Ethical Issues Of Divorce Mediation

These mediation proceedings are not conducted under oath, do not follow traditional rules of evidence and are not limited to developing the facts. Mediators are expected to draw out the parties' perceptions and feelings about the events that have brought them into conflict. It also encourages parties to acknowledge

There has been a long history regarding reform proposals and recommendations surrounding the law of divorce. The first legislation which was introduced in divorce law was the Matrimonial Causes Act 1857, which allowed people to obtain a divorce. However, today the provisions within that act are outdated, yet, it represented society in 1857. In 1937, legislation altered to catch up with societal changes and additional grounds of divorce were introduced. This again occurred in 1973, where legislation changed altering the grounds and facts in which a divorce could be obtained. This is the current legislation relied upon today.

Many times in counseling sessions, situations arise that require the ability to make ethical decisions. When confronting these types of situations, counselors often refer to the Elizabeth Reynold Welfel’s Ethical Model, comprised of 10 steps, to guide them in making an ethical decision. These steps provide a framework which counselors may use to help with ethical dilemmas. Below are the 10 steps in the Ethical Decision-Making Model provided by Elizabeth Welfel in the book Ethics in Counseling and Psychotherapy to examine the multiple relationship case described in Herlihy and Corey’s ACA Ethical Standards Casebook (2006, p. 242) "A

A special research field in the mediation literature intends to shed light on the question, how influential the impact of mediator’s characteristics and motivations on the mediation process is. Concerning the state of research, the studies of this debate show a divergent picture. There are scientists who have queried the significance of mediator’s impartiality (Bercovitch/Houston 1996; Kydd 2003, Touval 1982; Zartmann/Touval 1996). Scholars like Saadia Touval have underpinned that mediators are often biased and can perform their tasks just as well if not better as impartial mediators. Additionally, Touval and Zartmann stated in their study that mediation is an exercise in power politics: “leverage is the ticket to mediation” (Touval/Zartmann 1989: 129). In 2003, Kydd finds that mediators use their leverage to one of the two conflicting parties and therefore constraint concessions. Thus, the mediator must be biased to be effective. This means that merely a mediator who is biased towards one side can credibility tell them that the opponent will not make peace without the concession. Carnevale and Arad (1996) also remarked the importance of bias. Nevertheless, they suggest that impartiality should not be underestimated and therefore be taken in to consideration.

Traditional approaches to mediation assume that a conflict’s parties and a mediator share one compelling reason for initiating mediation: a desire to reduce,abate,or resolve a conflict.To this end,both sides may invest personnel,time,and resources in the mediation.This shared humanititarian interest maybe the only genuine reason in a few instances of mediation,but normally even this interest intertwines with other, less altruistic,

“A mediator is a third party who assists interested parties in negotiating a conflict. A mediator controls the mediation process but does not have authority to decide the outcome for the parties” (Barsky, 2007). A mediator, in a given situation, helps to dissolve the conflict and looks to the best interest

Fells (2016, p. 211) wrote “ just as a doctor works to bring a person back to health, so too a mediator works to bring a deadlocked negotiation back to a situation where the parties can reach agreement”. This essay discusses this statement with reference to contemporary research on dispute resolution. In order to comprehend how this is achieved, we must consider the essence of mediation, the different types of mediation and what mediators do. Negotiation and mediation are process used to resolve opposing preferences between parties. Negotiation is defined in Fells (2016, p. 3) as “a process by which two parties with differences that they need to resolve try to reach agreement through

Going through with a divorce is a costly endeavor, both financially and emotionally, so having an affordable family lawyer Plano TX to work with for child custody matters is important. Going the route of child custody mediation provides parents with a viable alternative to the traditional divorce process and allows them to come up with a workable solution to benefit both parents and the children. Here are 5 benefits of using child custody mediation:

Mediation is a different process to reach a resolution for parties that find themselves in a family court matter. Mediation is a part of the process ran by the courts by individuals that are unbiased and yet knowledgably about family law matters and the law. The courts want couples to give mediation a try before taking the matter before the judge in case some issues can be worked out beforehand. Attorneys are not included in this process. What happens in mediation is all parties will work on the issues at hand as peaceful as possible and in a manner to hopefully reach amicable outcomes, with a third party to help oversee this process and help negotiate their issues. These issues that can be heard in mediation are many and can be a wide variety of needs from the parties. These issues can be negotiation of assets, debts, child and spousal support, and visitation and custody matters of any children involved in the case.

Dignity and worth of a person was used a lot in the interview. I took into consideration that my client was upset and hurt that her parents were getting a divorce. I helped my client understand that her opinion does matter during the divorce and that she may want to talk to her parents about the situation. Also coming from a divorced family I can understand why my client is feeling upset and feel that she has no opinion in the matter. I explained to her that she does have a right to explain her side and how she feels about the divorce. Importance of human relationships was basically the whole idea of the interview. We conducted and interview on how my client felt about her relationship between her parents and herself. I helped my client to

Several of us, might already be using the different techniques that are mentioned throughout this paper when dealing with conflict or mediating or coaching others who are involved in conflict. Prior to this course, I thought there was only one way to facilitate the mediation process, and it was the mediator’s role to work that model until the mediation process had convened. Kenneth Cloke writes in several of his case studies from the book, The Crossroads of Conflict, that he would regularly work with clients and “coach” them through the dispute. This took place through multiple sessions with the clients. Conducting mediations through staggered meeting times allows for numerous opportunities for the mediator to work with the clients to develop their own confidence and competence to successfully involve themselves in the conflict in a constructive way. There is a common core and skill set used in between mediation and conflict coaching, but at the same time, conflict coaching requires a separate and distinct process combined with a separate theory of its’

The couple asked me if I know anyone or a place where they can get help because they still love each other and do not really want a divorce unless it is inevitable and for the purpose of raising their son jointly. I told them that I am a mediator and has been doing mediation since 1984, shared information about some of my works, successes, and also informed them of other resources in PG County. They told me that they will like me to mediate the dispute between both couples. So, I scheduled them to meet with me at my office on March 14, 2016 at 6.00 PM. I am going to name the mediators John and Kelly (which is not their real name) for the purpose of this paper.

Merriam-Webster dictionary defines an ethical dilemma as a problem where a person has to choose between a moral and an immoral act. Attorneys come into contact daily which involves the attorney-client relationships. The attorney-client privilege is a legal privilege that works to keep communications between a lawyer and his/her client secret (silence is golden). The privilege is a legal doctrine that protects confidential information, the contents and actions related to the privileged communication must preserve the integrity of the attorney-client privilege. This paper presents the ethical dilemmas of the attorney-client privileges, trust and the importance of adequate closure in attorney-client relationships.

Throughout the years there has been many definitions of mediation. Nevertheless one the most acceptable definition of mediation refers to this procedure as a “…process in which the participants, with the support of a mediator, identify issues, develop options, consider alternatives and make decisions about future actions…” . They also described mediators as the third party assisting the participants in reaching their decision. This process should form a part of the pre-trial civil litigation process as its advantages on the legal system and the community outweigh its disadvantages. The distinguishing models of mediation make it a suitable approach for all or most civil cases.

An agreement to mediate future disputes means that the parties want to present their side to a mediator, a third party who is neutral. This mediator’s