8125 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

How Mediation Works 41 sloe should not work with the parties directly on substantive matters to develop a fair and just decision according to the intervenor's values. Suskind (1981, pp. 46-47), an environmen- tal mediator, argues that intervenors should be involved in sub- stantive decisions when (1) "the impacts of negotiated agree- ment [will affect] under represented or unrepresented groups," (2) there is "the possibility that joint net gains have not been maximized," (3) the parties are not aware of the "long term spill-over effects of the settlements," and (4) the precedents that they set "may be detrimental to the parties or the broader public." Suskind further notes that "although such intervention may make it difficult to retain the appearance of neutrality and the trust of the active parties, environmental mediators cannot fulfill their responsibilities to the community-at-large if they re- main passive" (p. 47). Some labor-management mediators also belong to this school. These "deal-makers" intervene substan- tively when the parties are uninformed, ill-prepared to nego- tiate, or unaware of mutually acceptable substantive settlements (Kolb, 1983). Child custody and divorce mediators also have advocates in the second school. Saposnek (1983) argues that the mediator should advocate the unrepresented interests of the children in negotiations between the parents and believes that the mediator should intervene and influence the substantive outcome if those interests are violated and not taken into consideration. Coogler (1978) also urges the mediator to engage in substantive negotia- tions and advocates that the intervenor write a letter of noncon- currence that is sent to the court if the mediator seriously dis- agrees with the settlement. Haynes (1981), another family mediator, believes that the intervenor should be active in power balancing help to de- fine the terms of the substantive decision. Haynes, Coogler, and Saposnek directly disregard the concept of substantive impar- tiality as a critical component of the mediator's role. There is a spectrum along which mediators place them- selves in defining their degree of involvement in the procedure and substance of negotiations. On one side are those who advo- cate mostly procedural interventions; on the other side are ad-