As part of my role as Communications person for the ADR section of the Dallas Bar Association, I have the privilege of attending monthly section meetings. Yesterday's meeting was fabulous.
Three very prominent attorneys and one former judge were on a panel discussing everything from the value of a joint session, ethical considerations, and mediation tips. I came away with a page full of notes.
Most importantly, to me, was the unanimous viewpoint by all three experienced attorneys that they want a mediator who will evaluate the case and be advocates for settlement. "Evaluate the case and the party's position", "hold people accountable", "help clients understand risks" were phrases that were used.
I know some mediators who agree with this position. I know others who believe the evaluative model is flawed because it takes the mediator out of a truly neutral position. What do you think? Should we do what our "customers" want and desire?
No comments:
Post a Comment