LibraryCoursesPunitive vs. restorative approaches to harm
Courses
Practical

Punitive vs. restorative approaches to harm

The punitive approach to harm — punishment proportional to offense, isolation of the offender — has been the dominant framework of Western legal systems for centuries and has consistently failed on its own terms: recidivism remains high, communities remain fractured, and the conditions that produce harm are left intact. Restorative justice asks a different set of questions: what harm was done, what does the harmed person need, and what can the person who caused harm do to repair it? This is not softness; it is a more demanding account of what accountability actually requires.

Juana
Juana
Online
The coach is replying
12 courses
Living with Punitive vs. restorative approaches to harmPunitive vs. restorative approaches to harmPunitive vs. restorative approaches to harm in PracticePunitive vs. restorative approaches to harm: A Deeper LookPunitive vs. restorative approaches to harm: FoundationsPunitive vs. restorative approaches to harm: From Confusion to ClarityPunitive vs. restorative approaches to harm: Questions Worth AskingPunitive vs. restorative approaches to harm: Start HerePunitive vs. restorative approaches to harm: What Nobody Tells YouThe Examined Punitive vs. restorative approaches to harmWhat Is Punitive vs. restorative approaches to harm?Why Punitive vs. restorative approaches to harm Matters