The Ethics Of 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

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 has no legal authority to impose a settlement on the parties thus functions more as an invited guest who can be required to leave if one or both bargaining parties no longer desire the mediators continued involvement in the bargaining process (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2012). A mediator 's primary function is to identify issues, explore possible bases for agreement, discuss the consequences of reaching impasse, and encourage each party to accommodate the interests of other parties through negotiation. However, unlike arbitrators, mediators lack

“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

According to McCorkle and Reese (2015) many disputants may feel that their ideas are going to be perceived as inconsequential” (p 121). There is nothing worse in any conflict than not feeling your concerns acknowledge and have a feeling that whatever is said is meaningless. However, once everyone’s concerns have been acknowledged, it is up to the mediator to separate interest from position. Mostly every disputant has an interest, and defines the problem as a way to change the other responsible party’s behavior and not

As the mediator I am a thirty four year old female and mother of five. I was raised around many cultures growing up with a similar cultural background of the female disputant. This conflict can be particularly complex for myself as mediator because of the potential bias that can occur with cultural differences. Even though I share similarities with the mother as mediator I must bring a non-bias perception to the resolution process and try to view the conflict from both parties’ sides with a resolution that satisfies both parties and the child. “Parties who perceived mediator bias in favor of the other party were much less accepting of the mediator’s actions.”(Poitras, 2009) The parties must have trust in the mediator if the dispute resolution

I never imagined myself as a mediator, but prior to beginning this class I learned from previous students that it included role plays in which we mediated disputes between our classmates. I incorrectly assumed we would be thrust in a simple situation like helping mutual friends work out some simple disagreement. I did not realize we would practice our conflict management skills in so formal and serious a setting. I found the prospect somewhat daunting, but as the semester progressed I became increasingly comfortable with mediation. I performed well in certain aspects of the mediations and struggled, but improved in, others, culminating in my best mediation yet. In short, I improved my mediating abilities throughout the semester, progressing from an average mediator who performs adequately to an excellent one who effectively uses key mediation tactics, at least in role plays.

The awareness of these major differences in perception is very beneficial. This leaves both parties suddenly aware of what led to the dispute at hand. A careful consideration of the different positions, important issues, and alternate perceptions can give everyone an understanding of how difficult it is for a judge and/or jury to come to a fair conclusion. Who is right? Who is telling the truth? Who can prove their claims with proof?

Mediation is an ethical obligation. For those such as Jane, who have suggestions on what could be done to accommodate and seems out of the company’s will, a mediator may be able to make both parties meet half way or come to some sort of agreement. Ethically, companies “are obligated to ‘make meditation accessible to those who would like to use it,’ the Guidelines suggest that, in assessing whether to provide disability accommodations, ‘the broadest definition of disability should be applied, including chronic conditions, episodic symptoms, and temporary disabilities.’" (Cohen, 2005, n.p.).

The process of adjusting or settling disputes in a friendly manner through extra judicial means.

Whether or not disputants reach an agreement, the mediation approach offers a safe place where no one need feel embarrassed” (Griffin, 2009).

A problem that may be associated with mediation is power imbalance. Unfortunately, the mediator is only a third party which is present to assist the disputants with their communication to ensure it does not break down and help them reach a decision; however “the parties are in ultimate control, the mediator should not intervene even if one party has more bargaining power than the other” . This can in some cases result in an unfair agreement. Another adverse side of mediation is that; “basically anyone can hang out a sign and practice mediation” - meaning that mediators do not need to undergo a long period of study to ensure their professionalism and knowledge of dispute resolution. This can be harmful to the system and may result in cases being handled by unprofessional personals.

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

Consider how an imbalance between 'high power' and 'low power' parties might shape a negotiation process. How might an experienced mediator deal with this problem? Provide practical examples where appropriate.