Baltimore Mediation recently had an opportunity to conduct a workshop on mediator ethics to
\nthe Baltimore City Circuit Court. We know how important it is for mediators to examine their
\norientation to practice and we always facilitate discussion of the attendant issues in our
\ncertificated 40-hour trainings. Baltimore Mediation believes that an ethical mediator must
\nexamine ethical questions and grapple with them. <\/p>\n
In training, when Louise Phipps Senft asked the question \u201cWhat makes you a good mediator?\u201d
\nThe responses were varied. A few examples: \u201cI\u2019m fair\u201d, \u201cI have a keen sense of what\u2019s right or
\nwrong\u201d, and \u201cI can get people to agree.\u201d These are viewpoints of settlement oriented mediators.
\nIt is easy to develop an ego around producing results, but that\u2019s the very reason why the
\nmediator ethic of self-determination is so important.<\/p>\n
Respecting self-determination is easy to say, but can be hard to do. Yes of course, people
\nparticipating in mediation should be able to make their own decisions, especially when we think
\nthey are making good decisions. It gets thorny, however, when a mediator perceives that a
\nclient is about to make a decision with disastrous consequences or when a mediator feels they
\ncan \u201csave\u201d someone from themselves.<\/p>\n
This story comes up all the time when Baltimore Mediation trains attorneys. Consider this
\nquestion that we heard in a recent training as an example:<\/p>\n
What if you are in a mediation session, and you just KNOW a person is about to make a terrible
\ndecision. Or you just KNOW that their attorney is being unethical pushing for something\u2013 even
\nthough the person does not seem to see the situation as you do. How could the mediator not
\nstep in?<\/p>\n
Many mediators, especially if they are lawyers, say they would enter into a caucus \u2013 a separate
\nprivate meeting with just the person – and advise them to look a little harder at the deal. This is
\nproblematic for many reasons. First, this assumes that the mediator knows what\u2019s best \u2013 that
\nhaving legal knowledge means they have the whole story. Maybe they do, but maybe not.
\nSecondly, even when truly believing they are protecting and helping the person, the mediator
\nhere is acting out of their own sense of what is right and good. Most critically, self-determination
\nis out the window. This intervention disempowers the person and ruins the deal for the other
\nperson. The mediator here is not a mediator, but now is serving as an advisor. <\/p>\n
If you read this scenario and think that mediator intervention is the best course, then we\u2019d urge
\nyou to consider your orientation to your practice. Look critically at your strategies and consider
\nlearning more reflective and eliciting practices. Do you use a directive approach as a mediator?
\nRespecting self is a hallmark of good mediation practice and at Baltimore Mediation we take it
\nvery seriously.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Baltimore Mediation recently had an opportunity to conduct a workshop on mediator ethics to
\nthe Baltimore City Circuit Court. We know how important it is for mediators to examine their
\norientation to practice and we always facilitate discussion of the attendant issues in our
\ncertificated 40-hour trainings. Baltimore Mediation believes that an ethical mediator must
\nexamine ethical questions and grapple with them. <\/p>\n
In training, when Louise Phipps Senft asked the question \u201cWhat makes you a good mediator?\u201d
\nThe responses were varied. A few examples: \u201cI\u2019m <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[242],"tags":[],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n