Criminal justice reformers spill much ink in explicating the benefits and challenges of restorative justice and therapeutic jurisprudence.1 These writings show that our fields have much in common. They incorporate normative frameworks and methodologies through which to express their values in criminal justice.2 In doing so, they challenge modern justice to become more humane.3 Restorative justice asks criminal justice practitioners and legal professionals to involve people in identifying their needs, repairing harm and building strong relationships, rather than imposing a proportionate amount of harm on perpetrators.4 Therapeutic jurisprudence recognizes that legal rules, procedures, and actors have pro-therapeutic or anti-therapeutic effects, and looks for methods to prioritize and realize the former.5 Both propose a relational, participatory criminal justice process that departs from modern standards by providing citizens with opportunities for empowerment and to have their needs met.6 Some have sought to identify areas of theoretical and practical convergence between the two fields regarding their implications for criminal justice reform.7