Abstract

Restorative justice has long been considered an important alternative lens to approach illegal and harmful behavior compared to traditional criminal justice approaches. Despite this widespread and successful application, efforts to use this approach within forensic mental health settings have seemingly been minimal. This review aimed to synthesize the available information on the application, evidence for use, and barriers or unique considerations for restorative justice practices within forensic mental health settings. The PRISMA extension for scoping reviews checklist guided our reporting of the results. After conducting an extensive review of the literature, six peer-reviewed articles and five gray literature documents were included. Our results demonstrate that restorative justice approaches in forensic mental health settings are being used by a small number of committed individuals and are not broadly accepted or part of typical care services. The evidence for use of this approach is extremely sparse but do suggest that these interventions could be appropriate in forensic mental health settings as reports for positive impacts are available on three levels, with patients, victims, and organizations. Information about the unique considerations that should be made and how restorative justice in forensic mental health differs from use in other populations is discussed.

摘要

与传统的刑事司法方法相比，恢复性司法长期以来一直被认为是处理非法和有害行为的重要替代视角。尽管应用广泛且成功，但在法医心理健康环境中使用这种方法的努力似乎很少。本综述旨在综合有关应用程序的可用信息、使用证据以及法医心理健康环境中恢复性司法实践的障碍或独特考虑因素。范围审查清单的 PRISMA 扩展指导了我们的结果报告。在对文献进行广泛审查后，纳入了 6 篇同行评议文章和 5 篇灰色文献文件。我们的结果表明，法医心理健康环境中的恢复性司法方法正在被少数忠诚的个人使用，并且没有被广泛接受或成为典型护理服务的一部分。使用这种方法的证据非常稀少，但确实表明这些干预措施可能适用于法医心理健康环境，因为可以在三个层面上获得积极影响的报告，即患者、受害者和组织。讨论了有关应做出的独特考虑以及法医心理健康中的恢复性司法与在其他人群中的使用有何不同的信息。使用这种方法的证据非常稀少，但确实表明这些干预措施可能适用于法医心理健康环境，因为可以在三个层面上获得积极影响的报告，即患者、受害者和组织。讨论了有关应做出的独特考虑以及法医心理健康中的恢复性司法与在其他人群中的使用有何不同的信息。使用这种方法的证据非常稀少，但确实表明这些干预措施可能适用于法医心理健康环境，因为可以在三个层面上获得积极影响的报告，即患者、受害者和组织。讨论了有关应做出的独特考虑以及法医心理健康中的恢复性司法与在其他人群中的使用有何不同的信息。