NCJ Number
101259
Journal
Mediation Quarterly Issue: 11 Dated: (March 1986) Pages: 5-23
Date Published
1986
Length
19 pages
Annotation
Divorce mediation in Britain and the United States is compared, and questions are raised about the ability of current research and policy debates to incorporate the critical problems of procedural justice that appear to exist.
Abstract
In Britain, practitioners working at the informal resolution of marriage disputes may use in-court or out-of-court forms of 'conciliation.' The former is run by the probation service or court registrar, is usually free, and often uses lawyers as conciliators. The latter is run by privately funded voluntary agencies and staffed by laymen or social workers. In contrast to the British system, mediation in the United States uses largely a fee-for-service approach. While some mediators are in the field for ideological and social reasons, many can be seen as entrepreneurs establishing a market and attempting to attract clients. In both countries, similarities can be seen in the policy issues facing conciliators/mediators in the areas of professionalism and professional credentialing, the treatment of unrepresented third parties (e.g., children), and the moral nature and ideological content of mediation. In Britain, debate over conciliation has focused on quantitative and economic arguments presented by the Government and qualitative and moral rationales put forth by practitioners. Research has focused on relatively small-scale program evaluations. It is unlikely that any of these approaches will provide a means for resolving the major policy issues facing the field. 22 references.