Retributive, Rehabilitative, and Restorative Justice

¶ … Correctional System: Three different approaches and philosophies to the problem of crime The three philosophical cornerstones of the corrections system are retribution, rehabilitation, and restoration. However, while most modern theorists of criminal justice believe that there must be some proportion of these elements in all forms of punishment, not all believe that they must be present to the same degree. This paper will advance the idea that ultimately the concepts of rehabilitation and restoration must be more present within the judicial system today while retribution should be deemphasized.

The concept of retribution in the justice system dates back to the classical theory of crime, which stressed that the punishment for a crime must exceed its likely rewards. "For a rational system of criminal justice to work, punishment must be certain, swift, and proportional. The ultimate goal was to insure that the benefits of crime never outweighed the potential pain from punishments the offender would receive. As rational, calculating human beings, most would avoid crime under such a system" (Greek, "The Classical School").

This concept of punishment as deterrence is still present within the justice system, as seen in advocates of the death penalty, 'three strikes and you are out' legislation, and harsher sentences for offenders. The presumption is that people will rationally decide that crime does not pay when faced with such punishments. Unfortunately, criminals do not always act out of rational self-interest when pursuing a life of crime. Other theorists of crime which emphasize the irrational social and psychological dimensions of crime stress the need for rehabilitating the offender.

"Although rehabilitation is often considered a type of punishment for criminal offenders, its objectives are therapeutic rather than punitive…the rehabilitative ideal views criminal behavior more like a disease that should be treated with scientific methods available to cure the offender" (Smith 1). The idea is to make the criminal a productive member of society through therapy and education. The stress in this model is upon how conditions such as poverty and untreated mental illness motivate crime: by addressing these factors, the criminal can be reincorporated back into the social fold.

A third theory of how to address the problem of crime and punishment is that of restorative justice. Of course, justice is always concerned with protecting the public from potential criminals but restorative justice is unique in the way it stresses how the criminal must be an active participant in healing the community which he harmed through his crime. "Restorative justice is a theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm caused or revealed by criminal behavior" ("What is restorative justice," Restorative Justice Online).

Examples of restorative justice include community service (such as someone who committed a hate crime undoing the damage he did to the church or synagogue) or victim-perpetrator mediation in which the victim is allowed to confront the perpetrator and explain the harms done to him or her. While to some degree a balance of all of these elements are required in any criminal justice system, statistical evidence indicates there is an extreme imbalance in how crime is addressed through punishment.

Evidence of discrimination in the justice system suggests that there is a lack of justice in terms of how punishment is allocated which subverts the concept of rehabilitation and fosters hostility to an unjust society. There is also evidence of how social factors can contribute to fostering criminal tendencies amongst individuals who believe they have no clear way out of their circumstances.

For example, within the juvenile justice system which is supposed to be primarily rehabilitative: "African-American youth are 1.4 times more likely to be detained than white youth arrested for the same crimes, and are twice as likely to be transferred.