Conclusion
Dissatisfaction with the current paradigm of criminal justice is leading to new programs with different visions. Some, such as restitution, can be incorporated into existing structures. Others, such as victim-offender reconciliation, point to a possible new approach to criminal justice—restorative justice. In some ways, restorative justice is simply a new application of an ancient vision. It is new wine from old vines. But those of us who celebrate the harvest are advised to remember the parable of new wine and old wineskins. Before we begin to pour—before we insert restorative features into familiar responses to crime—we would do well to reflect on what the consequences may be.
This article has considered four likely consequences: the challenge to abolish criminal law, the challenge to rank multiple goals, the challenge to determine harm rationally, and the challenge to structure community-government cooperation. Although each challenge is significant, I have argued that all can be effectively addressed. Indeed, they must be if criminal justice is to become—using Justice John Kelly's image—a means of healing the wounds of crime.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
B.A., Wheaton College 1971; J.D., DePaul University 1975; LL.M., Georgetown University 1993. I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Dr. Karen Strong, David Carlson, Thomas Crawford, and Dr. Daniel Dreisbach.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Van Ness, D.W. New wine and old wineskins: Four challenges of restorative justice. Crim Law Forum 4, 251–276 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01096074
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01096074