Negotiating violence in family law mediation

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to understand mediation in divorce cases where intimate partner violence (IPV) is a concern. These cases may involve managing power imbalances, coercive control or risk for continued violence.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper, the authors use feminist and sociological theoretical approaches and grounded theory to analyze triangulated ethnographic data to explore how mediators construct and manage the issue of IPV in mediation.FindingsThe results indicate that mediators often share a common discourse about IPV that asserts that mediators are professionals with the skills to both identify IPV and to appropriately conduct mediations where IPV is present. However, to achieve successful mediations mediators sometimes choose to discount the seriousness of IPV in assessments. They also use a set of fluid strategies to handle potential power imbalances that allow them to represent themselves as unbiased, even while those strategies risk the equity of the mediation.Practical implicationsThe authors share several strategies that could enhance the social justice of the process for all parties, including uniformity in assessing whether IPV is a concern and oversight of mediators’ practices and training.Social implicationsThe results indicate mediators often share a common discourse about IPV that asserts mediators are professionals with the skills to identify IPV and to appropriately conduct mediations where IPV is present. To reach settlement mediators use a set of fluid mediation and accommodation strategies to handle potential power imbalances due to IPV that allow them to represent themselves as impartial, even while those strategies may risk equity in the mediation.Originality/valueThe unique data provide a behind-the-scenes look at mediation generated from participant observation of mediation training and actual mediations, along with interviews with 30 practicing mediators.