Life After Harm: Exploring the Impact of a Restorative Justice Peer Support Group for People Who Have Sexually Offended
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In recent decades, restorative justice approaches such as victim-offender conferences and circle processes have emerged as a response to people who have caused sexual harm. The traditional legal responses to sexual offending are designed to deter, incapacitate, and rehabilitate. Restorative justice, conversely, is fundamentally concerned with fulfilling obligations, meeting needs, and repairing relationships. Relative to other offending populations, people who have sexually offended face numerous challenges including intense feelings of shame, stigma, and isolation. A restorative justice approach, which values respect and advocacy for all persons and prioritizes community, can help reduce negative emotional states, build accountability and prosocial skills, and insulate people who have caused sexual harm from risk factors that could otherwise contribute to the maintenance of offending behaviour. Although a wealth of literature on Circles of Support and Accountability exists, there is limited research on other community- based transitional restorative justice approaches; particularly non-encounter programs that do not directly involve victims of sexual harm. Additionally, there is little research that describes the impact of spaces involving peer support within non-custodial settings for this specific offending population. This case study seeks to address these gaps by capturing the lived experiences of formerly incarcerated group members involved in a community-based, restorative justice-focused peer support group for people who have sexually offended. This study relies on semi-structured interviews with five support group members and two service coordinators from a grassroots restorative justice organization in Ontario, Canada, as well as an observation of a support group session. Specifically, this thesis connects its findings to broader RJ ethos by exploring the effectiveness of the support group in helping group members fulfill their obligations, meeting their needs, and repairing their relationships. Three main findings are revealed. First, the support group provided a safe passage through which group members were able to create accountability. Restorative justice values and norms were mobilized to help group members understand and address the contributing and resulting harms of their sexual offences to prevent further harm. Second, peer interactions in a positive social space facilitated the development of social capital, which helped group members navigate various emotional and structural challenges associated with their reintegration, as well as cultivate a sense of community. Finally, the support group provided an avenue for healing after experiencing a carceral pipeline of marginalization. The criminalization faced by the participants was antithetical to the conditions required for them to prevent further offending. Group members found solace in RJ and through continued participation in the support group, they were able to realize a fulfilling life after harm was possible. Finding hope led them down a journey of personal transformation which positively impacted their relationships outside of the support group and strengthened their ties to their communities. This study concludes with several considerations for policy and practice as well as recommendations for future research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,012 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».