to the exhibition were invited to vote for their favourite image, and we were delighted to be contacted by Don John Omale, whose image was placed third in the voting.

Don John has kindly shared these further reflections on his entry, the design and what he learned from the competition, including a powerful reminder of what we can learn from Africa.

Why did you enter the exhibition?

The call for submission by Lindsey Pointer of Vermont Law School was an opportunity for me to showcase an afrocentric perspective to the Reimagine Justice Art Competition.

What was your thought process for your design?

My design was and is based on my sociological imaginations of dispute resolution and the sociology of law in Africa. I have often told my international audiences that when it comes to restorative justice, the west needs to learn from Africa as much as Africa needs to learn from them. To us in Africa, restorative justice is like a good old wine served in a new glass. And so to me, the logic and principles of restorative justice are in the old contained and in the new explained. Restorative justice processes and practices have been culturally inbuilt to the models of dispute resolution in most African countries and communities but never known to them as such before now. Growing up in a rural African community in the 70s and 80s It is a common sight to see elders and community members gathered under a tree shade to resolve community disputes brought before them. In my design you can see the people seated in a circle to make contributions to how a conflict brought before them can be peacefully resolved. The blindfolded "justice lady" is an enigma of justice, a facilitator or mediator that dispenses justice or resolves the dispute without fear or favour. It's a representation of impartiality which should be a typical characteristic of most a good mediator/facilitator. I used a woman because in Africa women appear to be more liberal , fair and impartial when it comes to dispensation of justice because the ones who give lives are always inclined to protect lives. Perhaps, that explains why most judges and magistrates in Africa are women. We have more women on the bench than men . I might be wrong though, but that is my perspective on the "African Justice Lady " that I submitted to the Reimagine Justice competition at Vermont Law School which came in third position. 

Has doing your submission and seeing others changed your thinking at all or offered any different perspectives? Has it helped your work or personal experiences?

What I learned from the competition was that people have different and creative imaginations of the concept of restorative justice. The competition also demonstrated that restorative justice is a globally accepted idea judging from the number of submissions to the Reimagine Justice competition. The competition also shows that there are possibilities for global networking of ideas and knowledge sharing around Restorative Justice hence, I am reinvigorated to learn from others’ perspectives as well as continuing to share the African perspective to the international community.

To see the exhibits as well as find out more about the Reimagining Justice: A Virtual Restorative Justice Art Show here - https://www.vermontlaw.edu/rj-art

What’s behind a name?

I am Geoff Emerson, a retired probation officer and one of The Mint House trustees. I will be writing a series of short pieces reflecting on different aspects of restorative practice for the Mint House.

This first piece explores why we are called “The Mint House”. If this interests you, read on. The building in which the Mint House was launched in 2015 – and from which we operate when we need a physical space – is alleged to have been the temporary location for the Royal Mint of King Charles I during the English Civil War in the 1640s. The building was used to mint (manufacture) coinage to enable the King to pay his troops, something he had not been very good at. Paying troops to fight battles is not a very restorative activity. To make matters worse the coinage was minted from silver plate taken from the Oxford Colleges and melted down at the Mint House.

An Oxford Crown. Photo credit to Ashmolean Museum Oxford.

As I write this, I realise I am getting into the murky territory of judging past people and actions using the values of today, restorative values of course! Was Charles I a bad king? Was melting down beautiful objects to make money a bad thing to do? Can it be excused by the good of paying hungry troops who had not been paid for months? Are these just the wrong kind of questions?

To us, adopting “The Mint House” name focuses both on the minting of new things and the freshness of a medicinal and culinary herb which promotes good health and good food. What’s in a word, or two? Whilst it is helpful to understand the past, restorative ways of thinking suggest that we should also look forward with hope and to fresh ways of doing things.

What happened in the Mint House in the 1640s was a part of a difficult history when Parliament was seeking to assert the democratic rights of the people in what became a bloody civil war. The whole country was affected both in terms of painful bloodshed, but also democratic rights achieved. Subsequent history has shown both progress in terms of democratic rights, but also continuing conflict over how human rights can be won in a society where they continue to be abused. The Mint House has a mission to promote restorative practice as a means of resolving conflict peacefully. For us this means finding new and creative ways of communicating what restorative practice is and why it matters, working with partners to introduce restorative practice in new settings – workplaces, colleges, housing complexes and more - and looking afresh at what enables organisations to embed restorative practices in how they do things day-to-day. We’re convinced the resulting ‘currency’ – deep listening, respectful dialogue, understanding needs and peaceful conflict resolution – is one that will benefit us all.

The Mint House today from Bonn Square

Juliet, her Romeo and Restorative Justice

BY PAUL S. FIDDES

Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet begins like a comedy, with the first half of the play filled by light-hearted banter, but it ends as a tragedy with the waste of two young lives. Viewed through the lens of the modern ‘restorative justice’ movement, the situation cries out for a restorative justice process throughout most of the play, and shows the first steps being taken in this direction only at the very end. For the story is of two families alienated from one another, nursing ancient grievances which they feel to be real, but which are never actually spoken about and faced openly together.

The feuding families are the Montagues and the Capulets, and the play begins with a street fight in Verona between members of the two households. It is halted by the intervention of the ruler, Prince Escalus, who warns all concerned that they will pay with their lives for any further disturbance of the peace of the city. Romeo, only son of the Montagues, is hopelessly in love with a girl called Rosaline, and his friends Mercutio and Benvolio mock his obsession with her. Nevertheless they persuade him to go to a masked ball at the Capulet’s house where she will be a guest and he will be able to see her. Instead he meets and falls deeply in love with Juliet, the only daughter of the Capulets, and she likewise falls in love with him. Her fiery cousin Tybalt recognizes Romeo and is outraged, taking his presence as an insult to the Capulet family. The fact that the ancient grudge between the families could be resolved if only they would talk about it openly together is underlined by the fact that when Tybalt tells Capulet that Romeo is there, he makes light of it. Tybalt however is deeply offended and the seeds of tragedy have been sown. Juliet laments that the families cannot get beyond the surface appearance of a name to see the true person underneath: ‘O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo? … What’s in a name? That which we call a rose/ By any other word would smell as sweet.’ 

The very next afternoon, with the help of Juliet’s nurse, Romeo and Juliet are secretly married by Friar Lawrence. They rightly think that at this moment a liaison between the two families would not be welcomed. Not more than an hour after the secret marriage, Tybalt picks a quarrel with Romeo, but Romeo answers him peacefully, assuring him that he loves him for a reason that he cannot yet disclose. Mercutio is astounded by what he considers a ‘vile submission’ by Romeo, and enters himself into a duel with Tybalt. Attempting to stop the fight, Romeo steps between them and Tybalt takes the opportunity to stab Mercutio with his sword, who dies as he had lived with a pun on his lips: ‘Ask for me tomorrow and you will find me a grave man’. 

Romeo had gained a new perspective, viewing the feud as insignificant in light of his love for Juliet, and he had been anxious to restore the broken relationships. But, ingrief and guilt at the death of his friend, he relapses back into the old view of the situation. Crying ‘O sweet Juliet, thy beauty has made me effeminate’, he challenges Tybalt and kills him. From this point, from a failure to talk together about an ancient grudge and the injuries done in the past on both sides, there is a straight road to disaster. For the Prince banishes Romeo instantly from Verona on pain of death, and after spending a single night of passionate love with his bride, he escapes to Mantua.

Juliet now learns that her parents are insisting, against her will, on marrying her to a suitor they approve of, Count Paris. Even her nurse, who knows about the secret marriage to Romeo, tries to persuade her to fall in with her parent’s intentions. Trapped in a patriarchal system, frantic with worry and fear, she turns to Friar Lawrence, who devises a plan: he gives her a drug which will make her appear dead, so she will be interred in the family mausoleum. He will send a letter to Romeo telling him of the trick, and he will come to the tomb and take her away to Mantua when she awakens from her drugged sleep. Unfortunately the messenger is delayed, and Romeo hears only about her supposed death. He procures poison for himself and goes to Juliet’s tomb where he kills Paris who has come to pay his respects, and who attacks Romeo when he thinks the tomb is being violated. Inside, finding Juliet apparently dead Romeo poisons himself; Juliet wakes to find him dead beside her and kills herself with Romeo’s dagger. The two families, now united in grief, finally vow to end the feud.

In various ways a lack of communication between all concerned has precipitated the catastrophe, and the Prince rightly commands that they must ‘go hence to have more talk of these sad things’. Though too late to avert the tragedy, from a modern viewpoint we can say that they now embark on a process of restorative justice and seek to find a way forward together into the future.

Each family will honour the victim of the other, Montague raising a golden statue of Juliet and Capulet doing the same for Romeo. So the story of Romeo and Juliet will be remembered as long as Verona lasts. They have lost their lives to unresolved grievances, but have left a story behind them which will hopefully prevent any renewal of the feud, and which will have a wider effect on the whole community which has been caught up in the families’ dispute. 

Revd Professor Paul S. Fiddes Author of More Things in Heaven and Earth: Shakespeare, Theology, and the Interplay of Texts (University of Virginia Press, 2022)

---

If you live in or near Oxford and would like to join us for a charity performance of Romeo and Juliet, Wild Goose Theatre Company are allowing us to sell tickets to their dress rehearsal in aid of The Mint House: https://www.minthouseoxford.co.uk/events/shakespeare2023

Restorative justice and unconscious biases

by Rosie Chadwick

Biases are all around us. They’re part of the human condition, developed over millenia and there for a reason, making life easier in many cases. At the same time, we need to be alive and alert to how biases affect our decision-making when preparing for and facilitating restorative encounters. How are we affected by how someone looks or sounds, how articulate they are, how self-aware they seem, how likeable and relatable we find them, by the nature of the crime (without regard to context) by the order in which we meet people, or by the biases in other people’s accounts of the situation?

Our recent Mint House CPD session, led by Dr Kathryn Rowsell and consultant Dr Richard Barker, gave us a great glimpse of the wide range and volume of potential biases, powerfully codified in the Cognitive bias codex:

The session also helpfully suggested some useful mitigations, and some questions we can ask ourselves to help us be more mindful of our biases. (Originally from Athwal-Kooner, P., Ratcliffe, M., & DaSilva, A. C. (2022). See full reference below.)

Theme	Question
Lens	What is my lens to view the world?   How have my values impacted on my lens?   What impact might my lens have on me? On my practice?   What is the lens of the person I am working with/supporting?   How does this impact how they view the world?
Power and Privilege	What is my power and privilege?   How am I using this?   How do I experience inequality?   How do I experience other’s experience of inequality?   How do I respond to this?
Assumptions	What assumptions am I making about this person?   What might be influencing me to make such assumptions?
Inferences	What cultural inferences and behaviours am I promoting in my language and behaviour?   How may others experience this?   How might this impact on inclusivity in my context?
Developing my lens	How am I open to developing my lens?   What might impact my openness to adapt my lens? (fears/barriers)   How can I work with this?   Who is my “critical friend” who can help me reflect about my lens?

​

Thanks to all for a rich discussion, and we’ll look forward to exploring this area further.

---

References:

Cognitive Bias Codex

Athwal-Kooner, P., Ratcliffe, M., & DaSilva, A. C. (2022). Challenging Bias in the Forensic Context: Lived Experiences. In G. C. Liell; M. J. Fisher; & L. F. Jones (Eds.) (2022). Challenging Bias in Forensic Psychological Assessment and Testing: Theoretical and Practical Approaches to Working with Diverse Populations. London: Routledge

Restorative Parenting Podcast

by Joy Bettles

Recently, I have really enjoyed being involved in producing our first ever podcast on the topic of ‘Restorative Parenting’.

Over the past couple of months, Crystena Parker-Shandal, Justine Andreu Darling, Lindsey Pointer, and I have gathered for a series of conversations on our reflections and journeys in incorporating restorative principles in our family lives. It has been so encouraging to connect with other like-minded parents and to discuss the joys and challenges of living restoratively and modelling restorative justice and practice with our children.

In the first episode (released today!), we briefly shared some of what we consider to be key components to restorative parenting, and opened up about some of the highs and lows of restorative parenting.

This and future episodes will cover:

• What is restorative parenting?

• Highs and lows of restorative parenting

• Helping our children develop emotional awareness and vocabulary

• Working through sibling conflict and rivalry

• Building our own capacity for restorative responses

We are hoping that this will open up a wider discussion with others of you who also want to share your journey of restorative parenting! Please send us a message on social media or email joy@minthouseoxford.co.uk if you have something to share or if you would like to be invited to future online meetups (we already have one scheduled for the 22nd of May 2023).

In this season of the podcast we gathered around the shared experience of motherhood with young children, but we would love to hear the perspectives of other parents/fathers, as well as those with tweens, teenagers, and grown children!

Please listen at the links below, and follow/subscribe so that you are notified each time a new episode is released:

The Economic Case for Restorative Justice

by Lucy Harris (Why me?)

Restorative Justice (RJ) has the power to change the lives of all those affected by crime. Why me?’s ambassador stories are powerful examples of its impact on individuals. To promote evidence based decision making, these stories need to be combined with data and research on the economic impact of Restorative Justice.

In a unique collaboration between Why me? and economist Frank Grimsey Jones, we have carried out a contemporary, holistic, and generalisable economic evaluation of Restorative Justice. We aim to inform evidence-based commissioning of RJ that will improve funding of, and access to, RJ interventions. The resulting report and economic model has been published on Why me?’s website. 

Why is it necessary to demonstrate the economic benefits of criminal justice interventions?

Reoffending has substantial costs for society and the government. It also reduces wellbeing for victims and offenders. Around a quarter of proven offenders reoffend within a year, committing an average of three to four offences each (UK Government Database). In 2016, the total economic and social costs of crime were estimated to be £59 billion (Heeks et al., 2018), with reoffending in the first year of follow-up accounting for £18 billion (Newton et al., 2019). Breaking the cycle of reoffending is crucial to reduce spending by the criminal justice system, and improve the lives of offenders and victims.

An Economic Evaluation of Restorative Justice

Our evaluation findings demonstrate that the social return on investment in Restorative Justice is substantial. For every £1 invested in Restorative Justice, there were £14 of social benefits. The direct return on investment for the Criminal Justice System was £4 per £1 invested in RJ. RJ substantially reduces reoffending. In our model each direct RJ intervention reduced the average number of reoffences in the first year from 27 to 19.  Overall, our model suggested that a £5 million investment in RJ, would be associated with total benefits of £76 million, including saving the criminal justice system £17 million.

Although previous research (Shapland et al., 2008; Strang et al., 2013) shows that direct Restorative Justice interventions reduce reoffending, investment in, and access to, RJ remains limited. Our economic evaluation has provided a robust way to demonstrate and model the economic benefit of RJ interventions linked to reduced reoffending and improved wellbeing. Overall, economic evaluations are underutilised in the social sector, but can be a useful and compelling way to influence decision making.

Our economic evaluation provides a significant breakthrough for the economic case for Restorative Justice:

"A key aspect for anyone considering initiatives benefiting victims or encouraging desistance is whether they are value for money. This in-depth economic analysis of restorative justice takes us much further to answer this question - in a positive direction.”

- Joanna Shapland, Edward Bramley Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Sheffield

Our recommendations for future research, policy makers, and Police and Crime Commissioners

Our research shows that Restorative Justice can reduce reoffending, save money and help victims to recover. Following these substantial findings, Why me? continue to demonstrate that increasing access to Restorative Justice should be a policy priority for national and local decision makers within the Criminal Justice System.

Why me? believe that this can be achieved by implementing a series of recommendations which we have laid out in full in our report. Recommendations include:

1. Improved national data collection. Key metrics should include level of investment, number of referrals, number of direct Restorative Justice interventions, number of indirect Restorative Justice interventions, reoffending rate, victim wellbeing and offender wellbeing.

2. The right to be given information about and access to Restorative Justice should be enshrined within the primary legislation of the Victims’ Bill. This legislative right should end existing blanket bans on Restorative Justice provision for specific types of cases, so that all victims of crime are able to decide whether to engage with Restorative Justice.

3. Police and Crime Commissioners should use the model produced by this research to understand the return on investment in Restorative Justice in their area. PPCs should share the model with staff or external providers responsible for Restorative Justice delivery, establish an action plan to ensure consistent data collection and analysis to understand and improve return on investment.

Read the published report and economic model here. If you’re interested in hearing more about the research, or need any assistance with using the model, please get in contact via info@why-me.org.

---

You can watch the recording of our report launch event on the Why me? Youtube channel:

---

References:

Heeks, M., Reed, S., Tafsiri, M., & Prince, S. (2018). The economic and social costs of crime Second edition.

Shapland, J., Atkinson, A., Atkinson, H., Dignan, J., Edwards, L., Hibbert, J., Howes, M., Johnstone, J., Robinson, G., & Sorsby, A. (2008). Does restorative justice affect reconviction?: the fourth report the evaluation of three schemes. National Offender Management Service.

Strang, H., Sherman, L. W., Mayo‐Wilson, E., Woods, D., & Ariel, B. (2013). Restorative Justice Conferencing (RJC) Using Face‐to‐Face Meetings of Offenders and Victims: Effects on Offender Recidivism and Victim Satisfaction. A Systematic Review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 9(1), 1–59.

Newton, A., May, X., Eames, S., & Ahmad, M. (2019). Economic and social costs of reoffending: Analytical report.

UK Government Database. (n.d.). GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk

Restoring trust in policing

by Rosie Chadwick

It was great to join people from all ‘corners’ of the criminal justice system at a research symposium hosted by the Criminal Justice Alliance for some thought-provoking talks and conversations on the theme of improving trust in the criminal justice system.

Perhaps not surprisingly, much discussion focused on declining trust in the police, with consequences including high levels of under-reporting of crime, declining feelings of public safety (with people not seeing the police as their protectors or confident that they will come when called) and – some argued – a rise in ‘penal populism’ fuelling a steep rise in the prison population.[1]  

Recent surveys underline the decline in trust.  

• In a YouGov survey carried out in January 2023, 51% of Londoners said they didn’t trust the Metropolitan Police very much or at all, while only 6% said they trusted them “a lot”. The gap was even wider when the question was asked of ethnic minority Londoners.   

• Another regular YouGov survey asks people how much confidence they have in the police to deal with crime in their local area. In the latest ‘edition’ of the survey  38% of those responding said they had ‘a lot’ (4%) or ‘a fair amount’ of confidence (34%) compared with 54% who have ‘no confidence (17%) or ‘not very much’ confidence (37%). How much confidence Brits have in police to deal with crime (yougov.co.uk)

So far so depressing. On though to a workshop in the afternoon looking at how particular points of crisis in penal policy can sometimes be a trigger for positive change based on a recognition that ‘something must be done.’  

We clearly need to do something to rebuild trust in the police.  That something needs to be at an institutional level, rather than allocating blame to individual officers or units.  I look forward to hearing more from Kerry Clamp and Paul Mukasa about the role restorative policing might play in this rebuilding effort at our event later this week.

[1] Official projections show the prison population in England and Wales rising from  83,687 currently to 94,400 by March 2025 and between 93,100 and 106,300 by March 2027.

---

You can watch a recording of the event ‘Restorative policing: where next?’ on our event recordings page and YouTube channel:

Restorative justice in prisons: reasons to be gloomy and glimmers of hope

by Rosie Chadwick

Reasons to be gloomy and glimmers of hope: these were my main take aways from the Mint House session recently on ‘Restorative justice in prisons – where next?’ 

Among reasons to be gloomy, conversationalists highlighted:

• the lack of a political appetite for a reform agenda

• learning and commitment lost when staff including Governors moved on

• the challenges of working with a culture where rules and risk aversion are ingrained

• RJ seemingly being dropped from the curriculum of the ‘Unlocked’ leadership development programme for prison officers

• the huge difficulty of accessing prisons currently, so that victims often wait for months if not longer for their case to be progressed

Among glimmers of hope, we heard examples from other jurisdictions of where access to restorative justice has been written into law, though with a wise reminded that organisational challenges remain. We were reminded of good work going on across many institutions involving providers such as Belong, Remedi, Sussex Pathways and others, creating many opportunities for reflection, shared learning and evaluation[1]. And we had the example of HMP Peterborough, which in 2021 became the first prison to achieve Registered Restorative Organisation Status, and the ‘whole prison’ approach to restorative justice now being adopted across all Sodexo-managed prisons.   

Earlier this week I heard someone talking about systems change in health care. The speaker challenged the notion that we should expect radical reform to come from Government, saying ‘We are the people we’ve been waiting for.’  A question for us all is how we can fan the glimmers, turning them into something stronger.

---

You can watch a recording of the event on our event recordings page and YouTube Channel:

---

[1] See, e.g. http://www.belongmakingjusticehappen.co.uk/publications.html and https://www.remediuk.org/case-studies-prison-work/

Evidencing Success: A Call for A National Repository of Restorative Case Studies

by Benjamin Fisk (University of Gloucestershire)

Any practitioner who uses restorative approaches, in whatever setting they are applying them, will tell you that this stuff works. They will tell you that well trained practitioners working for schools, police, social work services, housing, prisons, health and myriad of other areas frequently see multiple types of success at many points along the journey when working with people in this way.

I started a Restorative Justice Council commissioned PhD studentship in October 2021 to explore the evidencing of success and successful in restorative work. My initial review of the academic literature, and the sourcing of service evaluations, reports and policy documents in the public domain highlighted that the definition of “success” in restorative work is nearly as complex as the definition of “restorative practice” itself.

The first strand of my research is to understand how professionals define success in their work, and what they understand “effectiveness”, “efficiency” and “impact” to mean in their context. I have been distributing a survey to capture these views and even at this early stage it is clear that these terms are highly subjective, contextual and can be viewed from multiple stakeholder positions. If you are a professional, academic, practitioner, manager or commissioner reading about this survey for the first time, I would love to hear your views, so I won’t go into further detail about my initial findings now as I do not want to lead your potential responses to my questions.

You can find my survey here: https://forms.gle/CqoFLVLJgUPqHAG29

The next big component of my research has been to explore the templates and documents that services use to capture data about their restorative work. I want to understand where success can be observed, how it is recorded and monitored, what headings and measures are being employed, how this data is then used and where it is reported. I am continuing to collect blank templates and would welcome any submissions from service providers.

In the last 5 months I have been working on a report for the All-Party Parliamentary Group using data submitted to the initial enquiry on Restorative Practice 2021/22, and I am hoping to publish a paper with my initial findings from an analysis of 6 Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) RJ reporting templates. What I can share at this stage is that the language and data categories that services use to collect information about participants, referrals, case management, restorative processes, interventions, and evaluation differs significantly. Whilst it is possible that there may be other templates that align with some of the features six analyzed, if this theme of divergence in measurement were to be evident and perhaps even greater in other PCC reporting templates, then it could be suggested that any conclusions drawn from the comparison of data collected using these templates would lack both reliability and validity to the point that they would be almost unusable.

The big takeaway from this initial research is that greater oversight, guidance and standardization are required. This will enable the meaningful use of quantitative data about the use of restorative approaches to effectively demonstrate success.

It will take time to clarify the different caveats and language variants used for counting that prevent equivalency. Once this is done it must be agreed which will be used universally going forward, and this must be done in a restorative way that includes professional stakeholders and service users, and ultimately enables quantitative comparison that is meaningful.

But despite this challenge, a glimmer of hope appears in other forms of data that are already collected by the majority of restorative services. Case studies are routinely created by services for internal professional development, service evaluation, quality assurance and commissioning requirements. They provide powerful qualitative evidence of success in restorative work that captures the story behind the hard countable outcomes. By offering context that describes the often intangible successes that figures alone can not actualize, these documents can highlight the effectiveness of a well prepared conference as well as the impact the process has on participants and the changes that occur for participants on that journey, whether they reach the point of a face to face encounter or not. Case studies are an avenue that the sector can travel down immediately whilst the complex work is done to agree and employ quantitative measures across services that address the concerns about reliability and validity of sector wide data going forward.

My initial findings call for the creation of a National Repository of Restorative Case Studies. RJ service providers I have spoken with are providing case studies as a component of their regular PCC reporting. From conversations with Family Group Conference providers in both child and adult social work settings, case studies are regularly created and used to demonstrate best practice. Youth Offending Services exist in every local authority and multiple schools across the UK have employed restorative approaches to the benefit of their educational communities. Even at a conservative estimate, if all of these services, schools and organisations could provide one case in the next 12 months alone, we could quickly generate a database of over 350 case studies in one year. This doesn’t even include historical case studies that we know organisations have collected over more than 30 years of practice in the UK.

A database will require funding to manage the data hosting and technical logistics, negotiations between stakeholders and bodies to oversee the project and acknowledge the hard work undertaken by services that gives credit whilst maintaining the anonymity of participants. The repository must be fully functional at launch and use multiple media types that enable anyone who requires specific evidence to search case studies by offence, problem, concern or harm type; the broad geographical area or type of setting such as rural or city; some general detail about the demographics of participants; and the type of restorative approaches used and the types of success that were observed. I genuinely believe that this is something that is achievable, would be beneficial to the entire restorative sector, but would also speak to the heads and hearts of service users, other professionals, commissioners, and decision makers in government whilst other ways to evidence success are negotiated.

I will be presenting more about my research and my initial findings at the Restorative Justice Council conference taking place from November 21st to 22nd 2022 and the International Institute of Restorative Practice World Conference from January 25th – 27th 2023.

If you would like to take part in my research please do not hesitate to contact me by email at benfisk@connect.glos.ac.uk.

---

Benjamin Fisk is a PhD student at the University of Gloucestershire and is a registered social worker.

Can restorative justice play a part in our response to online harms?

by Rosie Chadwick

Almost daily it seems we have painful reminders in the news about the range of online harms, the damage these cause, and the limitations of current responses centred on content moderation and traditional forms of justice.

These messages also come through strongly in a report published by the Victims Commissioner in June this year, based on a ‘call for information’ from people who had experienced online harms. The report lists 20 different types of online harms - along with a catch all ‘other’ category. It points to a similarly long list of negative effects, on mental health, sleep, work, relationships and more. A significant minority (25%) of people sharing their experiences had chosen not to report them to the police and/or internet companies because they thought this would be futile. Where people had reported, satisfaction with the response tended to be low.

Amy Hasinoff is a US academic who (with others) has been leading thinking on whether restorative justice can help us address online harm more effectively. Amy spoke on this topic at the European Digital Rights Conference Privacy Camp in 2021 (summary available here). Her most recent work (available here) looks at whether restorative - and transformative - justice responses can be scaled, reflecting the nature of online harm.

We’re delighted that Amy will be joining us from 7-8 pm (GMT) on 10 November 2022 to share her thinking with us. You can find out more here: https://www.minthouseoxford.co.uk/events/2022/9/27/restorative-justice-and-online-harm.

---

You can watch a recording of the event on our event recordings page and YouTube Channel:

Art-making, gifting, and solidarity in restorative justice processes

by Joy Bettles

We were thrilled to have Dr Clair Aldington (Space2face Shetland) speak at our recent event on her research and experiences in the area of art-making, gifting, and solidarity in restorative justice processes.

Clair is an experienced restorative justice facilitator and has recently completed her PhD at Northumbria University with a thesis titled ‘Drawing a line / the meaning of making, gifting, and solidarity in restorative justice processes’.

At the event, we considered how pieces of art can be powerful and act as conduits of dialogue. Art can be used in situations of indirect restorative justice where there is no face to face meeting and can be an accessible form of engagement in restorative justice for people who struggle to sit still for long periods or find it challenging to express themselves using words.

Clair shared with us several examples of how making and gifting had been used to address harms such as theft, fraud, and assault. It was really interesting to see how different forms of art were used by individuals based on their interests, skills, and what they hoped to convey to those they harmed. Some examples included a garden bench, a tree sculpture, a box with personal messages, and a handmade paper book.

Clair pointed out that in order to engage people with art-making and gifting, it is helpful to not use the word ‘art’ as people often have preconceptions about what ‘art’ means and their ability to produce art. Instead, she suggested that restorative justice practitioners ask participants what they enjoy doing or making and whether they have any hobbies. Using the phrase “Have you made anything before?” opens up a wider pool of possibilities such as candle making, baking a cake, or gardening.

She also encouraged all of us to consider recruiting restorative justice practitioners from a more diverse range of backgrounds, especially the creative industries. Training artists and creators as practitioners would allow them to bring their creative skills into restorative justice work.

Clair’s research will hopefully be published in the near future, so please follow us on social media or sign up to our mailing list for updates!  You can also find more information on Clair’s work on her website: https://www.clairaldington.com/

Communicating Restorative Justice and Practice: My top take-aways from our recent conference

by Rosie Chadwick

We heard some fantastic insights at our conference on Communicating Restorative Justice and Practice. These are my top take-aways. It will be great to hear what others took from the day.

Reframing restorative justice

•  Take on board key techniques that research tells us will help us communicate more effectively. Avoid labels, jargon, fatalism. Don’t overdo the stats. Steer clear of messaging that reinforces myths or triggers negative beliefs.  The more consistently we can all do this the better.

• The recommended messaging framework - sharing a belief, stating the dilemma, offering a solution – is a useful structure to draw on.

• Can more be done to tackle common myths?! One for further discussion.

• Contact Lucy Jaffe to find out more, including what the next phase of work is likely to involve.

Overcoming barriers and gatekeepers to restorative justice

• Think about what the different parties/partners in restorative justice are looking for: they are not all looking for the same thing! Help stakeholders to be explicit about their aims and recognise each other’s aims and where each other is coming from. As restorative practitioners, we should be good at this!

• ‘Case extraction’ works better than referral.

• Orient risk assessments towards different risks and ways of mitigating these. Draw out the risks of not doing RJ as well as the risks of RJ.

• Pay attention to the feedback loop.

• We can usefully do a better job of documenting approaches and researching processes and practices, not just outcomes.

Communicating restorative justice to victims of crime

• A proactive, systematic, inclusive approach works best.

• The offer of restorative justice can be made too late but never too early. It’s important to give victims time to have the conversation.

•  It’s helpful to find out victims’ contact preferences early on. 

• The content of the offer matters: ‘what do you need to repair the harm?’ backed up by a range of options, not ‘do you want to meet the offender?’

• A lack of data inhibits research.

• The whole ethos of an organisation affects how, and how often, RJ is broached with victims.

Communicating restorative practice in the context of neurodiversity

• The statistics on the ‘school to prison pipeline’ are striking: there’s an overwhelming case for acting early.  

• Time is an important factor: taking time to build trust and do things together; allowing decompression and processing time when responding to incidents; managing differing conceptions of time.

• Neurodiversity covers everyone! The important thing is to take a highly personalised approach that recognises each person’s intersecting challenges and needs.

• Restorative practice works well within a wider emphasis on emotional literacy.

• Having involvement from police officers who understand and work with the ethos of the school and who pupils can engage with in a positive way is invaluable.

Communicating restorative justice through film and the arts

• Films have many layers. They can enable a much deeper conversation than might otherwise be reached.  How films are used is important.

• RJ Working has found working with young people to devise films to be extremely powerful. This creates opportunities to ‘make meaning’ and helps young people have a sense that restorative practice is relevant for them in their locality.  

• Asking students at the local art college to help create an animation can help us reach beyond a ‘restorative justice bubble’ bringing students into the process of cultural understanding.

Introducing children to restorative practice through stories

• Like films, stories are a great way to communicate a lot in a little.

• Children’s stories often communicate deep life lessons and can prompt deep conversations. They reach adults as well as children.

• There are many opportunities to supplement stories, for example with circle time/questions and experiential learning. We can look forward to colouring sheets to go with Lindsey’s newly published story! 

•  We can’t teach children about restorative justice without being restorative with them.

Panel discussion

• There’s important work to be done winning over Police and Crime Commissioners and supporting people who have come though RJ to become facilitators.

• Non-verbal communication matters: we need to ‘endlessly model the values we espouse.’

• We should shift the tone - be more confident and less apologetic – ‘have you heard of this great movement…!’