Ethics in Mediation: Centralising Relationships of Trust

Revision of the National Mediator Accreditation System, effective from 1 July 2015, removes the requirement for mediators to demonstrate understanding of neutrality as an ethical competency. The principle of impartiality has been retained and the principle of self-determination has been newly included as an ethical competency. The self-determination of participants, recognised in the original version of the NMAS, has been more clearly articulated as the aim of mediation practice. Abandonment of the principle of neutrality signals a need to reconsider the role of the mediator, which was once identified with control of the process of mediation, though neutral as to its content and outcome. Abandonment of neutrality calls for an alternative frame of reference for ethical practice in mediation. In this paper, the relationship of trust between mediator and parties is proposed as a suitable and defensible alternative ethical framework. It is argued that this relationship can be constructed according to principles associated with fiduciary and therapeutic relationships, in recognition of the distinctive socio-legal context of practice. Abandonment of neutrality also raises issues as to the mediator's role in achieving fairness for participants. It is argued that relationships of trust provide a convincing framework within which to consider issues of substantive fairness in mediation. Full text also available via Informit

Publication Details

Journal
La Trobe University
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.26181/29643725.v2
Primary Topic
Conflict Management and Negotiation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Ethics in Mediation: Centralising Relationships of Trust

La Trobe University
Conflict Management and Negotiation
article

Ethics in Mediation: Centralising Relationships of Trust

article en

Abstract

Revision of the National Mediator Accreditation System, effective from 1 July 2015, removes the requirement for mediators to demonstrate understanding of neutrality as an ethical competency. The principle of impartiality has been retained and the principle of self-determination has been newly included as an ethical competency. The self-determination of participants, recognised in the original version of the NMAS, has been more clearly articulated as the aim of mediation practice. Abandonment of the principle of neutrality signals a need to reconsider the role of the mediator, which was once identified with control of the process of mediation, though neutral as to its content and outcome. Abandonment of neutrality calls for an alternative frame of reference for ethical practice in mediation. In this paper, the relationship of trust between mediator and parties is proposed as a suitable and defensible alternative ethical framework. It is argued that this relationship can be constructed according to principles associated with fiduciary and therapeutic relationships, in recognition of the distinctive socio-legal context of practice. Abandonment of neutrality also raises issues as to the mediator's role in achieving fairness for participants. It is argued that relationships of trust provide a convincing framework within which to consider issues of substantive fairness in mediation. Full text also available via Informit

La Trobe University
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 49%
Conflict Management and Negotiation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.