logo czasopisma

Articles

No. 3 (2024): Law & Social Bonds Nr 4 (50) 2024

Paradigmatic Models of Mediation, Mandatory Eclectics or a Direct Decision

Submitted
13 March 2024
Published
21-08-2024

Abstract

 

The article conceptually reviews the paradigmatic models of mediation, to understand the professional role of a mediator and the scope of ethical obligations. The description of each model showcases the corresponding action of a mediator and the standard of intervention in the process and studies their effectiveness in achieving the goals of mediation. In this regard, the paper examines the content of a mediator's ethical obligations and potential dilemmas in different mediation models, which might be associated with a mediator's direct and uniform choice of a particular mediation model. The article emphasizes the importance of a mediator's competence for the proper flow of a process and, at the same time, analyzes the necessity to strictly demark it from the professional role of an attorney, which is essential for the ethical execution of a mediator's role.  

References

  1. Alexander Nadja, International and Comparative Mediation Legal Perspectives. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2009.
    View in Google Scholar
  2. Alfini James, „Evaluative versus Facilitative Mediation: A Discussion” Florida State University Law Review, No. 4 (1997): 926. https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1447&context=lr.
    View in Google Scholar
  3. Anderson Dorcas Quek, „Facilitative Versus Evaluative Mediation, Is there Necessarily a Dichotomy?” Asian Journal on Mediation, (2013): 68. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2889142.
    View in Google Scholar
  4. Boulle Laurence, Mediation: Principles, Process, Practice. Chatswood, N.S.W: Lexis Nexis Butterworths, 2005.
    View in Google Scholar
  5. Boulle Laurence, Miryana Nesic, Mediation: Principles, Process. London: Tottel, 2001.
    View in Google Scholar
  6. Boulle, Laurence, Mediation: Principles, Process, Practice. Butterworths: Lexis Nexis, 2011.
    View in Google Scholar
  7. Bush Robert Baruch, „Substituting Mediation for Arbitration: The Growing Market for Evaluative Mediation, and What it Means for the ADR Field” Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, No. 1 (2002):122. https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/drlj/vol3/iss1/6.
    View in Google Scholar
  8. Bush Robert Baruch, Joseph Folger, The Promise of Mediation: Responding to Conflict Through Empowerment and Recognition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994.
    View in Google Scholar
  9. Bush, Robert Baruch, Folger, Joseph, The Promise of Mediation: The Transformative Approach to Conflict. United States of Amerika: Jossey-Bass, 2005.
    View in Google Scholar
  10. Chern Cyril, The Commercial Mediator’s Handbook. New York: Informa Law from Routledge, 2015.
    View in Google Scholar
  11. Chowdhury Jamila, Gender Power and Mediation, Evaluative Mediation to Challenge the Power of Social Discourses. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars, 2012.
    View in Google Scholar
  12. Chowdhury Jamila, Gender Power and Mediation, Evaluative Mediation to Challenge the Power of Social Discourses. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars, 2012.
    View in Google Scholar
  13. Clark Bryan, Lawyers and Mediation. Heidelberg: Springer, 2012.
    View in Google Scholar
  14. Coben James Richard, Peter Thompson, „The Haghighi Trilogy and the Minnesota Civil Mediation Act: Exposing a Phantom Menace Casting a Pall Over the Development of ADR in Minnesota” Hamline Journal of Public Law & Policy, 20 (1999): 299-324. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1723301.
    View in Google Scholar
  15. Craver Charles, „The Use of Mediation to Resolve Community Disputes, Washington University Journal of Law & Policy” New Directions in Community Lawyering Social Entrepreneurship, and Dispute Resolution, 48 (2015): 237. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy/vol48/iss1/13.
    View in Google Scholar
  16. Dubler Nancy, Carol Liebman, Bioethics Mediation, A Guide to Shaping Shared Solutions. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 2011.
    View in Google Scholar
  17. Ethical Mediation, Advocate, Vancouver Bar Association, Vol. 79, part 6, 857.
    View in Google Scholar
  18. Feehily Ronán, International Commercial Mediation, Law and Regulation in Comparative Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022.
    View in Google Scholar
  19. Feerick, John et al., „Standards of Professional Conduct in Alternative Dispute Resolution” Journal of Dispute Resolution, No. 1 (1995): 101-102.
    View in Google Scholar
  20. Field Rachael, Jonathan Crowe, Mediation Ethics, From Theory to Practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020.
    View in Google Scholar
  21. Folger Joseph, Robert A. Baruch Bush, „Transformative Mediation, A self-assessment” International Journal of Conflict Engagement and Resolution, No.1 (2014): 20-34.
    View in Google Scholar
  22. Freund James, Anatomy of a Mediation: a Dealmaker's Distinctive approach to Resolving Dollar Disputes and other Commercial Conflicts. New York: Practising Law Institute, 2012.
    View in Google Scholar
  23. General Reports of the XIXth Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law Rapports Généraux du XIXème Congrès de l'Académie Internationale de Droit Comparé. ed. Schauer Martin, Bea Verschraegen. The Netherlands: Springer, 2017.
    View in Google Scholar
  24. Golann Dwight, „Variations in Mediation: How – and Why – Legal Mediators Change Styles in the Course of a Case, Journal of Dispute Resolution” University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository, No. 1 (2000): 42. https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1047&context=jdr.
    View in Google Scholar
  25. Hinshaw Art, Andrea Kupfer Schneider, Sarah Rudolph Cole, Discussions in Dispute Resolutioni. The Foundational Articles. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021.
    View in Google Scholar
  26. Hopt Klaus, Felix Steffek, Principles and Regulation in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
    View in Google Scholar
  27. Hyman Jonathan, Lela Love, „If Portia Were a Mediator: An Inquiry into Justice in Mediation” Clinical Law Review, (2002): 157. https://www.pgpmediation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/If-Portia-Were-a-Mediator-9-Clinical-L-Rev-157.pdf.
    View in Google Scholar
  28. Imperati Samuel, „Alternative Dispute Resolution Symposium Issue: Mediator Practice Models: The Intersection of Ethics and Stylistic Practices in Mediation” Willamette Law Review, (1997): 2-7. https://www2.mediate.com/ICM/docs/Willamette%20Law%20Review%20Excerpt.pdf.
    View in Google Scholar
  29. Kandashvili Irakli, Mediation. Tbilisi: Cezanne, 2022 (in Georgian).
    View in Google Scholar
  30. Laflin Maureen, „Preserving the Integrity of Mediation Through the Adoption of Ethical Rules for Lawyer-Mediators” Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy, No. 1 (2000): 486. https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjlepp/vol14/iss1/14.
    View in Google Scholar
  31. Lee Joel, Marcus Tao Shien Lim, Contemporary Issues In Mediation. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company, 2016.
    View in Google Scholar
  32. Levin Murray, „The Propriety of Evaluative Mediation: Concerns about the Nature and Quality of an Evaluative Opinion” Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, Vol. XVI (2001): 267-296. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/159560678.pdf.
    View in Google Scholar
  33. Love Lela, „The Top Ten Reasons Why Mediators Should Not Evaluate” Florida State University Review, No. 4 (1997): 939. https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1448&context=lr.
    View in Google Scholar
  34. Love Lela, John Cooley, „The Intersection of Evaluation by Mediators and Informed Consent: Warning the Unwary” Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, No. 1 (2005): 45-46.
    View in Google Scholar
  35. Mediation in International Commercial and Investment Disputes, ed. Catharine Titi Katia Fach Gómez. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
    View in Google Scholar
  36. Moberly Robert, „Mediator Gag Rules: Is It Ethical for Mediators to Evaluate or Advise?” South Texas Law Review, 38 (1997): 772.
    View in Google Scholar
  37. Moffitt Michael, Andrea Kupfer Schneider, Examples & Explanations: Dispute Resolution. United States: Aspen Publishers, 2011.
    View in Google Scholar
  38. Munjal Diksha, „Tug of War: Evaluative versus Facilitative Mediator” Pretoria Student Law Review, 6 (2012): 72-73, 79. https://upjournals.up.ac.za/index.php/pslr/article/view/2137/2022.
    View in Google Scholar
  39. Noce Dorothy Della, „Evaluative Mediation: In Search of Practice Competencies” Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 27 (2009): 139, 208-209. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2263813.
    View in Google Scholar
  40. Nolan-Haley Jacqueline, „Court Mediation and the Search for Justice through Law” Washington University Law Review, No. 1 (1996): 65-66.
    View in Google Scholar
  41. Nolan-Haley Jacqueline, „Informed Consent in Mediation: A Guiding Principle for Truly Educated Decision-making” Notre Dame Law Review, 74 (1999): 797, 834-838. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/274/.
    View in Google Scholar
  42. Nylund Anna, Kaijus Ervasti, Lin Adrian, Nordic Mediation Research. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2019.
    View in Google Scholar
  43. Ordover Abraham, Andrea Doneff, Alternatives to Litigation, Mediation, Arbitration and the Art of Dispute Resolution. Boulder: National Institute for Trial Advocacy, 2014.
    View in Google Scholar
  44. Pou Charles, „Assuring Excellence, or Merely Reassuring? Policy and Practice in Promoting Mediator Quality” Journal of Dispute Resolution, No. 2 (2004): 303-354. https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1470&context=jdr.
    View in Google Scholar
  45. Riskin Leonard, „Mediator Orientations, Strategies and Techniques” Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation, No. 9 (1994): 111-114. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1506704.
    View in Google Scholar
  46. Riskin Leonard, „Understanding Mediators' Orientations, Strategies, and Techniques: A Grid for the Perplexed” Harvard Negotiation Law Review, No. 7 (1996): 8-51, 35-36. http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/facultypub/668.
    View in Google Scholar
  47. Roberts Kenneth, „Mediating the Evaluative-Facilitative Debate: Why Both Parties Are Wrong and a Proposal for Settlement” Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, No. 1 (2007): 192, 198.
    View in Google Scholar
  48. Roberts Marian, Mediation in Family Disputes, Principles of Practice. London-New York: Routledge-Taylor and Francis Group, 2014.
    View in Google Scholar
  49. Russel Murray, The Mediation Handbook, Effective Strategies for Litigators. Denver Colorado: Bradford Publishing Company, 2011.
    View in Google Scholar
  50. Santos Hugo Luz dos, Towards a Four-Tiered Model of Mediation Against the Background of a Narrative of Social Sub-systems in Everlasting Cross-Fertilization. Singapore: Springer, 2023.
    View in Google Scholar
  51. Self-Determination in Mediation, The Art and Science of Mirrors and Lights. ed. Dan Simon, Rara West. Lan Ham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2022.
    View in Google Scholar
  52. Shapira Omer, „Joining Forces in Search for Answers: The Use of Therapeutic Jurisprudence in the Realm of Mediation Ethics” Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, No. 2 (2008): 244.
    View in Google Scholar
  53. Shapira Omer, A Theory of Mediator’s Ethics, Foundations, Rationale and Application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
    View in Google Scholar
  54. Stark James, „Preliminary Reflections on the Establishment of a Mediation Clinic” Clinical Law Review, 2 (1996): 487. https://digitalcommons.lib.uconn.edu/law_papers/166.
    View in Google Scholar
  55. Stark James, „The Ethics of Mediation Evaluation: Some Troublesome Questions And Tentative Proposals, from an Evaluative Lawyer Mediator” South Texas Law Review, 38 (1997): 795. https://digitalcommons.lib.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1198&context=law_papers.
    View in Google Scholar
  56. Stempel Jeffrey, „The Inevitability of the Eclectic: Liberating ADR from Ideology” Journal of Dispute Resolution, No. 2 (2000): 247, 275. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/217.
    View in Google Scholar
  57. Stitt Alan, Mediation Practical Guide. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis, 2016.
    View in Google Scholar
  58. Tallodi Timea, How Parties Experience Mediation, An Interview Study on Relationship Changes in Workplace Mediation. Springer International Publishing, 2020.
    View in Google Scholar
  59. The Negotiator’s Fieldbook, The Desk Reference for the Experienced Negotiator, ed. Schneider Andrea Kupfer, Christopher Honeyman. Washington, DC: ABA Section of Dispute Resolution, 2006.
    View in Google Scholar
  60. Waldman Ellen, Mediation Ethics, Cases and Commentaries. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010.
    View in Google Scholar
  61. Weckstein Donald, „In Praise of Party Empowerment And of Mediator Activism” Willamette Law Review, 33 (1997): 526.
    View in Google Scholar
  62. Wolski Bobette, „An Ethical Evaluation Process for Mediators: A Preliminary Exploration of Factors Which Impact Ethical Decision-Making” Ethics in Alternative Dispute Resolution, No. 1 (2017-2018): 69, 70, 71.
    View in Google Scholar
  63. Zena Zumeta, „A Facilitative Mediator Responds” Journal of Dispute Resolution, No. 2 (2000): 337. https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2000/iss2/8.
    View in Google Scholar

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.