Retributive punishment: Between vindication and healing

Abstract

This article engages with the mental and emotional transition of victims in the post-violation process in light of recent retributive theories. It argues that two separate yet related needs of victims must be addressed by legal intervention: normative vindication and therapeutic recovery. Retributive punishment can be said to right the wrong done to victims, expressing the message that they are violated and should be vindicated. It achieves this by reaffirming their normative status while also addressing and redressing their sense of injustice and moral vulnerability: normative restoration. However, the senses of injustice and moral vulnerability are different from those of injury, loss, and grief. Even if retributive punishment provides a means of communicating solidarity with victims in a normative sense, it is doubtful how it provides healing for the losses and injuries left unrepaired. Victims also require a therapeutic intervention, allowing them to come to terms with the sufferings of violation: ethical restoration. This article claims that recent victim-oriented retributivism highlights a dimension of punishment that has not been sufficiently explored in penal theory by providing normative restoration, but it is not clear whether it is structurally well positioned to address and heal the deeper wounds caused by criminal violation.