Earlier this month this blog reported that the St. Louis Symphony Orchestra, on strike for eight weeks over a salary dispute, had agreed to mediation between musicians and management.
Thanks to the help of a federal mediator, the symphony, one of the oldest in the U.S., has ended its strike and will resume its concert schedule.
Posted in News about ADR
We don’t accomplish anything in this world alone…and whatever happens is the result of the whole tapestry of one’s life and all the weavings of individual threads from one to another that creates something.
Posted in Mediation Quotes
For some years now here in the U.S. a debate has raged regarding depictions of violence and conflict in the media. Some would argue that the media glorify violence, positing it as the most effective and direct means of resolving conflict. And that in depictions of conflict by the media, conflict itself becomes the sole focus, with little meaningful analysis of the forces giving rise to conflict, no understanding of the underlying interests at its heart, and no chance to understand the different perspectives that exist among the parties to the conflict. Whether this is accurate or not I’ll leave for others to debate.
What I can say with certainty, however, is that while conflict no doubt sells newspapers and fills seats at the multiplex, conflict resolution just doesn’t seem to have the same panache. Let’s face it, no one makes movies about mediation. And no one has ever made an animated cartoon about mediation.
But that’s all changed, thanks to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The DVA has produced a cartoon short, The Three Little Pigs Go to Mediation. Don’t miss seeing the Three Little Pigs and the Big Bad Wolf work out their differences with the help of the Wise Old Owl, an experienced mediator who uses the facilitative model.
Two earlier posts discussed a controversial decision here in Massachusetts by a Superior Court judge in a case known as Massachusetts Port Authority v. Employers Insurance of Wausau, a Mutual Company (Civil Action No. 95-3079-A). In this case a judge held that a defendant’s failure to heed the advice of mediators could constitute evidence of bad faith refusal to settle. Because the decision seemingly disregards Massachusetts law which protects the confidentiality of communications made during the course of a mediation, this decision could have adverse impact on public confidence in the mediation process.
The text of the decision at the time of those postings was not available in an electronic format on the Internet. However, I have since been able to obtain a paper copy of the decision and put it into a PDF format. Click here to download it.
Just a few weeks ago on a chilly but gloriously sunlit January morning I attended the wedding of two dear friends at our local town hall. What made this particular wedding so unique is that the happy couple had been together for thirty-eight years before getting married. This was also the first marriage between two men to be performed in this small Massachusetts town.
The twenty of us who were present were deeply moved by this ceremony which honored almost forty years of devotion, commitment, and love between two life partners. Many other gay couples in Massachusetts have taken the same step since the Commonwealth legalized gay marriage: by conservative estimates, over 4,000 gay marriage certificates were issued in Massachusetts during 2004.
But just a few days ago I learned that another gay couple has regretfully chosen to end their months-old marriage. And others, too, have filed for divorce here in the Commonwealth.
These two very different cases illustrate what we know from experience: many marriages and relationships endure, but sadly they can also end in separation or divorce.
Divorce, a legal process, can easily become adversarial, and lead to increased stress and mental trauma. It doesn’t have to be that way. There are resources and options available for all couples, heterosexual and gay, for support throughout separation and divorce.
There are two processes in particular which can make a difference for couples going through a divorce: mediation and collaborative law.
Mediation provides a low-cost and confidential alternative to litigation. In mediation, a third party assists a divorcing couple have a constructive conversation about the issues they need to address as part of the process of obtaining a legal divorce. Those issues may include: division of assets and debts; spousal support; issues relating to children, including visitation and custody; and any issues that are unique to the relationship.
Mediation helps people talk through the issues that affect them and their families and reach agreements that are fair, workable, and make sense for them. Gay couples contemplating divorce may wish to think about working with a mediator who has experience with and is sensitive to issues affecting the gay community. The important thing is to find a mediator that you feel comfortable working with.
For information on mediation, visit Mediate.com or the web site for the Association for Conflict Resolution. Residents of Massachusetts may be interested in exploring the web site for the Massachusetts Council on Family Mediation.
Collaborative law is another option available to divorcing couples, which can be used on its own or in conjunction with mediation.
According to the web site for the Massachusetts Collaborative Law Council, the goal of collaborative law is “to protect the privacy and dignity of all involved”:
We acknowledge that the essence of “Collaborative Law” is the shared belief by participants that it is in the best interests of parties and their families in typical Family Law matters to commit themselves to avoiding litigation.We therefore adopt this conflict resolution process, which does not rely on a Court-imposed resolution, but relies on an atmosphere of honesty, cooperation, integrity and professionalism, geared toward ensuring the future well-being of the family.
Our goal is to eliminate the negative economic, social, and emotional consequences of protracted litigation to the participants and their families.
It requires the free and open exchange of information, and envisions working together with other experts, including psychologists, financial experts, and others, and sharing the recommendations and work product of those experts.
For more information about collaborative law, you can also visit the web site for the International Academy for Collaborative Professionals.
Today in the U.S. we commemorate Presidents’ Day, a federal holiday honoring the two U.S. presidents born during this month–George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. The following quote is from Lincoln, who studied law and became a successful attorney long before he contemplated a run for the White House.
Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. As a peacemaker the lawyer has superior opportunity of being a good man.
Posted in Mediation Quotes
[Update: Unfortunately this online project has since folded. However, I leave the post as is, simply because it serves as an example of the suitability of the web as a tool for collaboration.]
Collaborative problem-solving is based on the notion that the collective wisdom of the group can yield ingeniously creative solutions to challenging dilemmas that individuals on their own have difficulty resolving. Mediation of course is one way to enable individuals and groups to team up together to solve problems. But there are other, equally creative ways to tap into that energy, and one web site seeks to do just that.
Gratitude.net offers people the opportunity to harness the power of collaborative problem-solving by creating a kind of reserve or pool of experience, wisdom, and insight. In the words of founder Tory Gattis, a social systems architect, the goal of Gratitude.net is to become “the ‘eBay’ of kindness, wisdom, and goodwill” by “matching people’s life challenges and advice offerings”. As Gattis explains, Gratitude.net is based on the following premise: What if the best solutions to life’s challenges could be drawn out of a large networked community and made available to all? Could that help accelerate people up the hierarchy and lead to a better world?
For further information on how to become a member of Gratitude.net, please visit the web site.
Since January 2003, NPR station KUNM, 89.9 FM in Albuquerque, New Mexico, has been airing the radio series Peace Talks, which “investigates how people can make peace and pursue non-violent solutions to conflict—within themselves, their families and communities, and the world.”
Peace Talks airs on the last Friday of each month at 8:00 a.m. (MT). Its next program, Martin Luther King Junior’s Path to Nonviolence, the second part of a two-part program, will be airing on February 25, 2005.
This series has addressed topics and issues ranging from “Seeking Civility in Political Discourse” to “Preventing Bullying in Our Schools” to “Mediating Conflict in the Workplace”. A national series is currently in the development and fund-raising stage.
For information on upcoming programs, and for Real Audio links to previously aired programs, visit the Peace Talks web site.
A spirited editorial captioned “The Importance of Keeping Mediators’ Statements Confidential” appears in the February 14, 2005, edition of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. Authored by Eric Green, Natasha Lisman, and Jeffrey Stern, well known figures in the Boston ADR community, and supported by other ADR practitioners including Jim McGuire and Paul Finn, the editorial expresses deep concern over Massachusetts Port Authority v. Employers Insurance of Wausau, the Massachusetts Superior Court decision discussed on this blog in a posting dated January 18, 2005. (In that case the judge cited statements made by mediators during the course of three separate mediations as evidence of a defendant’s bad faith refusal to settle for failing to heed the advice of mediators.)
The authors warn of the threat this decision poses “to the integrity and effectiveness of mediation as a method of dispute resolution” because of its potential impact on confidentiality, a defining principle of mediation practice.
As the authors point out,
…as lawyers, judges, legislatures, scholars and parties acknowledge, confidentiality of mediation is essential for its success. Settlement requires that the parties and the mediator be free to engage in candid, unbridled discussions about the case without fear that something they say in mediation can later be used in a subsequent proceeding.
To permit such subsequent use, as was done in the MassPort case, will cast a deadly chill and severely impair the mediation process and all its important benefits…The admission and use of the three mediators’ statements in the MassPort case are likewise inimical to [the Massachusetts mediator confidentiality statute] and its underlying policy and, if permitted to stand unchallenged and uncorrected, could lead to long-lasting damage to a vital instrument of policy and justice—the unhampered and confident use of private means of dispute resolution such as mediation.
Clearly there is much at stake in this case for the mediation field. The threat posed by this decision to public confidence in mediation and other forms of dispute resolution should not be underestimated. Massachusetts courts should be in the business of promoting, not undermining, the important public policy considerations that underpin the Massachusetts confidentiality statute.
Given that this case has attracted the attention of such luminaries as Eric Green and Jim McGuire, an appeal resulting from the MassPort case will undoubtedly result in a flurry of amicus curiae briefs from leaders in the ADR field protesting the MassPort decision. The ADR community is not going to take this one lying down.
In an earlier posting I had lamented the confusion in the public mind between “mediation” and “meditation”. There is, however, a potentially valuable connection between these two distinctly different practices insofar as a technique used in one can increase a practitioner’s effectiveness in the other.
With this understanding in mind, the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law launched a program called the Initiative on Mindfulness in Law and Dispute Resolution, under the direction of renowned mediator and law school professor Leonard L. Riskin. According to the law school’s web site, the Initiative “is devoted to exploring the potential benefits and risks of mindfulness (and to some extent related contemplative practices, including yoga and other forms of meditation) to members of the legal and dispute resolution professions and those who use or are affected by those professions.”
Some objections, however, have been raised to the teaching of mindfulness at a public university, including concerns that doing so may constitute a constitutionally impermissible endorsement of religious beliefs.
In the best spirit of dispute resolution, however, a public debate concerning mindfulness will be held this Thursday at the law school, with the aim of promoting dialogue and providing an opportunity for all perspectives on this issue to be heard.
Posted in Events for Mediators, Mediation
The ABA Journal honored Mediation Channel as one of the top 100 legal blogs for 2009. Readers, thanks for inspiring me!
