CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 36Sexual Assault and Victimization StudiesCriminal Justice and PenologyLegal and Social Justice Studies

Restorative Justice for Survivors of Sexual Violence Experienced in Adulthood: A Scoping Review

Burns, Courtney Julia, Sinko, Laura·2023·Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
DOI 10.1177/15248380211029408
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Sexual violence (SV) is a widespread human rights issue. Survivors of SV often experience profound dehumanization and poor health outcomes when their trauma is not properly addressed, rendering it critical that they are honored and empowered within subsequent processes of healing and seeking justice. With adjudication through the criminal legal system largely underutilized due to retraumatization, scrutiny from law enforcement professionals, and high rates of case closure, restorative justice (RJ) has emerged as a promising option for survivors to repair harm and experience accountability. Little is known, however, regarding the best practices for its use in cases of SV. To meet this need, a scoping review was conducted to identify the best practices for the implementation of RJ after instances of SV experienced in adulthood. Following the search methodology outlined by the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis for scoping reviews, 15 articles met search criteria, including four empirical studies and 11 nonempirical research materials spanning five academic disciplines. Best practices and structures for RJ were subsequently identified, including key phases for appropriate implementation. This review can be used to create increasingly productive RJ processes for SV survivors, which is particularly important for those coming from marginalized communities facing structural inequities, as well as survivors on university campuses. As researchers, we have the power to use science to propel society toward the creation of more efficacious healing spaces for survivors of SV, and optimizing safe RJ processes plays a key role in bringing this to fruition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/15248380211029408

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. Campus PRISM, 2020, Campus PRISM: Promoting restorative initiatives for sexual misconduct on college campuses
  2. Centre for Innovative Justice, RMIT University, 2014, Innovative justice responses to sexual offending
  3. Costello B., 2002, Restorative practices in the workplace [Paper presentation]
  4. Daly K., 1999, Restorative justice: From philosophy to practice
  5. Ehrenfeld J. M., 2020, Police brutality must stop
  6. Hanson R. K., 1999, Static 99: Improving actuarial risk assessments for sex offenders, 2
  7. Kaplan M., 2017, Temple Law Review, 89, 701
  8. Millon T., 2009, MCMI-III manual
  9. Munn Z., 2018, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, 1
  10. Nichols H. R., 1996, Multiphasic Sex Inventory II
  11. Orcutt M., 2020, Journal of College and University Law, 45, 1
  12. Quaker Peace & Social Witness, 2005, Circles of support and accountability in the Thames Valley: The first three years April 2002 to March 2005
  13. Reimund M., 2004, Drake Law Review, 53, 667
  14. Seidman I., 2005, Suffolk University Law Review, 38, 467
  15. Smith S. G., 2018, The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2015 data brief—Updated release
  16. Stubbs J., 2010, Meanings of justice: Sexual assault and the appeal to restorative justice
  17. Tiemessen A. E., 2004, African Studies Quarterly, 8, 57
  18. Toews B., 2006, The little book of restorative justice for people in prison
  19. Umbreit M.S., 2002, Executive summary: Victim offender dialogue in crimes of severe violence: A multi-site study of programs in Texas and Ohio
  20. Vail K., 2019, Washington Law Review, 94, 2085
  21. Van Ness D. W., 2005, Enhancing criminal justice reform, including restorative justice
  22. Wager N., 2013, A scoping review considering the applicability of restorative justice to cases of sexual assault

Cited by

Still being checked.

Related

Authors
Burns, C. J., & Sinko, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Corresponding author
Burns, Courtney Julia
ORCID
Venue
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2021-07-06
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
340-354
ISSN
  • 1524-8380 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8324
DOI
10.1177/15248380211029408
OpenAlex
W3178277287
Semantic Scholar
eae7485459c56a1323cb5b701909bf2902033660
Cited by
36
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
FWCI
1.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Trauma Violence & Abuse (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal and Social Justice Studies
Keywords
restorative justice, sexual violence, adult survivors, best practices, retraumatization, criminal justice system, accountability, marginalized communities, trauma recovery, structural inequality
MeSH terms
Humans, Human Rights, Sex Offenses, Social Justice, Survivors, Law Enforcement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review