Editing Transformative justice (section)

== Distinctions between transformative and restorative justice ==
Transformative justice is distinguishable from [[restorative justice]] in that transformative justice places emphasis on addressing and repairing harm outside of the state.<ref name=":5">Kim, Mimi E. “From carceral feminism to transformative justice: Women-of-color feminism and alternatives to incarceration”. ''Journal Of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work'' 27, no. 3 (2018): 219-233. doi:10.1080/15313204.2018.1474827</ref> [[Adrienne Maree Brown|adrienne maree brown]] uses the example of a person who has stolen money in order to buy food to sustain themselves, writing that “if the racialized system of capitalism has produced such inequality that someone who is hungry and steals a purse to resource a meal, returning the purse with an apology or community service to does nothing to address that hunger”.<ref name=":3">brown, adrienne marie. ''We Will Not Cancel Us: And Other Dreams Of Transformative Justice''. AK Press, 2020.</ref> Instead, transformative justice requires “the work of addressing harm at the root, outside the mechanisms of the state, so that we can grow into the right relationship with one another”.<ref name=":3" />

Transformative justice is further distinct from restorative justice in that, as many activists and movements stress, the latter is more easily vulnerable to state co-optation. While many of the goals of restorative justice intersect or are compatible with the goals of transformative justice, many restorative justice practices tend to operate within the confines of existing state structures, such as within jails or through community programs involving law enforcement. For example, many restorative justice initiatives take place directly within jails and involve a collaborative relationship with law enforcement or with state sponsored justice systems. As Mimi Kim writes:<ref>Kim, Mimi E. “Anti-Carceral Feminism: The Contradictions of Progress and the Possibilities of Counter-Hegemonic Struggle”. ''Affilia'' 35, no. 3 (2019): 309-326. doi:10.1177/0886109919878276.</ref>

{{Quote|text=“What most of these restorative justice programs share, however, is a collaborative tie to law enforcement, a fact often taken for granted or just as easily overlooked as the promise of restoration rather than retribution distracts attention from the carceral conditions that still bind many of these practices. While pitched as an alternative to the machinery of mass incarceration, restorative justice programs are often initiated from within or in close collaboration with the criminal legal system, leaving its assumptions, its personnel, and its program design within the logic and institutions of the carceral state. In practice, this means that these programs, in large part, leave the selection of cases and, likewise, their potential withdrawal from qualification to prosecutors; failure to meet law enforcement standards may result in sentencing and incarceration; and a number of such programs are carried out entirely within the walls of jails and prisons.”}}

A stark divide between restorative justice and transformative justice rests on the question of whether or not to engage with the criminal justice system in navigating responses to instances of harms or violence. It is the reliance on or collaboration with formalized or state systems of justice that distinguishes restorative justice approaches from transformative justice ones. Thus, while restorative justice and transformative justice may share similar ideological underpinnings and goals, their set of approaches and tactics can be quite divergent. 

In contrast to restorative justice, no quantification or assessment of loss or harms or any assignment of the role of victim is made, and no attempt to compare the past (historical) and future (normative or predicted) conditions is made either.<ref name=":1" /> While restorative justice seeks to return the victim to their initial state before the harm occurred, transformative justice is more concerned with questioning whether the conditions in place before the harm are themselves equitable and just, and looks to redress them in order to prevent further harm within the community.<ref>Mingus, Mia. “Transformative Justice: A Brief Description”. ''TransformHarm'', January 11, 2019. <nowiki>https://transformharm.org/tj_resource/transformative-justice-a-brief-description/</nowiki></ref> The victim is not normally part of the transformative process, but can choose to be. Participants agree only on what constitutes effective [[harms reduction]], which may include separating or isolating perpetrator and victim. 

In contrast to equity-restorative justice, there is no social definition of [[Equity (economics)|equity]] imposed on participants. Each is free to decide on some "new normal" state of being for themselves, and is not pressured to agree on it.<ref>Sociology Lens Insights. “Restorative Justice and Transformative Justice: Definitions and Debates”. Accessed October 11, 2019. <nowiki>https://www.sociologylens.net/topics/crime-and-deviance/restorative-justice-and-transformative-justice-definitions-and-debates/11521</nowiki></ref> A victim may continue to seek revenge or desire [[punishment]], e.g. as in [[retributive justice]] systems. A perpetrator may lack remorse and may say that they lack remorse.