In this report we are going to explore the ethical, moral and legal challenges of the notion of dual relationships as an advocate or mediator. First of all I would like to give a short description for the two concepts: advocating and mediating. Advocating is considered to be the pure defending of a certain person, position, idea or else. Whereas mediating is somewhat different activity. In mediation, a neutral third party, i.e. mediator or two co-mediators, assists the disputing parties in finding their own mutually acceptable solution to the dispute. The parties agree to negotiated terms, if they can, making all of the decisions themselves.
Mediation, like negotiation, seeks solutions whereby both sides win in the agreement. This could be said to empower the disputants because, unlike going to a judge, it places the responsibility for problem-solving and decision-making in their hands. Mediation and legal representation are two separate roles; your lawyer cannot be your mediator due to the conflict of interests that such dual representation would create. Although these two positions are pretty often come together in dual relationship. This happens when for example an attorney is advocating a person, by defending him in a court of law. But at the same time that attorney makes an agreement with the prosecutor, (in the situation when it is hard to get the court to the desired position) thus playing the role of an expressed mediator between the plaintiff and the defendant.
The Essay on Advocacy and Mediation
Mediation can be defined as the act of intervening for the purpose of bringing about resolution to a conflict (Barsky, 2007). In the mediation process mediators are considered to be a non-bias, neutral third party who directs the mediation process in effort to guide the conflicting party’s to a viable conflict resolution. Having no displayed or exhibited pre-judgment of either conflicting parties, ...
Actually I would say that this is pretty unjust situation in terms of ethics. Obviously it would be better to have all conflicts handled in a pretty straight forward manner. By this I mean that if the person is guilty he should be judged and sentenced, while if he is not, he should be left free. But in nowadays life it rarely happens. Pretty often money resolves the issue, and in such cases it is hard to rise up the issue of morality or ethical one. We can raise many other examples of the dual relationships of an advocate or mediator role, but I think that this is a most clearly expressed one. The advocate is challenged with the issue that he is originally hired to protect persons standing, while if that persons standing is somewhat shaky, he has to become a mediator between the parties in order to make the best of the situation. I think these practices are illegal, but they take place in nowadays jurisdiction.
In order to explore the idea of the integration of advocacy and mediation within the human services field, we must look carefully on the every days activities of the police authorities. We may find closings for the theme in everyday newspapers. Despite the fact that many cases are settled effectively through mediation, certain situations exist in which mediation would only further existing conflicts or create new ones. Every person that is being arrested for any charge is proposed to have an advocate, and as we have discovered before the advocate often serves as a mediator. But in this situation the role of advocate as mediator would not be so proper, although rarely we may hit such a situation too. From the conceptual standpoint I would rather say that the integration of advocacy and mediation within the human services field is necessary.
This would probably help to solve conflicts faster and easier for all parties. Now let us strike the issue of advocating and mediation within domestic violence. My personal philosophy is rather controversial when looking at this issue. Because the domestic violence is probably one of the most frequent crimes during past few decades. I would say that advocating and mediating activities play a core role in loving those kind of conflicts. The role of mediator helps people to prevent them from the future occurrences of the conflict.
The issues that arise within domestic environment are usually the ones that are difficult to solve. They would be rather impossible to solve in a peaceful manner without the help of mediators and advocates. Therefore this profession is so popular and highly respected in our society. I admit that there is a slight possibility of a future raise of the demand for people that are able to consent with the two deeds. Finally I would conclude our society needs advocation and mediation to protect their interests, as well as they need the police to protect their well being.
The Essay on California Case Law On Mediation Issues Is In Flux A
California case law on Mediation issues is in flux. A statute has been enacted in California mandating mediation of common disputes. Since January 1, 1998 in several California law codes were amended. They define mediation and govern mediation in the fields of civil actions, insurance, the environment, family, labor-management, community, agency actions, etc. California law protects the ...
Bibliography:
Eric Gillbstein, The Moral Side of Jurisdiction.
New York: The Viking Press, 1997. Thomas Bradley, The Research on Advocating. Eastern Economist, Washington: Eastpac Publishing Co. Vol. 65, 2001. Joseph Finly, The Lawfirm, New York: Cooper Square Publishers, Inc., 1997. Tyson McPierce, On Dual Relationships, article.
Sparta Daily, vol. 221, 2000..
