Exploring the potential of contextual ethics in mediation

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The Australian National Mediator Standards state that ‘the purpose of a mediation process is to maximise participants’ decision making’. To achieve this, the dominant model of mediation practised in Australia – the facilitative model – ethically requires the mediator to be in an ‘outsider-impartial’ role,3 as opposed to an ‘insider-partial’ role. That is, mediation ethics require mediators to be impartial facilitators of the process in order to ensure that the content and outcome of the dispute are self-determined by the parties. In managing the process impartially, a mediator is expected to be fair, even-handed, unbiased and free of prejudice. A mediator who is coercive, who favours one party over another or who makes a decision for the parties is not impartial and thereby is said to violate the possibility of party self-determination.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationAlternative Perspectives on Lawyers and Legal Ethics
Subtitle of host publicationReimagining the Profession
EditorsFrancesca Bartlett, Reid Mortensen, Kieran Tranter
PublisherRoutledge
Pages193-217
Number of pages25
ISBN (Print)0203846885, 9780203846889
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 16 Aug 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

mediation
moral philosophy
self-determination
prejudice
decision making

Cite this

Field, R. (2010). Exploring the potential of contextual ethics in mediation. In F. Bartlett, R. Mortensen, & K. Tranter (Eds.), Alternative Perspectives on Lawyers and Legal Ethics: Reimagining the Profession (pp. 193-217). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203846889
Field, Rachael. / Exploring the potential of contextual ethics in mediation. Alternative Perspectives on Lawyers and Legal Ethics: Reimagining the Profession. editor / Francesca Bartlett ; Reid Mortensen ; Kieran Tranter. Routledge, 2010. pp. 193-217
@inbook{61510171240547aab0173570fb98042c,
title = "Exploring the potential of contextual ethics in mediation",
abstract = "The Australian National Mediator Standards state that ‘the purpose of a mediation process is to maximise participants’ decision making’. To achieve this, the dominant model of mediation practised in Australia – the facilitative model – ethically requires the mediator to be in an ‘outsider-impartial’ role,3 as opposed to an ‘insider-partial’ role. That is, mediation ethics require mediators to be impartial facilitators of the process in order to ensure that the content and outcome of the dispute are self-determined by the parties. In managing the process impartially, a mediator is expected to be fair, even-handed, unbiased and free of prejudice. A mediator who is coercive, who favours one party over another or who makes a decision for the parties is not impartial and thereby is said to violate the possibility of party self-determination.",
author = "Rachael Field",
year = "2010",
month = "8",
day = "16",
doi = "10.4324/9780203846889",
language = "English",
isbn = "0203846885",
pages = "193--217",
editor = "Francesca Bartlett and Reid Mortensen and Kieran Tranter",
booktitle = "Alternative Perspectives on Lawyers and Legal Ethics",
publisher = "Routledge",
address = "United States",

}

Field, R 2010, Exploring the potential of contextual ethics in mediation. in F Bartlett, R Mortensen & K Tranter (eds), Alternative Perspectives on Lawyers and Legal Ethics: Reimagining the Profession. Routledge, pp. 193-217. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203846889

Exploring the potential of contextual ethics in mediation. / Field, Rachael.

Alternative Perspectives on Lawyers and Legal Ethics: Reimagining the Profession. ed. / Francesca Bartlett; Reid Mortensen; Kieran Tranter. Routledge, 2010. p. 193-217.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Exploring the potential of contextual ethics in mediation

AU - Field, Rachael

PY - 2010/8/16

Y1 - 2010/8/16

N2 - The Australian National Mediator Standards state that ‘the purpose of a mediation process is to maximise participants’ decision making’. To achieve this, the dominant model of mediation practised in Australia – the facilitative model – ethically requires the mediator to be in an ‘outsider-impartial’ role,3 as opposed to an ‘insider-partial’ role. That is, mediation ethics require mediators to be impartial facilitators of the process in order to ensure that the content and outcome of the dispute are self-determined by the parties. In managing the process impartially, a mediator is expected to be fair, even-handed, unbiased and free of prejudice. A mediator who is coercive, who favours one party over another or who makes a decision for the parties is not impartial and thereby is said to violate the possibility of party self-determination.

AB - The Australian National Mediator Standards state that ‘the purpose of a mediation process is to maximise participants’ decision making’. To achieve this, the dominant model of mediation practised in Australia – the facilitative model – ethically requires the mediator to be in an ‘outsider-impartial’ role,3 as opposed to an ‘insider-partial’ role. That is, mediation ethics require mediators to be impartial facilitators of the process in order to ensure that the content and outcome of the dispute are self-determined by the parties. In managing the process impartially, a mediator is expected to be fair, even-handed, unbiased and free of prejudice. A mediator who is coercive, who favours one party over another or who makes a decision for the parties is not impartial and thereby is said to violate the possibility of party self-determination.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84911093799&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4324/9780203846889

DO - 10.4324/9780203846889

M3 - Chapter

SN - 0203846885

SN - 9780203846889

SP - 193

EP - 217

BT - Alternative Perspectives on Lawyers and Legal Ethics

A2 - Bartlett, Francesca

A2 - Mortensen, Reid

A2 - Tranter, Kieran

PB - Routledge

ER -

Field R. Exploring the potential of contextual ethics in mediation. In Bartlett F, Mortensen R, Tranter K, editors, Alternative Perspectives on Lawyers and Legal Ethics: Reimagining the Profession. Routledge. 2010. p. 193-217 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203846889