Abstract
AbstractThrough analysis of three mediator interventions, including two from the author's field research on child custody mediation in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, the author suggests that the theoretical distinctions between process and content, and between considering options and making suggestions, are untenable in practice and inadvisable as the sole basis for developing good mediation practice criteria (for example, the Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators). As a complement, the author suggests the inclusion of situated substantive expertise (grounded understanding of the people participating, the particular problems they face, and the range of workable solutions) as an affirmative obligation for mediators.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
