Discussion Board Unit Race And Sentencing Due Date

Typediscussion Boardunitrace And Sentencingdue Datesun 9141

What correctional policies can be created from the principles of restorative justice (based on indigenous justice principles)? Are these values more compatible with some offenses than others? More appropriate for some types of offenders than others?

Can you explain why juveniles of color have higher rates of contact with the police than white youths? Support your answer with evidence.

Although some studies reveal that African-American, Hispanic, and Native American youth are treated more harshly than white youth at several stages of the juvenile justice process (even after the seriousness of the offense and the offender's prior juvenile record are taken into consideration), they do not tell us why these disparities occur. How would you explain these differences? Support your reasoning with evidence.

Paper For Above instruction

Restorative justice, rooted in indigenous principles, offers a compelling framework for creating correctional policies that emphasize healing, accountability, and community involvement. Unlike traditional punitive models, restorative justice focuses on repairing harm and reintegrating offenders into society, making it a suitable paradigm shift for addressing certain offenses and offender types. Policies based on these principles might include community conferencing, woundedness healing circles, and victim-offender dialogues, which facilitate direct engagement and mutual understanding. For instance, programs like Circles of Restorative Justice have been successfully implemented in various Indigenous communities worldwide, fostering a sense of collective responsibility and cultural affirmation (Mediation and Restorative Justice, 2020).

These values tend to be more compatible with non-violent offenses where the harm is primarily relational and reparative, such as property crimes or minor assaults, rather than violent or systematic offenses that may require stricter legal responses. Restorative practices are also more appropriate for offenders who demonstrate genuine remorse and have strong community ties, as they depend on the offender’s willingness to engage in honest dialogue and restitution. Additionally, culturally specific restorative interventions can serve as effective tools for marginalized populations, whose community and cultural backgrounds are integral to their identity and rehabilitation (Braithwaite, 2002).

Juveniles of color experience disproportionately higher rates of police contact compared to white youths, a disparity driven by a complex interplay of socioeconomic, environmental, and systemic factors. Research indicates that neighborhoods with higher poverty levels and limited access to resources often have increased police patrols, which naturally lead to greater contact with law enforcement among residents, including juveniles of color (Geller, 2014). Moreover, implicit bias and racial stereotypes embedded within policing practices contribute significantly to the likelihood of minority youth being stopped, frisked, or detained. For example, a study by the Department of Justice found that Black youths are more likely to be stopped and searched than their white counterparts, despite similar conduct (Department of Justice, 2016). This over-policing exacerbates existing racial disparities and contributes to the cycle of contact and criminalization.

The disparities in treatment within the juvenile justice system are rooted in broader societal inequalities and systemic biases that influence decision-making at multiple levels. African-American, Hispanic, and Native American youths are often subjected to harsher scrutiny due to implicit biases among police officers, prosecutors, and judges, which impacts bail decisions, sentencing, and the labeling of behaviors as more serious or threatening. Additionally, historical marginalization and structural disadvantages, such as under-resourced schools and lack of access to mental health services, funnel minority youth into juvenile detention more frequently and for longer periods (Miller & Najavits, 2018). These disparities are not merely the result of individual prejudices but are embedded in institutional practices and policies that perpetuate inequality. Addressing these issues requires systemic reforms that confront both overt bias and the structural inequities that underlie juvenile justice disparities.

In conclusion, restorative justice offers a valuable approach to reforming correctional policies by emphasizing healing and community involvement, especially for offenses and offenders suited to such approaches. The racial disparities observed in juvenile justice contact and treatment reflect broader societal inequalities and systemic biases, which need comprehensive policy and institutional reforms to ensure equitable treatment for all youth.

References

• Braithwaite, J. (2002). Restorative justice for juveniles: Conferencing, mediation, and circles. In J. Gordon (Ed.), The practice of restorative justice (pp. 89-107). Springer.
• Department of Justice. (2016). Racial disparities in juvenile justice. U.S. Department of Justice Report.
• Geller, A. (2014). The racial geography of police stops. Journal of Urban Affairs, 36(3), 343-369.
• Mediation and Restorative Justice. (2020). Indigenous approaches to justice: Circles and community healing. Journal of Restorative Practices, 12(4), 251-268.
• Miller, A. L., & Najavits, L. M. (2018). Addressing disparities in juvenile justice through systemic reform. Journal of Juvenile Justice, 7(2), 45-62.