"A Good Idea in an Ideal World": Survivors' Views on Restorative Justice for Intimate Partner Violence

In response to longstanding critiques of the legal system's ability to meet survivors' justice-related needs, restorative justice (RJ) has been proposed as a complementary approach that emphasizes healing, accountability, and survivor participation. However, the use of RJ in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) remains highly contested, with concerns surrounding safety, power imbalances, coercion, and the potential for re-traumatization. Despite these debates, there is limited empirical research examining how survivors themselves perceive the suitability of RJ in the context of IPV. Drawing on in-depth interviews with 57 women and nonbinary survivors of IPV in Ontario, Canada, this study explores their willingness to engage in RJ processes and perceived benefits and risks. Using a community-engaged research approach, findings reveal substantial variation in survivors' views. Participants identified potential benefits of RJ, including having a voice, achieving closure, holding perpetrators accountable, involving the community, and preventing future harm. At the same time, many expressed significant concerns related to personal safety, the sincerity of perpetrator accountability, and the adequacy of community capacity to support restorative processes. Overall, survivors tended to view RJ as an idealized model of justice, with practical benefits contingent upon stringent safeguards. The paper concludes by situating findings within ongoing debates about RJ and IPV, and by offering recommendations for practice and future research grounded in survivors' lived experiences.