|
Message From The President
IADR has accomplished a great deal in
furtherance of our mission to “spread the word” about the effectiveness
of the mediation process. For example, the Peacemaker Quarterly
newsletter and our website
www.adrpeacemaking.org are operational. (Incidentally, if you have
not emailed your biography and picture to Susan Ewing at
amta@dwx.com, please do so. Susan can
be reached at 515-283-0331.)
In addition, IADR offers basic and advanced mediation courses. We have
established and supported national mediation competitions for
undergraduate and law students and provide training sessions on
mediation strategies and techniques to the participants prior to the
competitions.
Also, we are anxious to accelerate our involvement and activities with
the general public as well as private and public institutions. To that
end, we will be offering seminars, programs and even “hands-on”
mediation training in those venues.
Our October 7 meeting at the Illinois State Bar Association in Chicago
will be dealing with the above subjects and other critical issues.
Perhaps the most significant subject will be the type of member-ship
IADR will offer. I have informally discussed this question with several
board members. It appears as if a general membership, by invitation
only, limited to a specific number, may be the way to proceed. We could
establish acceptable standards for membership and perhaps designate our
members as “Fellows of the International Academy of Dispute Resolution.”
I will be presenting this approach to the board for our consideration.
We will want to concentrate on inviting into IADR more persons from
outside the Midwest and even outside the United States. This will
encourage and facilitate interesting national and international seminars
and conventions.
Also, high on our October agenda will be the question of whether IADR
should become involved in the certification of mediators. There are
other important items on the agenda including reports from our Public
Relations and By-Laws Committees. We are about ready to finalize and
approve the By-Laws.
Please contact me on my cell phone at 847-899-3300 or Susan at
515-283-0331 about other items you would like to add to the agenda and
whether you are planning to attend. We have to make appropriate luncheon
arrangements with the Illinois State Bar Association.
Fred Lane, President
Fifth
World Mediation Forum/Conference
On September 9-11, 2005, Dick Calkins
attended the Fifth World Mediation Form/Conference in Crans-Montana,
Switzerland and gives us this report.
Some 650 persons from 54 countries
attended the confer-ence. Only a few Americans were present including
the president of ADR and Professor Scott Hughes from the University of
New Mexico law School.
The organization was established in
Dublin, Ireland in 1993, and conducts a worldwide conference every other
year. The first such conference was held in 1997 in Madrid, Spain and
thereafter in Havana, Cuba, Sardinia, Italy, Buenos Aires, Argentina and
Crans-Montana, Switzerland.
The Conference began with a plenary
session with all attendees. It was conducted in five languages –
French, Italian, Spanish, German and English, depending on the language
of the speaker. Headsets were pro-vided, like at the United Nations, so
that one could hear the speaker in their own native tongue. Thereafter,
during the three days of the conference, attendees were invited to
attend various breakout work sessions, addressing various questions from
ways to seek legislative recognition of media-tion to use of mediation
in the penal system, to the need for mediation in family law. Because
there was no translating in these sessions, you could only attend a
session in a language you could understand.
One of the goals of the World Mediation
Forum is to establish chapters in each country or region of the world.
These in turn are expected to hold their own conferences and address
prob-lems of particular interest to the country or region. Countries in
South America, particularly Argentina, are well represented and
organized and play a major role in the organization. The president of
the organization and more than a majority of the executive committee (15
members) are from South America. Surprisingly, coun-tries of Europe, in
particular Germany, Austria, and Italy seem sparsely represented for
whatever reason. I do not know. Even some African nations had a
greater presence.
A primary theme of the conference was
to consider how to gain legislative and regulatory implementation of
mediation. Interestingly, the conference equated the growth of
mediation with the growth of democracy; that increased recognition of
mediation was vital to sustaining and growing democracy throughout the
world.
My impression is that insofar as
implementing mediation at various levels of dispute resolution, the
United States is by far the most advanced of any country or region in
the world. In many areas, there are obstacles to even gaining an
understanding of what mediation is, much less implement it. I would
sur-mise that most areas of the world are where the United States was 10
or 15 years ago in making mediation a truly effective tool of dispute
resolution.
In speaking with a represen-tative from
Slovakia, he explained that much of the resistance to mediation comes
from the people themselves who would truly benefit from it. He
explained that they are so used to being told by a judge what to do that
they feel a mediator is doing nothing more than prying into their
personal affairs.
Insofar as the subject matter of the
Conference, eighty percent or more dealt with family law and the
protection of women and children, and employment problems. There was
little consideration given to personal injury, commercial, and the many
areas of law we commonly mediate in the United States. My conclusion is
that those of our members who are heavily involved in family law and
employment issues would find the organization of great value and
interest. As a footnote, I would add that the only mediation format
recognized is conference and transformative mediation. People I spoke
to had no idea what caucus mediation is.
The following is the Crans-Montana
Declaration:
FORWARD
Considering
that the conditions of conflicts are recurrent, that conflicts are on
the increase in many areas (social, cultural, economic, political,
family, school, environmental, etc.) and that they lead to mutual
misunderstandings, intolerance, exclusion, violence and war
Considering
that mediation appears more and more as an alternative and confirmed
method of dealing with conflicts on a national, regional and
interna-tional level
Considering
the consequences of profound changes in economic, political, cultural,
social, family and environmental structures and functions brought about
by globalization
And finally, considering
that mediation is recognized as an effective means of answering the
challenges of contemporary societies
The participants of the 5th
International Conference of the World Mediation Forum, gathered in Crans-Montana
on September 11, 2005 make this Declaration:
1. We promote mediation with the aim
of respecting human dignity and the fundamental rights of children,
women and men and to improve relation-ships between individuals, groups,
communities and nations.
2. We recommend mediation as a means
of managing interpersonal and collective conflicts in order to reinforce
economic, political, social and environmental changes for the benefit of
society.
3. We encourage citizens, through a
culture of mediation, to recognize their shared values and respect their
differences and to promote a sense of belonging to a socially and
culturally shared environment.
4. We call on civil society, States
and international organi-zations to prevent and resolve conflicts at all
levels by seeking the intervention of a third party mediator who is
qualified, impartial and independent.
5. We urge mediators to promote
individual and collective responsibility by supporting solidarity and
sustainable development worldwide.
6. We encourage increased exchanges
and reflections between mediation researchers, educators, practitioners
and policy makers at a local, national and international level.
7. We advocate that mediation be
developed through increased re-sources for mediation education, training
and research and by interna-tional cooperation.
8. We exhort Governments,
Parliaments, justice sys-tems, NGO’s and all people to do everything
within their power to promote a culture of peace through mediation.
Top
The Power of the Apology and Act
of Forgiveness
By: Richard M. Calkins
In mediation, we, as mediators, are
prone to call ourselves “peacemakers.” And, indeed, we should feel a
sense of pride as we take time to use the peacemaker’s tools, for we
establish, not resolution, but peace and healing for those we serve.
But what are the peace-maker’s tools
available to us? We are instructed, for example, to avoid
confronta-tion or adversarial methods of persuasion; that is, avoid
playing devil’s advocate, for this only puts a party or attorney on the
defensive. Instead, we are encouraged to ask questions which show
support rather than doubt, under-standing rather than criticism, and
interest rather than indifference. We are instructed to avoid
argumentative language when another seeks to argue with us and defend
their position. Our course is simply to agree with them to signal that
argumentative persuasion is not a part of the settlement equation. To
tell a party or attorney, “I agree with you,” or “I don’t disagree with
you,” is a powerful peacemaker tool which builds significant rapport and
trust.
There is another peacemaker tool equally
powerful and effective in bringing parties to reconciliation and peace.
It is the tool of apology and forgiveness. If we can convince a
defendant for example, to consider making a sincere apology for what
occurred, and their concern for the welfare and recovery of the
plaintiff, he will have taken a major step helping the plaintiff to
forgive.
A party who can be convinced to consider
forgiveness has also taken a major step to resolution. Regardless of
the context of the mediation, the party who apologizes helps the other
to find it in their heart to forgive, and forgiveness by one or both of
the parties will tone down much of the emotion that exists in a
mediation. And with the taming of the emotions the parties are better
able to listen to their lawyers and reach a fair and honorable
settlement.
Although the apology is being used more
and more by adjusters and with satisfactory results, forgiveness, as a
peacemaker’s tool is rarely proposed in mediation probably because of
its religious overtones. Indeed, Abrahamic’s religious tradition in
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, all affirm the importance of
forgiveness as a means to lasting resolution and peace.
If parties to a dispute apologize and
forgive, it not only helps them to resolution, but it builds their inner
peace, strength and dignity. Resolution through the apology and
forgiveness gives the strongest assurance that the issue in conflict
will not occur again.
But how does the mediator inject the
apology and forgiveness into the process? The hatred and anger
generated in a personal injury action, for example, which obstruct
settlement, are often misdirected or misunderstood. The failure of a
defendant to appear in a wrongful death action because the
decision-maker, the adjuster, is present can be misconstrued to be a
sign of indifference or unconcern. This in turn can generate serious
anger and animosity which distracts from the process. By having the
defendant attend and apologizing and expressing grave remorse and
concern for decedent’s family, the door is opened for forgiveness to
become operative.
In the divorce context, an apology and
forgiveness can be of particular importance because of the presence of
children if that be the case. The mediator can make clear that an
apology or forgiveness is not an act of surrender. They are a sauve to
heal the wounds. If both sides can be encouraged to see the humanity in
the other a major step has been taken to peaceful resolution.
In encouraging parties to consider the
apology and act of forgiveness, the mediator should probably speak to
each party separately in private caucus. The mediator might review with
each the good qualities they saw in their spouse when marriage was
contemplated. Whatever the mediator can say that will encourage the
party to consider the positive rather than dwell on the negative is
helpful.
In any context in which anger, hatred
and frustration are actively affecting the settlement process, the
apology and forgiveness tool should be considered. They are the great
neutralizer and healer. This is true not only between the parties but
also between the lawyers who might dislike each other. Perhaps we as
mediators should not be so hesitant to use the words “apology” and
“forgiveness” and inject it into the process whenever we can. It can be
done delicately without offense to any one
Top
JOINT ADR CONFERENCE
Chicago, Illinois
Date:
December 1-2, 2005
Place:
Museum of Science and Industry, 57th Street and Lake Shore
Drive, Chicago, Illinois
Keynote Speakers:
Joel Daly on December 1, Ken Cloke on December 2, and Juan Ortiz on
December 2.
Contact:
Laura at 312-882-8000,
admin@collablawil.org,
fax 847-516-3339, 350 High Road, Cary, IL 60013, subject line: Joint ADR
Top
Upcoming Events:
IADR Board Meeting
October 7, 2005
Illinois State Bar Assn Office
Chicago, IL
10:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
College Mediation Tournament
November 4-5, 2005
John Marshall Law School
314 S. Plymouth Court
Chicago, IL 60604
Law School Mediation Tournament
March 30 - April 1, 2006
Chicago Bar Association
321 S. Plymouth Court
Chicago, IL
Mediation Training
Primary class in caucus mediation.
January 9-13, 2006
Drake Legal Clinic
24th & University
Des Moines, IA 50311
For more info. contact:
Susan Ewing
2700 Westown Parkway, Ste. 220
West Des Moines, IA 50266
515-283-0331 or amta@dwx.com
Top |
