Atlas›Domain XV · Nature, philosophy, social & rites of passage›Guide 067
Guide XV-067

Peacemaking and sentencing circles

Barry Stuart, Pranis, Wedge1992Yukon
A 34 · L 53 · M 1323 interventions in the Trinity explorer
Client cardCompare
[source: …] where a claim comes from[uncertain] not confirmed in a primary source[synthesis] the writer's reconstruction

1. Introduction

Version followed: the four-stage peacemaking circle process (determining suitability, preparation, convening all parties, follow-up) as set out in the Native American Rights Fund tribal peacemaking training materials for the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (2017-2018), within the circle lineage of Pranis, Stuart and Wedge (2003) and Pranis (2005); with the court-connected variants of Yukon circle sentencing (R v Moses, 1992), NSW Circle Sentencing (as described by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2020) and the Navajo Nation Judicial Branch Peacemaking Program (brochure, 2025). Safeguards follow the UNODC Handbook on Restorative Justice Programmes (2nd ed., 2020) and the Scottish Government restorative justice framework (2026).

Peacemaking and sentencing circles are not a psychotherapy. They are community justice processes in which the people affected by a harm, the person responsible, their supporters, community members and (in sentencing circles) justice officials sit in a circle without tables, speak in turn using a talking piece, and seek a consensus about what happened, its impact and what should be done [source: New Tactics in Human Rights; Beyond Intractability summary of Pranis 2005]. In a sentencing circle the court keeps its legal authority: in R v Moses (1992) 71 C.C.C. (3d) 347 (Y. Terr. Ct.), Judge Barry Stuart described seating the court in a circle as having "profoundly changed" decision-making and listed benefits including lay participation and victim involvement [source: Chartrand 1995, Alberta Law Review]; in NSW the circle develops a sentencing plan but the magistrate "retains final say" [source: Yeong and Moore 2020]. Peacemaking in the Navajo Nation is described by its Judicial Branch as the Dine traditional method of resolving problems by talking them out to restore hozho (harmony and balance) [source: Navajo Nation Peacemaking Program brochure 2025].

Core idea of change, as its practitioners hold it: harm damages relationships and community; when those affected tell their stories and are heard in a structured, values-based space, understanding, accountability and repair become possible, and the community takes a share of responsibility for the plan [source: Pranis 2005 via Beyond Intractability; New Tactics]. This is the practice's own account, not an established mechanism. Evidence line: in NSW, Circle Sentencing participants were less likely to be imprisoned and, among those not imprisoned, somewhat less likely to reoffend within 12 months; the authors stress these are associations, not causal effects [source: Yeong and Moore 2020].

The psychotherapist's work is mostly around the circle, not in it: assessing a client's readiness and safety, preparing and, where the programme allows, accompanying a victim or a responsible person, trauma-informed support before and after, coordination with trained keepers and programme staff, and working with the meaning of the process in the client's life. A therapist does not keep a justice circle without the programme's keeper training [synthesis]. Related guides: XI 101 talking and healing circles; V 156 Way of Council; 066 family group conferencing in this family.

Indigenous cultural authority: circle and peacemaking practices are attributed by their own institutions to Indigenous traditions (for example, Dine peacemaking to the Navajo Nation; NSW circles to local Aboriginal Elders). Ceremony content (prayers, smudging, songs) belongs to those communities and is not described here beyond the fact that it may open and close a circle [source: NARF EBCI training materials; Navajo Nation brochure].

2. Framework

The four stages of a circle process [source: NARF EBCI training materials, Tab 3]

  1. Determining suitability. Goal: decide whether a circle should happen at all. Questions named: are the parties willing; are trained facilitators available; is there enough time; can physical and emotional safety be maintained. A circle is not appropriate when no one is willing, when the organiser wants to convince or change others rather than listen, or when the intent is not respectful of all participants.
  2. Preparation. Goal: identify who has been affected and who needs to take part, including people with useful skills or life experience; familiarise each party with the process; explore the context of the issue. Preparation is done with each party separately before anyone meets.
  3. Convening all parties. Goal: identify shared values and guidelines; share stories, concerns, hopes and feelings; probe the underlying harm; generate ideas; find consensus; write an agreement that clarifies who is responsible for what.
  4. Follow-up. Goal: check whether obligations are being met; if not, find the cause and next steps; adjust the agreement; celebrate success. One training example sets a check-in two weeks after a juvenile sentencing circle.

Inside the convened circle the same materials describe four elements in sequence: getting acquainted; building understanding and trust; addressing issues or a vision; developing plans and unity. A sample agenda runs: opening, introductions, explaining the talking piece, discussing values, developing guidelines, the focal content, outcome, follow-up arrangements, closing [source: NARF EBCI training materials, Tabs 2-3].

Court-connected circle sentencing (North American model). One published sequence is: the offender applies to the circle process; a healing circle for the victim; a healing circle for the offender; a sentencing circle that reaches consensus on a sentencing plan (which can include commitments from the justice system, the community and family as well as the offender); follow-up circles that monitor progress and adjust the agreement [source: New Tactics in Human Rights]. Participants can include victims and supporters, offenders and supporters, judge, prosecutor, defence counsel, police and court workers. In the Yukon and Northwest Territories circles became regular court practice in the early 1990s; Crown and defence keep their usual opportunity to speak [source: Chartrand 1995].

NSW Circle Sentencing (Australia). Operating since 2002 for eligible Aboriginal people found guilty of non-excluded offences (excluded offences include sexual offences and grievous bodily harm assault, among others) at participating Local Courts. Steps: the magistrate refers for suitability assessment; with the offender's consent the Program Officer convenes the local Aboriginal Community Justice Group, which assesses suitability (community ties, impact on the community, nature of the offence, likely benefit); if suitable, the magistrate makes a participation order; the circle (typically four Elders, magistrate, Program Officer, police prosecutor, the offender and lawyer, the victim and a support person) discusses background, offence, impact on the victim and community, and prevention, and develops a sentencing plan; the magistrate approves participants and keeps final say [source: Yeong and Moore 2020].

Navajo Nation peacemaking. Referral from courts, schools, social services, prosecutors, probation or self-referral; sessions held at home, a chapter house or a court facility; participants work with a Peacemaker or Traditional Program Specialist, discuss events and their impact on everyone, and seek forgiveness and the well-being of family, clan and community using traditional law and values. Matters needing a court order must also be filed in court. The programme also lists Dine Family Group Conferencing and Life Value Engagement [source: Navajo Nation Peacemaking Program brochure 2025]. Founding dates and the history of a separate Peacemaker Court are [uncertain: not verified].

Session count and format. None of the sources gives a fixed number or length of preparation meetings or circles; the number of follow-up circles depends on the agreement [source: New Tactics; NARF EBCI]. Format is in person, seated in a circle with no table, often with a centrepiece [source: NARF EBCI; Beyond Intractability].

Criteria for moving between stages. Suitability to preparation: willingness, safety and trained keepers confirmed (and, in court programmes, a referral or order). Preparation to convening: each party understands the process, has agreed guidelines and supporters, and safety can be maintained; risks are reassessed throughout and the process paused or ended if they cannot be managed [source: NARF EBCI; Scottish Government 2026]. Convening to follow-up: an agreement reached by consensus (or a sentencing plan approved by the court). Follow-up ends when obligations are completed or the matter returns to court.

Where the therapist sits in this framework [synthesis]: at suitability (assessment of the client, with consent shared with the programme), throughout preparation (readiness, stabilisation, rehearsal, supporters), at the circle only in a role the programme approves (support person, or not present), and after the circle (debriefing, follow-up support, meaning-making).

3. Guiding principles

  • Voluntary participation, revocable at any time. Both victim and offender must consent freely and can withdraw at any point; no one is coerced or unfairly induced [source: UNODC 2020, p. 16]. Practical meaning: the therapist checks repeatedly that the client wants this, separate from what the court, family or community wants.
  • Informed consent. Parties are told their rights, the nature of the process and its possible consequences before agreeing [source: UNODC 2020, p. 16]. Practical meaning: make sure the client knows what will happen, who will be there and what the outcome can mean legally.
  • Agreed basic facts; participation is not an admission. Processes are used where the parties normally agree on the basic facts, and an offender's participation is not used as evidence of guilt later; failure to agree is not held against the offender [source: UNODC 2020, pp. 16-17]. Practical meaning: a responsible person who disputes what happened is not ready; a victim should not enter a circle expecting to prove the facts.
  • Safety comes first and is reassessed continually. Risk and strengths are assessed in every process, including history between participants and power imbalances; if risk cannot be managed the process is paused or ended [source: Scottish Government 2026, section 20]. Practical meaning: the therapist shares relevant risk information (with consent) and supports a decision to pause.
  • Power imbalance and cultural difference are taken into account [source: UNODC 2020, p. 16]. Practical meaning: ask who in the circle holds influence over the client; Crnkovich's account of an early Nunavik circle shows how respected figures endorsing an outcome made it hard for a victim to object [source: Crnkovich, A Sentencing Circle].
  • Domestic and sexual violence need specialist assessment. Mediation-type processes should not be mandatory in violence against women and, where used, follow specialised assessment and specially trained professionals [source: UNODC 2020, pp. 19-20]; for domestic abuse, specific risk assessment (SARA named as an example) and a shared risk management plan [source: Scottish Government 2026]; survivor in control, no minimising of the offence or replacement of a more serious sanction, practitioners trained in coercive control [source: Restorative Justice Council]. NSW excludes sexual offences [source: Yeong and Moore 2020].
  • Equality of voice through the talking piece. Only the holder speaks; it passes around so everyone has a turn, and no one is required to speak [source: New Tactics; NARF EBCI Tab 8]. Practical meaning: prepare the client both to speak and to pass.
  • The keeper holds the space but does not control the group [source: NARF EBCI Tab 3; Pranis 2005 via Beyond Intractability]. Practical meaning: the therapist does not take over the keeper's job, even as a supporter.
  • Shared values and guidelines, not rules. Values such as respect, honesty, empathy and courage; guidelines always include speaking and listening with respect and confidentiality [source: NARF EBCI Tab 4]. Practical meaning: help the client name which values matter to them before the circle.
  • Consensus decision-making. Consensus can be reached without full agreement if everyone feels heard [source: Pranis 2005 via Beyond Intractability]; in court programmes the judge or magistrate keeps final authority [source: Yeong and Moore 2020; Chartrand 1995]. Practical meaning: explain the actual decision rights to the client so the word "equal" does not mislead (Crnkovich names this as a mixed message).
  • Confidentiality with exceptions. Non-public discussions stay confidential unless the parties agree or law requires disclosure [source: UNODC 2020, p. 17; NARF EBCI Tab 7]. Practical meaning: clarify with the client what the therapist will and will not share with the programme, and what the circle may share with the court.
  • Community and cultural authority. Elders, Community Justice Groups and tribal peacemakers hold authority over circle membership and ceremony [source: Yeong and Moore 2020; Navajo Nation brochure]. Practical meaning: the therapist defers to that authority and does not import or alter ceremony.
  • Victim protection is a goal in its own right. Crnkovich recommends that sentencing goals include protection of victims and families regardless of what happens to the offender, and support for the victim separate from the abuser [source: Crnkovich]. Practical meaning: the victim's therapy is not a means to the offender's rehabilitation.
  • Children have a parent or guardian present and their voice heard [source: UNODC 2020, p. 16; Scottish Government 2026 on GIRFEC]. Practical meaning: assent as well as consent, safeguarding first, never naming minors.
  • Role clarity and competence. Taking the roles of therapist and keeper, or therapist and community member, for the same client is a multiple relationship; APA Ethics Code Standard 3.05 asks psychologists to avoid multiple relationships that risk impaired objectivity, competence or effectiveness, or exploitation or harm [source: APA Ethics Code; paraphrased]. Practical meaning: choose one role per client, and practise only within the training a programme requires [synthesis].
  • Trauma-informed pacing [synthesis]. Practical meaning: no client is hurried into a circle to suit a court timetable; stabilisation precedes contact.

4. Intervention inventory

The circle sources describe the circle process itself; they say little about what a psychotherapist does around it. The therapist-side procedures below are therefore largely [synthesis], built on the stages and safeguards cited, and each is marked. The circle elements a trained keeper uses (4.17-4.19) are described as the sources state them so that the therapist can prepare a client for them.

4.1 Orientation to the circle process

  • Purpose / when: a client has been offered, referred to or is curious about a sentencing or peacemaking circle; first step before any decision [synthesis, built on UNODC 2020 p. 16 informed consent].
  • Steps: (1) Find out who raised the circle (court, lawyer, Elders, school, family, the client). (2) Describe in plain words the four stages: suitability, preparation, the circle, follow-up [source: NARF EBCI]. (3) Describe the room: chairs in a circle, no table, a talking piece, a keeper, an opening and closing that may include ceremony [source: New Tactics; NARF EBCI]. (4) Explain who decides: consensus in the circle, but in court circles the judge or magistrate keeps final say [source: Yeong and Moore 2020]. (5) Give the programme's own written information if available and invite questions; agree to revisit.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Before you decide anything, let's get a clear picture of what a circle actually is, who sits in it, and who has the last word."
  • Watch for: the client agreeing before understanding; magical expectations (that the other person will apologise, or that the circle guarantees a lighter sentence). Working: the client can explain the process back in their own words and names one question to ask the programme.

4.2 Readiness and safety assessment: a client harmed by the offence

  • Purpose / when: a victim or affected family member is considering a victim healing circle or a sentencing circle [synthesis, built on NARF EBCI suitability questions and Scottish Government 2026 risk domains].
  • Steps: (1) Ask what the client hopes for and fears. (2) Review current trauma symptoms, dissociation, substance use, mental health and suicide risk using standard risk-assessment practice. (3) Map the history and current contact with the responsible person, including any orders. (4) Ask about influence and dependency (financial, housing, family, community standing). (5) Ask whether the client can say no in front of the people who will be there. (6) Summarise readiness as ready, not yet, or not suitable, and what would change it. (7) With consent, share relevant safety information with the programme.
  • Example language (illustrative): "What would you need to feel safe sitting in the same room? And if the honest answer is that you couldn't, that's important information, not a failure."
  • Watch for: contact with the responsible person shortly before the circle while a no-contact order applies (described in Crnkovich's account); pressure to attend for the offender's sake. Working: the client's decision is stable across sessions and their own.

4.3 Readiness assessment: a client responsible for harm

  • Purpose / when: a client facing charges or sentence is applying for or referred to a circle [synthesis, built on UNODC 2020 p. 16 on agreed facts].
  • Steps: (1) Clarify with the client that their lawyer advises on legal choices; the therapist does not. (2) Explore whether the client accepts the basic facts and their responsibility, as opposed to wanting a lighter sentence only. (3) Assess capacity to hear anger and grief without retaliation or collapse. (4) Assess substance use, mental health and suicide risk, especially if imprisonment is possible. (5) Explore shame versus guilt. (6) Note readiness and, with consent, share what the programme needs.
  • Example language (illustrative): "People in the circle will want to hear what you did and what you understand about its effects. What are you ready to say about that, honestly, today?"
  • Watch for: minimising, blaming the victim, rehearsed remorse; a belief that the circle is a soft option. Working: the client can describe the harm from the other person's point of view.

4.4 Domestic, family and sexual violence screening and routing

  • Purpose / when: any circle involving intimate partner, family or sexual violence, or where coercive control is possible.
  • Steps: (1) Screen for coercive control, ongoing abuse and fear. (2) Check programme eligibility: NSW excludes sexual offences [source: Yeong and Moore 2020]; UNODC says such processes should not be mandatory in violence against women and need prior specialised assessment and specially trained professionals [source: UNODC 2020, pp. 19-20]. (3) Ask whether the programme uses a specific domestic abuse risk assessment (the Scottish framework names SARA as an example) and shares a risk management plan [source: Scottish Government 2026]. (4) Check that the survivor controls the process and that it does not replace a criminal sanction [source: Restorative Justice Council]. (5) Involve specialist domestic or sexual violence services with consent. (6) If these conditions are not met, support the client in declining.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Because of what has happened between you, I'd want to know this programme has specialist safety checks before you go further. Can we ask them together?"
  • Watch for: sentences that bring victim and abuser together for counselling, which Crnkovich notes can imply shared responsibility and raise risk; family pressure to reconcile. Working: a written safety plan exists and the client knows how to stop the process.

4.5 Voluntariness and coercion check

  • Purpose / when: at every stage; especially where family, community leaders or the court favour the circle [source: UNODC 2020 p. 16; synthesis on method].
  • Steps: (1) Ask the client, alone, who wants them to take part and what happens if they say no. (2) Separate the client's wish from others' wishes. (3) Remind them that consent can be withdrawn at any time [source: UNODC 2020 p. 16]. (4) Repeat the check before the circle and after any major change.
  • Example language (illustrative): "If nobody else had an opinion about this, what would you choose?"
  • Watch for: the client deferring to an Elder, parent or partner; fear of losing community standing. Working: the client can state a reason for their choice that is about them.

4.6 Consent to share information with the programme

  • Purpose / when: before any contact with keepers, Program Officers or court staff [synthesis; Scottish Government 2026 notes that consent covers information sharing with partner services].
  • Steps: (1) Explain what the programme may ask for. (2) Agree with the client exactly what will be shared, with whom, and what stays private. (3) Obtain written consent per local law and professional rules. (4) Tell the client what the circle may pass to the court. (5) Review consent if the role changes.
  • Example language (illustrative): "I won't share anything without your say-so. Let's go through what the keeper needs to know for safety, and what stays between us."
  • Watch for: requests for full therapy notes; the therapist being treated as an assessor for the court. Working: the client knows the limits and still talks freely in therapy.

4.7 Coordination with keepers and programme staff

  • Purpose / when: the client is going ahead; the therapist supports but does not run the process [synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) Identify the keeper or Program Officer and their training and authority. (2) Share agreed safety and support needs (breaks, a support person, triggers, communication needs, interpreter). (3) Ask how preparation meetings run and when the client will meet the keeper. (4) Agree who the client contacts if distress rises. (5) Respect the programme's and Elders' authority on membership and ceremony.
  • Example language (illustrative, to a keeper): "My client has asked me to let you know she may need a break during the circle and would like a support person beside her. What's the usual way to arrange that?"
  • Watch for: poor organisation (Crnkovich describes participants left uninformed and selection left to the day); interpretation that is summarised rather than full. Working: the keeper confirms the arrangements before the circle.

4.8 Preparing the client's story

  • Purpose / when: before the convened circle, where storytelling is central [source: NARF EBCI on sharing stories; Pranis 2005 via Beyond Intractability; method synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) Invite the client to tell what happened and its effects as they would in the circle. (2) Help them choose what they want to say and what they will keep private. (3) Help put it in first-person, specific terms (for a victim: impact and needs; for a responsible person: actions and their effects). (4) Rehearse once or twice, briefly. (5) Agree that they may also pass.
  • Example language (illustrative): "You don't have to tell everything. What are the two or three things you most want them to understand?"
  • Watch for: retraumatising detail; scripted performance. Working: the client can say the core of it with tolerable distress.

4.9 Choosing and preparing supporters

  • Purpose / when: circles include supporters for both victim and offender [source: New Tactics; Yeong and Moore 2020]; Crnkovich recommends guidelines that include people who can support the victim [source: Crnkovich].
  • Steps: (1) List possible supporters. (2) Check each one's loyalties, and whether they also support the other party. (3) Discuss what the client wants from them (sit beside, speak, stay silent, help leave). (4) Suggest the supporter takes part in the programme's preparation. (5) Plan for someone to be with the client afterwards.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Who would be on your side in that room, even if things got hard?"
  • Watch for: supporters with their own agenda; no supporter at all. Working: the client names at least one person whose presence feels steadying.

4.10 Affect regulation and exit plan for the circle

  • Purpose / when: for a client with trauma symptoms, anxiety or anger [synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) Identify early signs of overwhelm. (2) Practise one or two grounding skills the client already uses. (3) Agree a discreet signal to the supporter or keeper. (4) Confirm with the keeper that breaks are possible (the keeper calls breaks when needed, per NARF EBCI Tab 3). (5) Agree what the client will do if they need to leave.
  • Example language (illustrative): "If your chest starts to tighten, what's your signal, and who will notice it?"
  • Watch for: the client planning to push through no matter what. Working: the client can describe the plan and believes they can use it.

4.11 Hearing hard things and responding to the talking piece

  • Purpose / when: preparing for rounds where the client must listen without replying [source: New Tactics on the talking piece; method synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) Explain that only the holder speaks and the piece passes around in turn. (2) Anticipate what others may say (anger, excuses, praise for the offender). (3) Rehearse listening with a grounding skill, then responding on their next turn. (4) Practise passing.
  • Example language (illustrative): "You may hear things you disagree with and have to wait your turn. What could help you hold on until the piece comes back to you?"
  • Watch for: the client expecting to rebut every point. Working: the client accepts that they can return to a point on their turn or after the circle.

4.12 Cultural formulation and cultural authority

  • Purpose / when: an Indigenous or other community-based circle, or any client for whom tradition, ceremony or community standing is central.
  • Steps: (1) Use the DSM-5-TR Cultural Formulation Interview, with its supplementary module on spirituality, religion and moral traditions, to understand what the circle means to the client and their community [uncertain: DSM-5-TR wording not verified]. (2) Ask whether the client wants contact between the therapist and an Elder or peacemaker; collaborate only if they do. (3) Do not take part in or adapt ceremony unless invited by those with authority. (4) If distress centres on faith or tradition, the DSM-5-TR "Religious or Spiritual Problem" may be noted with code Z65.8, which ICD-10-CM lists under "Other specified problems related to psychosocial circumstances" [source: ICD-10-CM Z65.8 (Unbound Medicine)].
  • Example language (illustrative): "What does it mean to you, and to your family, that the Elders will be part of this?"
  • Watch for: the therapist's assumptions about what is traditional; Crnkovich notes the need for frank discussion among women about possible discrimination within traditional practices. Working: the client feels both their culture and their own view are respected.

4.13 Children and young people: consent, assent and safeguarding

  • Purpose / when: a young person is the responsible person, the person harmed, or a witness; youth and school circles [source: UNODC 2020 p. 16 on parent or guardian presence; Scottish Government 2026 on the child's plan and voice; method synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) Follow local safeguarding procedures first. (2) Obtain the young person's own assent in language suited to age, as well as parental or legal consent. (3) Check that a parent, guardian or trusted adult can be present. (4) Coordinate with the agencies already involved in the child's plan. (5) Prepare the young person to pass the talking piece without penalty; NARF material notes students are not required to speak. (6) Arrange aftercare at home and school.
  • Example language (illustrative): "You get to say whether you want to do this. If you go, you can pass when the talking piece comes to you."
  • Watch for: adults speaking over the young person; shaming instead of accountability (the NARF juvenile example names accountability "not bashing" the youth). Working: the young person can say what they want from it.

4.14 Accompanying the client as a support person

  • Purpose / when: the programme permits a support person and the client asks for the therapist [synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) Ask the keeper whether a therapist may attend and in what role. (2) Agree with the client that in the room you are a supporter, not a facilitator, assessor or advocate. (3) Speak only on your turn and only if the client wants you to. (4) Watch for the agreed signal. (5) Stay available briefly afterwards and schedule a debrief. (6) Record the role in your notes and consider the multiple-relationship implications (see section 3).
  • Example language (illustrative, on one's turn): "I'm here to support [client's first name or role]. I'll pass for now."
  • Watch for: the urge to defend the client or correct others; being drawn into the court's decision. Working: the client reports feeling accompanied rather than represented.

4.15 Debriefing after the circle

  • Purpose / when: soon after any circle, healing circle or preparation meeting [synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) Check safety, sleep, substance use and suicide risk. (2) Invite the client to tell what happened and what stood out. (3) Separate what was said by others from what the client concludes about themselves. (4) Name what went as hoped and what did not. (5) Identify any new risk (renewed contact, retaliation, community talk) and pass it, with consent, to the keeper. (6) Plan the next weeks.
  • Example language (illustrative): "What are you carrying away from the circle, and is any of it something you'd like to put down?"
  • Watch for: delayed distress, intrusive memories, or a crash after initial relief. Working: the client can hold a mixed account of the experience.

4.16 Supporting follow-up and the agreement

  • Purpose / when: after an agreement or sentencing plan; follow-up circles check obligations and adjust the plan [source: New Tactics; NARF EBCI Tab 3].
  • Steps: (1) Go through the agreement with the client: what each person agreed to and by when. (2) For a responsible person: break commitments into steps and anticipate obstacles (substance use, work, relationships). (3) For a victim: track whether commitments made to them are kept and how that feels. (4) Prepare for follow-up circles as in 4.8-4.11. (5) If obligations are not met, help the client tell the keeper rather than conceal it.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Let's look at what you promised in the circle and which part is most likely to slip."
  • Watch for: commitments that conflict with therapy goals or safety (for example, joint counselling with an abuser, flagged by Crnkovich). Working: obligations are kept or renegotiated openly.

4.17 Preparing a client for the opening, values and guidelines

  • Purpose / when: before the convened circle; the keeper opens with a ceremony, prayer or reading, introductions, the talking piece, values and guidelines [source: NARF EBCI Tabs 2-4].
  • Steps: (1) Tell the client the opening may include ceremony led by people with that authority and that they can ask the keeper beforehand what to expect. (2) Explain that guidelines are agreed by the group and include speaking and listening with respect and confidentiality [source: NARF EBCI Tab 4]. (3) Ask what guideline the client would want to propose. (4) Explore any discomfort with ceremony (another faith, none), and help the client raise it with the keeper.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Is there a guideline that would make it easier for you to speak, something you could suggest when they ask?"
  • Watch for: the client feeling unable to raise religious or cultural discomfort. Working: the client knows what will happen at the opening and has one guideline to offer.

4.18 Preparing for the rounds: acquaintance, trust, issues, plans

  • Purpose / when: the convened circle moves through getting acquainted, building understanding and trust, addressing issues, and developing plans [source: NARF EBCI Tab 2].
  • Steps: (1) Explain that early rounds are often about introductions and values, not the offence. (2) Help the client choose what to share in those rounds (for example, a value that matters to them). (3) Prepare for the issues round with the story from 4.8. (4) Prepare ideas the client would want in a plan (for a victim: needs, safety, acknowledgment; for a responsible person: repair they can actually deliver).
  • Example language (illustrative): "When they ask what would help put things right, what would you want on that list?"
  • Watch for: impatience with relationship-building rounds; plans that promise more than the client can keep. Working: the client arrives with realistic proposals.

4.19 Understanding consensus and the court's final say

  • Purpose / when: before a sentencing circle [source: Pranis 2005 via Beyond Intractability; Yeong and Moore 2020; Chartrand 1995].
  • Steps: (1) Explain that consensus can mean everyone can live with the outcome, not full agreement. (2) Explain who has final legal authority in this programme. (3) Discuss how the client will say "I can't agree with that" if needed. (4) Discuss what happens if no agreement is reached; UNODC says failure to agree should not be used against the offender [source: UNODC 2020, p. 17].
  • Example language (illustrative): "Agreeing in the circle doesn't mean you have to pretend you're happy. If something isn't acceptable to you, how would you say so?"
  • Watch for: a victim feeling unable to object to an outcome supported by respected figures [source: Crnkovich]. Working: the client has words for dissent.

4.20 Separate or indirect options when a joint circle is unsuitable

  • Purpose / when: the client is not ready, risk is high, or the programme cannot assure safety. Published sequences include a healing circle for the victim separate from the offender's [source: New Tactics]; Crnkovich recommends support for the victim separate from the abuser; the Scottish framework lists choosing safe communication types and sequencing direct or indirect contact [source: Scottish Government 2026].
  • Steps: (1) Ask the programme which separate or indirect options it offers. (2) Explore with the client what they want to communicate and whether it needs the other person at all. (3) If indirect contact is offered, help prepare the message and the client's response to a reply. (4) Continue trauma treatment independent of the justice process.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Being in the same room isn't the only way to be heard. Would a separate circle or a message passed through the keeper fit better right now?"
  • Watch for: the client experiencing the alternative as second best imposed on them. Working: the client chooses the format.

4.21 Working with a decision not to take part, withdrawal or an unsatisfying circle

  • Purpose / when: the client declines, withdraws, is found unsuitable, or the circle disappoints [synthesis; UNODC 2020 p. 16 on withdrawal].
  • Steps: (1) Affirm that declining or withdrawing is a legitimate choice. (2) Explore guilt, shame or anger, including at community or family reactions. (3) Name what the client still needs (acknowledgment, safety, information) and other routes to it. (4) For a responsible person found unsuitable, process the outcome and return to the work on accountability.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Saying no to the circle was a decision about what you could do safely. What do you still need, and where else might it come from?"
  • Watch for: self-blame; community pressure to reconsider. Working: the client holds the decision without excessive guilt.

4.22 Meaning-making in ongoing therapy

  • Purpose / when: before and after a circle, to integrate it with the client's life story and values [synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) Explore what harmony, repair or justice mean to the client, including concepts from their own tradition (for example, hozho as the Navajo Nation describes it), attributed rather than imposed. (2) For a responsible person: distinguish guilt about actions from global shame; link the plan to the person they want to be. (3) For a victim: explore what acknowledgement did or did not change. (4) Revisit the experience as the client's understanding develops.
  • Example language (illustrative): "In your family's way of seeing things, what would it look like for this to be put right?"
  • Watch for: pressure to forgive (Dine peacemaking seeks forgiveness as a value [source: Navajo Nation brochure]; for an individual client forgiveness stays a choice [synthesis]). Working: the client's account is their own.

4.23 The therapist as keeper, or using circle formats in therapy groups

  • Purpose / when: a therapist wants to keep circles or to use talking-piece rounds in group work [synthesis].
  • Steps: (1) For justice circles, complete the programme's keeper training and work under its authority; trained facilitators are a suitability condition [source: NARF EBCI Tab 3]. (2) Never keep a circle for one's own therapy client in the same matter (multiple relationship; see section 3). (3) For therapeutic or community circles outside the justice system, see XI 101 talking and healing circles and V 156 Way of Council; do not borrow Indigenous ceremony. (4) Check professional insurance covers the activity and the setting.
  • Example language (illustrative, opening a non-justice group round): "We'll pass this object around; only the person holding it speaks, and anyone can pass."
  • Watch for: keeper self-care (named as necessary in NARF EBCI Tab 3); the group being steered by the keeper rather than held. Working: participants report feeling heard, and the keeper does not control outcomes.

5. Handling problems

Most of this section is [synthesis]; source-based points are cited.

  • Client agrees under pressure (court timetable, family, Elders, partner). Slow down; repeat the voluntariness check alone with the client (4.5); remind them consent is revocable [source: UNODC 2020 p. 16]; if the pressure comes from the responsible person, treat it as a safety issue (4.4).
  • Signs of coercive control or ongoing abuse emerge during preparation. Tell the client what you have noticed, review the safety plan, and, with consent, inform the programme; the Scottish framework says the process should pause or end if risk cannot be managed [source: Scottish Government 2026]; link to specialist domestic abuse services. Do not continue preparation as if nothing changed.
  • Breach of a no-contact order or pre-circle contact. Discuss risk and the client's choices; contact the programme with consent; follow mandatory reporting and safeguarding duties where they apply. Crnkovich's account shows how such contact can go unnoticed before a circle.
  • Victim silenced or sidelined in the circle. Crnkovich describes a circle that centred on the accused's needs while the victim spoke rarely and briefly [source: Crnkovich]. Before: agree with the keeper how the victim's voice and supporter will be protected (4.7, 4.9). After: validate the experience, record what the client wants changed, and support a complaint or feedback to the programme if they wish.
  • Overwhelm or dissociation during or after the circle. Use the agreed exit plan (4.10); after, return to stabilisation before any further circle; a follow-up circle can wait [synthesis].
  • Responsible person minimises or blames. Treat as not yet ready (4.3); work on accountability in therapy; tell the client honestly that the programme may find them unsuitable; do not coach performed remorse.
  • Responsible person fails to meet the agreement. Help the client tell the keeper early (4.16); explore obstacles (substance use, money, transport, mental health); follow-up circles exist to adjust agreements [source: NARF EBCI Tab 3].
  • Ambiguity about who decides. Words like equality can conflict with a judge's final authority [source: Crnkovich; Yeong and Moore 2020]; clarify the decision rights with the programme and the client's lawyer before the circle.
  • Language and interpretation problems. Crnkovich notes summarised rather than full interpretation meant some speakers' tone was lost. Ask the programme early for full interpretation and plain-language materials [synthesis on remedy].
  • Cultural mismatch or discomfort with ceremony. Help the client raise it with the keeper (4.17); respect the community's authority over ceremony and the client's right to decline participation in it; consider whether a non-ceremonial restorative process fits better.
  • Rupture with the therapist (the client feels the therapist is pushing the circle or is on the court's side). Acknowledge it, restate that the therapist has no stake in the outcome, and return to the client's own goals [synthesis].
  • Therapist pulled into the process (asked to report on progress, to advise the court, or to keep the circle). Restate role limits; share only what the client has consented to; decline roles you are not trained or permitted for; consult on multiple relationships (section 3) [synthesis].
  • Community fallout (gossip, loss of standing, retaliation after the circle). Assess safety; plan responses; with consent, inform the programme; confidentiality is a circle guideline but cannot be guaranteed outside the room [source: NARF EBCI Tab 4; synthesis].
  • Suicide risk, especially for a responsible person facing imprisonment or public exposure. Use standard risk assessment and safety planning; involve crisis services as needed (988 in the US; Samaritans 116 123 in the UK and Ireland) [synthesis].
  • Young person disengaged or shamed. Return to assent (4.13); check that the process is about accountability, not humiliation [source: NARF EBCI Tab 2]; involve safeguarding leads where needed.
  • Excluded offence or programme absent locally. Explain eligibility honestly (for example, NSW excludes sexual offences [source: Yeong and Moore 2020]); explore other restorative services in this family (see 066 family group conferencing) and continue therapy independent of the justice process.

Sources

← Previous · XV-066Family group conferencingNext · XV-068 →Circles of Support and Accountability