• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Policing >Comparing Police- And civilian-run Family Group conferences
【24h】

Comparing Police- And civilian-run Family Group conferences

机译：比较警察和平民举办的家庭小组会议

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to compare family group conferences (FGCs) facilitated by police officers with those facilitated by a civilian along several dimensions including process, reparation agreements, recidivism, and time until failure. Design/methodology/approach - Using observational data and juvenile histories of offending from the Indianapolis Restorative Justice Project, the authors attempted to answer four research questions: Are family group conferences facilitated by police officers procedurally different from family group conferences facilitated by civilians?; Are reparation agreements resulting from police-officer-facilitated conferences different from reparation agreements resulting from civilian-facilitated conferences?; Did youths who participated in police-facilitated conferences recidivate at different rates compared with youths who participated in civilian-facilitated conferences?; Did youths who participated in police-facilitated conferences have a longer time to failure than youths who participated in civilian-facilitated conferences? Findings - Generally, there appeared to be no major differences between conferences facilitated by civilians as opposed to police officers. Observations indicated that police officers seemed to lecture offenders more during the FGC and made more suggestions as to what should be in the reparation agreement. Youths who attended police-officer-facilitated conferences "survived" somewhat longer before re-offending than youths who attended civilian-facilitated conferences, although these differences were not statistically significant. Research limitations/implications - While subjects in the Indianapolis experiment were randomly assigned to family group conferences or a "control group" diversion program, subjects were not randomly assigned to conferences according to facilitator type. This limits the generalizability of the findings. Practical implications - The study suggests tjat both police officers and civilians are capable of facilitating FGCs, consistent with restorative justice principles. For police departments interested in responding proactively to early juvenile offending and in strengthening ties with the community, FGCs provide an opportunity through police officer training and involvement as conference facilitators. In contrast, in communities where the police may be disinclined to commit officers to the role of facilitator, the findings suggest that civilian facilitators can also effectively coordinate FGCs. Originality/value - The study adds to the restorative justice literature by further examining conference processes and outcomes.. Additionally, it offers the first empirical examination of some of the concerns that have been raised about police- as opposed to civilian-facilitated conferences. The finding that there were few differences between police- and civilian-run conferences suggests that the police are at least as capable as civilians in facilitating FGCs. This suggests that FGCs could be implemented as part of a community policing initiative utilizing police officers as facilitators. Similarly, FGCs could be implemented as part of a community justice initiative utilizing civilians as facilitators. The key to successful outcomes is likely to be driven by fidelity to theoretical principles as opposed to the formal role of the facilitator.
机译：目的-本文的目的是比较由警察协助的家庭小组会议（FGC）与由平民协助的家庭小组会议，包括流程，赔偿协议，累犯以及直至失败的时间等多个方面。设计/方法论/方法-作者利用印第安纳波利斯恢复性司法项目的观察数据和青少年犯罪历史，试图回答四个研究问题：警官主持的家庭小组会议在程序上是否不同于平民主持的家庭小组会议？警察官员主持的会议产生的赔偿协议与平民主持的会议产生的赔偿协议是否不同？与参加民用会议的年轻人相比，参加警察主持的会议的年轻人的离职率是否有所不同？参加警察主持会议的年轻人比参加平民主持会议的年轻人有更长的失败时间吗？调查结果-通常，由平民主持的会议与警察主持的会议之间似乎没有重大区别。观察表明，在FGC期间，警官似乎更多地向罪犯讲课，并就赔偿协议应包含的内容提出更多建议。参加警官主持会议的年轻人在幸免之前“幸存”的时间比参加平民主持会议的年轻人更长，尽管这些差异在统计上并不显着。研究的局限性/意义-尽管印第安纳波利斯实验中的受试者被随机分配到家庭小组会议或“对照组”转移计划中，但受试者并未根据主持人类型被随机分配到会议中。这限制了发现的普遍性。实际意义-研究表明，根据恢复性司法原则，警官和平民都有能力为联邦政府提供便利。对于有兴趣积极应对青少年犯罪并加强与社区联系的警察部门，FGC通过警察培训和作为会议主持人的参与提供了机会。相比之下，在可能不愿让警察担任调解人角色的社区中，调查结果表明，民间调解人也可以有效地协调联邦政府担保公司。独创性/价值-该研究通过进一步研究会议的过程和结果，为恢复性司法文献增添了新的价值。此外，它对与民意推动的会议有关的一些警察问题也进行了首次实证研究。警察和民政会议之间几乎没有区别的发现表明，警察在促进FGC方面至少具有与平民一样的能力。这表明FGC可以作为警务人员的社区治安计划的一部分而实施。同样，可以将民间社会组织作为平民利用促进者的社区司法倡议的一部分而实施。取得成功成果的关键很可能是由对理论原则的忠诚而不是主持人的正式角色所驱动。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号