Mediation Theory and Practice Umbreit,

Mediation Theory and Practice

Umbreit, M.S., Coates, R.B., Voss, B. (YEAR).The impact of victim-offender mediation: Two decades of research. Federal Probation, 65(3), page numbers.

Rationale / Author's Positionality:

In this article, the authors attempt to describe the attributes of victim offender mediation (VOM). They believe that VOM is one of the more effective recent innovations in the criminal justice system, and that this effectiveness is demonstrated when one looks at the following seven factors: client satisfaction, client perception of fairness, restitution, diversion, recidivism, costs, and VOM and crimes of violence.

This article did not describe any new research, but summarized the results of the past two decades of research into VOM.

First, the research made it clear that only 40 to 60% of people asked to participate in VOM chose to participate, which makes it clear that VOM is a very self-selective process.

Therefore, it is not surprising that VOM participants relate a high-level of satisfaction, because they self-select, and they do so to accomplish goals such as achieving restitution, holding the offender accountable, and helping the offender change. Offenders who were pleased with the process found themselves surprised by it, but some offenders felt that the victims were abusing the process. Victims who were satisfied with VOM reported higher rates of satisfaction with the criminal justice system. Overall, both victims and offenders felt that the process was fair, which was not a surprise given the high reports of satisfaction. VOM and restitution are linked, but while many victims may seek VOM to get restitution, they find that the opportunity to communicate may be more valuable than restitution. Some studies find that VOM makes it more likely for offenders to complete their restitution requirements, while other studies have not found that difference. However, when VOM is found to have an effect on restitution, that effect is positive. The studies about recidivism and VOM have resulted in a number of different conclusions, but they tend to demonstrate that VOM helps reduce the instance or severity of offender recidivism. VOM tends to be a more cost-efficient way of dealing with offenders than other means in the criminal justice system. Finally, while VOM has traditionally been used for less-serious crimes, there have been promising results in VOM programs for serious offenses, including violent crimes.

Application:

This article helped me understand the importance of VOM as part of the criminal-justice system. Given that VOM increases victim satisfaction with the criminal justice system, and may reduce recidivism rates and processing costs, it makes sense for criminal justice systems to offer VOM. Moreover, because it appears that victims of serious crimes may actually be more helped by VOM than the traditional justice system, it seems that jurisdictions should look at expanding their VOM programs. Though I have not been the victim of a serious crime, I would have appreciated being able to use VOM when someone stole my credit card, because I wanted to know if they had done so as part of an ongoing criminal enterprise, or as a one-time response to desperate life circumstances.