Therapeutic Jurisprudence: Providing Some Answers to the Neutrality Dilemma in Court-Connected Mediation
Douglas, Kathy & Field, Rachael M. (2007) Therapeutic Jurisprudence: Providing Some Answers to the Neutrality Dilemma in Court-Connected Mediation. In Reinhardt, G. & Cannon, A. (Eds.) Transforming Legal Processes in Court and Beyond, The Australian Institute of Judicial Administration, Perth, Western Australia, pp. 67-84.
Neutrality as an attribute of the practice of mediation has been criticised in the mediation literature. Key theorists maintain that mediator neutrality is a myth that hides the reality of the impact of the mediator on both the content and the process of mediation. Internationally, new models of mediation have been articulated that are therapeutic in nature, highly value relationships and include a multidiscipline approach to understanding conflict and emotion. These new models reject the concept of the neutral mediator. However, courts and governments rely upon neutrality as a "legitimising framework" for the wide adoption of mediation as an alternative to litigation. In this paper we discuss the paradigm of therapeutic jurisprudence and its links with new models of mediation, such as the transformative and narrative models. We postulate that the discourse of therapeutic jurisprudence can convince courts and governments to adopt models of mediation that eschew the attribute of neutrality.
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloadsdisplays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Conference Paper|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > Law not elsewhere classified (180199)|
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law|
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2007 (please consult author)|
|Deposited On:||11 Nov 2008|
|Last Modified:||29 Feb 2012 23:33|
Repository Staff Only: item control page