top of page

What Restorative Practices Are Not By JWSaintClair

As I continued a conversation about restorative practices, it became clear to me that there are a wide variety of expectations and definitions of restorative practices. Let’s start our discussion and initial view of what restorative practices are not.

Not about forcing participation:

Restorative practices are deeply rooted in the principles of voluntary engagement and mutual respect. Unlike punitive disciplinary measures that often coerce compliance through fear of punishment, restorative approaches prioritize the willingness of all parties involved to participate authentically. This emphasis on voluntarism is not merely procedural; it reflects a profound commitment to human dignity and agency. Restorative practices foster a sense of ownership over the resolution process by creating a space where individuals feel empowered to engage willingly. Participants are encouraged to express their perspectives, needs, and concerns freely, leading to more meaningful dialogue and collaborative problem-solving. This voluntary engagement ensures that the outcomes of restorative processes are driven by the genuine interests and needs of those involved rather than imposed externally. Ultimately, the voluntarism inherent in restorative practices is essential for building trust, promoting accountability, and fostering lasting resolution.

Not about forgiveness:

While forgiveness may emerge as a natural consequence of restorative processes, it is not their primary objective. Restorative practices center on accountability, responsibility, and repair rather than on the granting or seeking of forgiveness. Unlike forgiveness-centered approaches, which may prioritize reconciliation at the expense of acknowledging and addressing harm, restorative justice seeks to hold individuals accountable for their actions while also promoting healing and reconciliation. This nuanced approach recognizes that forgiveness cannot be coerced or rushed but must emerge authentically from a process of genuine acknowledgment, apology, and restitution. By focusing on accountability and repair, restorative practices empower individuals to take ownership of their actions, make amends to those they have harmed, and rebuild trust within the community. While forgiveness may ultimately play a role in the healing process, it is not the sole or primary goal of restorative justice.

Not a panacea:

While restorative practices offer valuable opportunities for addressing harm and promoting healing, they are not a universal solution for every conflict or situation. Recognizing that restorative processes may have limitations and may not be suitable or effective in all circumstances is essential. Factors such as the severity of the harm, the willingness of participants to engage, and the availability of resources can all influence the effectiveness of restorative approaches. Moreover, restorative practices require time, commitment, and investment from all parties involved, making them inherently resource-intensive and potentially challenging to implement on a large scale. Despite these limitations, restorative practices offer valuable benefits, including increased empathy, improved communication, and stronger community relationships. However, it is essential to approach restorative practices with a nuanced understanding of their strengths and limitations and to complement them with other approaches to conflict resolution as needed.

Not about punishment:

Restorative practices represent a departure from traditional punitive approaches to discipline, which focus on assigning blame and meting out punishment. Instead of punishment, restorative approaches emphasize healing, repair, and relationship-building. Rather than viewing conflict as an opportunity for punishment or retribution, restorative practices see it as an opportunity for learning, growth, and reconciliation. By facilitating dialogue, fostering empathy, and promoting accountability in a supportive and non-adversarial manner, restorative processes help individuals understand the impact of their actions and take responsibility for repairing the harm they have caused. This focus on accountability and repair not only promotes healing for those directly affected by harm but also strengthens relationships within the community. Ultimately, restorative practices contribute to a culture of mutual respect, understanding, and cooperation, where conflict is seen as an opportunity for growth and transformation rather than punishment.

Not the foundation of a disciplinary system:

While restorative practices can play a valuable role in disciplinary processes, they are not intended to replace traditional disciplinary measures entirely. Instead, they complement existing systems by offering an alternative approach that prioritizes relationship-building, accountability, and healing. Restorative practices

emphasize prevention, early intervention, and holistic support, helping to create a culture of respect, empathy, and accountability within institutions. However, it is essential to recognize that restorative practices alone cannot address all disciplinary issues and may need to be integrated into a broader framework of support and intervention. Moreover, restorative practices require training, resources, and ongoing commitment from all stakeholders, making them inherently challenging to implement on a large scale. Despite these challenges, restorative practices offer valuable benefits for individuals and communities, including increased trust, improved communication, and reduced recidivism rates.

Not about ostracizing individuals:

Restorative practices emphasize inclusivity, acceptance, and community involvement in addressing harm and resolving conflicts. Unlike punitive approaches, which may result in isolation and stigmatization, restorative processes seek to engage all stakeholders in finding constructive solutions. By encouraging empathy, understanding, and collaboration, restorative practices create opportunities for healing and repair that benefit both individuals and the community as a whole. This communal response fosters a sense of belonging and collective responsibility, reducing the likelihood of future conflicts and promoting a culture of mutual support and respect. Restorative practices help build stronger, more resilient communities where individuals feel valued, respected, and supported.

Not solely about individual behavior:

Restorative practices recognize that conflicts are often complex and involve multiple parties with varying perspectives and experiences. As such, they encourage a comprehensive examination of the factors contributing to harm, including systemic issues such as bias, inequality, and power dynamics. By addressing these underlying causes, restorative processes help participants understand the context in which conflicts arise and identify opportunities for systemic change. This holistic approach fosters empathy, promotes accountability, and supports the development of more inclusive and equitable communities. Moreover, restorative practices challenge individuals to reflect on their own roles and responsibilities in perpetuating harm, encouraging a collective commitment to positive change. Ultimately, by addressing both individual behavior and systemic factors, restorative practices help create safer, more supportive environments where all community members can thrive.

Food for thought:

1. How might we shift our mindset away from punitive approaches to discipline and towards more restorative and healing-centered practices?

2. How can we ensure that restorative practices are integrated into disciplinary systems in a way that complements existing structures and supports positive outcomes?

3. What steps can individuals take to foster inclusivity and acceptance within their communities, particularly in the context of addressing harm and conflict?

1 view0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page