ana schofield, Olympia WA email@example.com 09/14/04
A touchy subject!
Beyond neutrality requires an understanding of depth psychology. We in the 'field' of CR; I mean field in terms of interacting fields based on new theories in particle physics concerning 'super strings' and 'super symmetry, willy nilly skim the surface of the human mind, as if we know.
To this 'upstart' mediator, going beyond neutrality means deep self reflective practices that may evoke we mediators to own our 'personal' stuff. Beyond neutrality may mean going beyond opposites to transcend the opposites that currently dominate the human mind. Judaism being but one.
See Swiss Psychiatrist Carl Jung's work for reference and further reflection.
Bernie, we met during the 2001 initiation of the Conflict Resolution program at Antioch Mcgregor, in Yellow Springs, Ohio. I have NOT forgotten. Wishing you well in your endevours to uncover the 'holy grail' in mediation. Ana Schofield M.A. (Conflict Resolution) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org
Z. Locke Lewis, Dallas, TX 08/19/04
Mr. Mayer has identified most of the crises in the developing mediation profession, but not all. The judicial system must change their view of mediation as yet a second tier of costs associated with litigation. Whether or not mediation produces resolution, it cannot help but further understanding of the conflict. It is often personalities that thwart resolution, but even that can be exposed and/or illuminated during mediation. Any developing profession will go through a crisis. It is the dedication and perserverance of the individuals practicing the profession, and the quality of the results that will ultimately decide the survival of mediation as a professional pursuit. But, hey, mediation has been around for a long time.
Sterling , Oakland CA 08/02/04
I agree with some of Mr. Mayers' comments, specifically on the need to broaden our role as a field. I have been approached several times by participants in workshops I facilitated on Non-Defensive Communication to help them in thinking through how they would respond to others in difficult situations involving both interpersonal and intra-organizational conflict. I agree to work with them with the provision that I would not act as a neutral in their dispute unless my role in working with them as an individual is fully disclosed. In fact, they haven't been seeking the assistance of a neutral at all. I believe from their comments that they are seeking skills with which to be their own conflict resolvers, and I am happy to serve in that role.