What is Mediation?
Mediation may be thought of as "assisted negotiation." Negotiation may be thought of as "communications for agreement."
Hence, mediation is "assisted communications for agreement."
Central to mediation is the concept of "informed consent." So long as participants understand the nature of a contemplated mediation process and effectively consent to participate in the described process, virtually any mediation process is possible and appropriate.
Key Qualities of the Mediation Process
Voluntary - You can leave at any time for any reason, or no reason.
Collaborative - As no participant in mediation can impose anything on anyone, everyone is motivated to work together to solve the issues and reach best agreements.
Controlled - Each participant has complete decision-making power and a veto over each and every provision of any mediated agreement. Nothing can be imposed on you.
Confidential - Mediation is generally confidential, as you desire and agree, be that by statute, contract, rules of evidence and/or privilege. Mediation discussions and all materials developed for a mediation are generally not admissible in any subsequent court or other contested proceeding, except for a finalized and signed mediated agreement. Your mediator is obligated to describe the extent of mediation confidentiality and exceptions to that confidentiality. The extent of confidentiality for any "caucus meetings" (meetings between the mediator and individual parties) should also be defined.
Informed - The mediation process offers a full opportunity to obtain and incorporate legal and other expert information and advice. Individual or mutually acceptable experts can be retained. Expert advice is never determinative in mediation. The participants always retain decision-making power. Mediators are bound to encourage parties to obtain legal counsel and to advise them to have any mediated agreement involving legal issues reviewed by independent legal counsel prior to signing. Whether legal advice is sought is, ultimately, a decision of each mediation participant.
Impartial, Neutral, Balanced and Safe - The mediator has an equal and balanced responsibility to assist each mediating party and cannot favor the interests of any one party over another, nor should the mediator favor a particular result in the mediation. Your mediator is ethically obligated to acknowledge any substantive bias on issues in discussion. The mediator's role is to ensure that parties reach agreements in a voluntarily and informed manner, and not as a result of coercion or intimidation.
Self-Responsible and Satisfying - Based upon having actively participated in voluntarily resolving issues, participant satisfaction and the likelihood of compliance are found to be elevated through mediation compared to court options.
Biography
Jim Melamed co-founded Resourceful Internet Solutions (RIS) and Mediate.com in 1996. Before this, Jim founded The Mediation Center in Eugene, Oregon in 1983 and served as Executive Director of the national Academy of Family Mediators from 1987 to 1993.
Jim is past-Chair of the Oregon Dispute Resolution Commission and a member of the Oregon State Bar. Jim teaches Mediation at the Pepperdine University School of Law's Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution.
Jim was the first President and Executive Director of the Oregon Mediation Association (1985) and received the OMA's 2003 Award for Excellence.
Jim Received the Oregon State Bar Dispute Resolution Section's 2006 Sidney Lezak Award of Excellence and the 2007 John Haynes Distinguished Mediator Award from the Association for Conflict Resolution.
Jim's undergraduate degree is in in psychology, with honors, from Stanford University and his law degree is from the University of Oregon.
Additional articles by James Melamed
Comments
 |
|
| jaba ,
Dar Es Salaam |
06/07/09 |
| so useful |
|
|
|
|
Am currently doing a course on A.D.R at the University of Dar Es Salaam, to be frank, i have found this article quite useful! Thanks, keep it up! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jaba ,
Dar Es Salaam |
jabashadrack@gmail.com
06/07/09 |
| so useful |
|
|
|
|
Am currently doing a course on A.D.R at the University of Dar Es Salaam, to be frank, i have found this article quite useful! Thanks, keep it up! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jaba ,
Dar Es Salaam |
jabashadrack@gmail.com
06/07/09 |
| so useful |
|
|
|
|
Am currently doing a course on A.D.R at the University of Dar Es Salaam, to be frank, i have found this article quite useful! Thanks, keep it up! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| bonita ,
tyler tx |
12/08/07 |
| participant to a court ordered mediation |
|
|
|
|
I had been a participant to a court ordered
mediation, i was very much frustrated since my expectation was not fulfilled. It was my expectation that i could meet the other party face to face on the bargaining table, however it was the other way around the mediator conducted the bargaining session separately on a closed door session. All parties should have been on the bargaining table. I consider it biased mediation,since i should have seen and heard the bargaining in figures of the other party. Do you think it was a mediation? well, the end result was an impasse as i absolutely disagreed since the bargaining in figures was not transparent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Monica ,
Ogden UT |
04/18/07 |
| This is not what I had expected |
|
|
|
|
The Office Administrator that I had explained my situation to told me she would contact the other party involved re: mediation that same day and would call me back letting me know where things were at. Two weeks later during a heated conversation the other party informed me that he had spoken with this office person several times. I called the Office administrator/Case manager the next morning to see why there had been several conversations with the other party and I haven't heard anything. In that 20 min conversation I was told they do not get back to me unless the other party agreed even though I had requested for her to call me and tell me where things stood after contacting him. I had also explained to her that due to the high level of conflict and the effect its having on our kids I do not know who is right or wrong anymore. I was told that because the other party had concerns of the cost, he expected me to send an email with what I wanted, she stated "he has a right to be worried about the money", she had also informed me that "I can't control the other party by telling him what to do" when I tried to explain my feelings about this and why. She then instructed me to email the other party my expectations telling me how I needed to watch my wording. My purpose was to establish a co-parenting plan, everything she instructed me to do had been done several times. When I contacted this office and spoke with this person I explained all I wanted was for the other party to tell me what his day to day involvement would be to eliminate me expecting anything more and for it to be in writing.
I have decided againts mediation to establish a co-parenting plan. I obviously was mistaken on what mediation was about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See All 16 Comments
