Ensure participation is voluntary for all parties

Restorative processes only work when everyone — especially the harmed party — chooses to participate.

Why it works

Coerced participation in a restorative process produces a different dynamic than voluntary engagement. For the harmed party, being required to face someone who hurt them before they’re ready can re-traumatize rather than heal. For the person responsible, compelled participation tends to produce performative accountability rather than genuine responsibility-taking. Voluntary participation activates the self-determination mechanism — people who freely choose to engage invest more genuinely in the outcome.

How to do it

1. Before convening any restorative process, ask each party privately: "Do you want to participate in this? You don’t have to."
2. Provide alternatives: written dialogue, a surrogate victim if the actual victim isn’t ready, or a phased process.
3. If the harmed party declines, support that decision — the process cannot be restorative if it’s experienced as another imposition.

Evidence

Self-determination theory research (Deci & Ryan) shows that voluntary participation in processes produces more genuine engagement and durable behavior change than coerced participation — directly applicable to restorative processes. (mechanistic)

Direct studies of voluntary vs. coerced restorative processes are limited; the mechanism is consistent with self-determination theory but not independently isolated in restorative contexts.

Sources

• Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Plenum.

Common mistake

Treating the restorative process as a mandatory "facilitated conversation" that both parties must attend, which defeats the voluntary accountability mechanism at the heart of the approach.