Find Mediators Near You:

Mediator’s Ethics: Does It Include A Just Outcome For The Disputants?

Yesterday I attended the Southern California Mediation Association’s 21st Annual Conference. The piece by Professor/Dean Peter Robinson of The Straus Institute of Dispute Resolution at Pepperdine University really caused me to examine my practice. Although the talk was billed as “Ethics for Mediators”, Professor Robinson provoked us to question whether mediator’s have a heightened duty to make sure that whatever agreements we “broker” have legitimacy, integrity and meet legal standards. The legal standards would, of course, include only those agreements which were not entered under duress or coercion, were based upon informed consent and entered into by a person of sound mind and capacity. Robinson suggests that this is all the more important because if a party enters into an agreement in the context of mediation, he or she can never establish that the agreement was unfair and therefore set it aside later. Hmmm…This puts a burden upon the lawyer mediator that I’m not sure I’m willing to accept. I was pretty satisfied being staunchly “impartial” and allowing the parties to exercise their self determination. And yet….It’s noteworthy to point out that there are Model Standards for Mediators, which are a little different from those adopted here in California, that require both self-determination and fairness. Occasionally, these contradict one another. I have frequently presided over mediations in which I believed that one side was getting an unfair “deal”–but did not intervene to re-balance the terms of a deal which both sides agreed to enter into. While I routinely “test” whether there is money left on the table, for example, I typically refrain from interfering in a negotiation which seems to me to be imbalanced. I assume that each party, always acting through their attorneys in my case, have their own reasons for doing what they are about to do–even if it doesn’t make sense to me. There is something driving them to reach the deal that they strike–and I’m generally satisfied that I need not safeguard the “outcome”, just the fairness of the process. Robinson’s lecture suggests otherwise. I’m still examining…

                        author

Jan Frankel Schau

Attorney Jan Frankel Schau is a highly skilled neutral, engaged in full-time dispute resolution. Following a successful career spanning two decades in litigation, she has mediated over 700 cases for satisfied clients. Ms. Schau understands the nuances of trial and settlement practice as well as client relations and balancing the… MORE >

Featured Members

ad
View all

Read these next

Category

[NAWJ Podcast] Technology in the Courts and in ADR: Meeting the Moment

JAMS ADR Blog by Chris PooleIn a recent podcast produced by the National Association of Women Judges (NAWJ), Richard Birke, executive director of the JAMS Institute, and JAMS neutrals Hon. Frank Maas...

By Richard Birke
Category

Mediating in Cases in Domestic Violence – Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Kluwer Mediation BlogIn a one day survey of Domestic Violence Services provided in Ireland on this day last year (6 November 2012), the following statistics were recorded: 537 women and...

By Sabine Walsh
Category

Worldviews…….Do You Have One?

What is the basis for a mediator's approach to mediation? On what does a mediator base his/her decisions? The role of mediator is often described as a third party neutral...

By Anne Giacalone DiDomenico
×