Mediation: we resolve conflicts with the help of a professional mediator

More than an intermediary

I won’t be surprised if many have never heard of such a term and service as mediation until they came across them.

Generally speaking, mediation is similar to negotiations. Therefore, those who are offered to hire a mediator for pre-trial conflict resolution are likely to think that this is something like a lawyer or lawyer. And they will be wrong.

Mediation is more than that. It is a method of resolving conflict situations, often before the trial, which provides reliability due to a special set of tools. Those that are used specifically in mediation practice. Without making decisions himself, the mediator helps the parties to the conflict find options that would suit everyone.

The word “mediation” comes from the Latin mediare, meaning “to mediate”. And as a method of pre-trial settlement of conflicts in our country, mediation has been used relatively recently. From the point of view of the law, this is “an alternative procedure for resolving disputes with the participation of an intermediary (mediation procedure)”.

Mediation is good because it gives conflicting parties a chance to resolve their conflict or dispute without resorting to court. This is what often saves seemingly dead relationships, saves time and sometimes reputation.

It happens that mediation is needed as the penultimate opportunity, when a person is already sure only that he always has the final option – to go to court if he fails to reach an agreement.

Method principles

The mediation process has clear principles.

• The principle of voluntariness. This means that all conflicting parties must themselves, voluntarily agree to mediation. At the same time, each party has the right to say “stop” at any stage of the negotiations, and the procedure ends there.
• The principle of equality. It means that the mediator does not give advantages to any of the parties, devotes the same amount of time to each of them and uses the same work patterns.
• The principle of neutrality. If the mediator feels that he is emotionally involved in the conflict, he is obliged to stop the procedure and offer another professional to replace him.
• The principle of confidentiality. Everything said in the meeting room is kept confidential. In case of successful completion of the negotiations, the parties sign an agreement that specifies how they will interact in the future.

How to “divide” a child in a divorce?

Let me tell you about my own practical experience in mediation. Once a couple came to me for mediation. The question concerned the place of residence of a ten-year-old child. Initially, the father of the child agreed that it would be better for his son to live with his mother. But after a while he changed his mind.

The reason was the news that the boy’s mother changed the area of ​​residence without informing him about it. In addition, she moved to a much smaller apartment, and she was also invited to a new job with an irregular schedule. This was very different from their original arrangements.

The father of the child said that this is a completely different story, and demanded that his son live with him. But my mother strongly objected. And the child himself had a childhood dream that his parents lived together, as before. But at the same time, he understood that both his father and mother loved him. The boy, in principle, agreed to both options.

The turning point in this case was my suggestion to think about how the child would spend time – every hour, not counting school, for 5 days – and what he would do on the weekend. In what environment will he be and with whom will he do his homework?

In addition, it was worth considering that the boy would soon begin a transitional age. And there will be difficulties. In particular, parents should decide who will take care of the safety of a teenager – for example, on the Internet. How do mom and dad plan to deal with restrictive measures, if necessary?

At my suggestion, each of the parents voiced his own version of how he sees the boy’s leisure and education, communication with him. After discussing the pros and cons, both realized that the dad’s proposal is more in line with the interests of their son, gives more confidence and control.

As a result of mutual negotiations, the parents reached an agreement that the son would nevertheless begin to live with his father, and begin to spend his holidays with his mother. The neutral position of the mediator, goodwill, and the creation of an atmosphere of negotiations helped to find a peaceful solution. At the same time, it is worth noting that it is important for the participants in the conflict to know: they have a choice and the right not to agree.

There is always a solution

Initially, my parents behaved like they were in court and tried to impress me as a mediator. It seemed to everyone that this would give him points in the “fight”. But what is this fight? And why does the decision-making process often turn into a fight in the ring?

Unfortunately, it often happens that parents, trying to outdo each other, forget about the true purpose of negotiations: the safety and well-being of their child. It is fair to say that this couple quickly realized that as a mediator I do not decide for them and do not judge them, so it simply does not make sense to influence me.

The task was to help parents calmly look at the situation and create an atmosphere where there is a chance to hear the opponent, “build bridges” so that the parties can agree. And they really were able to do it. After all, the decision is always in the hands of the people who come to mediation.