•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Some of these benefits are due to the particular arguments of facilitation proponents, while others involve a general development of the field resulting from the debate. The first benefit is that facilitation proponents have highlighted how mediation can promote many important values such as party self-determination, and they have cautioned about risks of unfairness created by mediator evaluation as described in Part III. Second, the facilitation-evaluation debate has stimulated a better appreciation of the appropriateness of these techniques in different types of cases, as described in Part IV. Third, the debate has contributed to reducing ill-considered evaluation practice, as discussed in Part V. Fourth, the debate may cause many mediators to consider and reject simple assumptions, developing a more sophisticated understanding of the process. Re-examination of mediator evaluation could become part of a broader, healthy questioning of taken-for-granted mediation theory more generally, as considered in Part VI. Before examining these propositions, Part II provides a brief review of terminology used in the debate and what I suggest are overly law-centered assumptions embedded in Stempel's use of certain terms.

Share

COinS
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.