Kelly Martin wrote:
On 6/7/05, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
In real life, mediation is essentially a choice, not a requirement/obligation.
I've been in mandatory mediation twice (once on a court order, once on my request). The mediator, in both cases, had only the authority to report on what agreement, if any, was reached during the mediation. Matters discussed but not agreed upon would not be included in the report. (In one case, we agreed on most, but not all issues; in the other we agreed on nothing.) I think it's important that those acting as mediators keep the bulk of the mediation in confidence, reporting only that mediation occurred and on what was actually agreed upon, if anything, during the mediation. If either party refuses to mediate in good faith, then the mediator should simply bring mediations to a close and report back that no agreement was reached without explaining why.
Although I largely agree with you, when only one of the parties is clearly not negotiating in good faith that should be made clear in the report. This does not mean that this should be explained in great detail.
Ec