2011Pepperdine Digital Commons (Pepperdine University)Requires access

The Disempowering Relationship Between Mediator Neutrality and Judicial Impartiality: Toward a New Mediation Ethic

R. Zamir

Open publisher page 8 citations

Abstract

The issue I shall discuss in this article is whether the concept of mediator neutrality advances the empowering and effective participation of parties from disadvantaged groups. Section II will deal with the relationship between the concept of neutrality in the adversarial legal process, in the mediation process, and the concept of procedural justice. I shall then present the meanings ascribed to the concept of mediator neutrality in the two prevailing models of mediation: the problem-solving model and the transformative model. The affinity between these meanings and the concept of judicial impartiality will be discussed and critiqued. Finally, I shall suggest an alternative mediation ethic to neutrality that, in my opinion, may well increase the chances of furthering empowered participation among disadvantaged groups. The last part of the article will present the narrative mediation model and examine the mediation ethic on which it is based.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The issue I shall discuss in this article is whether the concept of mediator neutrality advances the empowering and effective participation of parties from disadvantaged groups. Section II will deal with the relationship between the concept of neutrality in the adversarial legal process, in the mediation process, and the concept of procedural justice. I shall then present the meanings ascribed to the concept of mediator neutrality in the two prevailing models of mediation: the problem-solving model and the transformative model. The affinity between these meanings and the concept of judicial impartiality will be discussed and critiqued. Finally, I shall suggest an alternative mediation ethic to neutrality that, in my opinion, may well increase the chances of furthering empowered participation among disadvantaged groups. The last part of the article will present the narrative mediation model and examine the mediation ethic on which it is based.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 8 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The issue I shall discuss in this article is whether the concept of mediator neutrality advances the empowering and effective participation of parties from disadvantaged groups. Section II will deal with the relationship between the concept of neutrality in the adversarial legal process, in the mediation process, and the concept of procedural justice. I shall then present the meanings ascribed to the concept of mediator neutrality in the two prevailing models of mediation: the problem-solving model and the transformative model. The affinity between these meanings and the concept of judicial impartiality will be discussed and critiqued. Finally, I shall suggest an alternative mediation ethic to neutrality that, in my opinion, may well increase the chances of furthering empowered participation among disadvantaged groups. The last part of the article will present the narrative mediation model and examine the mediation ethic on which it is based.

Key concepts: Neutrality, Impartiality, Mediation, Law, Political science, Lawyer supported mediation, Psychology, Law and economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Disempowering Relationship Between Mediator Neutrality and Judicial Impartiality: Toward a New Mediation Ethic — Research Paper | ScholarLens