Mediation Regulation Vs Self Determination

@_ bjbj .4bby6668n,6fGIIIIII.BmmGGIv30 mm 

Title Mediation Regulation VS Self Determination

Name Josephine Tauoa

Introduction

The Uniform Mediation Act was conceptualized in 1998 by different legal minds including the Americas Bar Association and National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) (Matt, 2005). The Act was geared toward harmonization of the process of across different states in America. The creation of the Act was also informed by the need to reduce the number of statutes charged with mediation regulation. There were approximately 2500 statutes used by the states. In light of this knowledge, the various committees proposed the adoption of the Act in 2001.

According to Matt (2005), the Act major aim is to create a platform where legal proceedings confidentiality is enhanced. This implies that mediators have access to all facts as provided by the parties seeking their services. Full disclosure ensures greater success of the mediation process. Such success results to increased confidence in the community. Higher confidence levels signify more dispute resolution through mediation.

Eight American States have since adopted the Act. These states include Washington, New Jersey, Iowa, Ohio, Illinois, Utah, Nebraska, District of Columbia and Vermont. Despite the adoption, there is uncertainty in the effectiveness of this Act in mediation. This essay looks at the summary of the Uniform Mediation Act, its benefit and shortcomings. In the process of discussion, the paper looks at the advantages and disadvantaged of the Act in relation to its ease of use among the different states.

The Uniform Mediation Act

The Act comprises of 15 sections. The first section gives the name of the Act, section 2 defines mediation and other associated terms. Section 3 gives the scope of the Act and type of mediations excluded in the Act. Section 4 details the rules of confidentiality protection. It gives guidelines related to disclosure, admissibility and discovery. Section 5 indicates the process of excluding and waiving privileges while section 6 highlights the exclusion to privilege. Section 7 gives instances where communication by the mediator is prohibited.

The next section shows the extent to which confidentiality is allowed. Section 9 outlines the need for mediator to disclose areas of interest before taking a mediation case. It emphasizes on the need for the mediator to be on a neutral ground. The next section states that parties may be accompanies by their attorneys. Section 11 relates the Act to the conformity of the internation standards while section 12 outlines circumstances where provisions may become invalid. The rest of the sections give a guideline for dates set up, repeals and application.

Benefits of the Uniform Mediation Act

States are encouraged to adopt the Act of because it enhances uniformity (Menkel-Meadow, 2013). In the era of technology advancement, the legal system is under pressure to provide fast and effect conflict resolution mechanisms. Uniformity of the mediation Act across the states means that mediators and parties in different states can settle their dispute using enhanced technology. These include use of the internet to make conference or video calls. This saves travel and space costs incurred by the parties. The other benefit of uniform mediation is the doing way with the likelihood of the process of mediation in one state being used by another state in litigation of process of administration.

The other benefit of Uniform Mediation Act if its simplicity. Parties in dispute and mediators do not have to through volumes of statutes in a bid to comprehend what confidentiality involves. Bearing in mind that most of the mediators are not well versed with the law, the Uniform Mediation Act provides a simplified, easily accessible and understood confidentiality of mediation and its provisions. The Act also leaves a provision where a court has an opportunity to apply some provisions in its discretion. These are the provisions left out in the Act for example how to determine the qualification of a mediator. A court is allowed to give an advisory opinion on such provisions.

Shortcoming of the Uniform Mediation Act

One of the major short comings of government regulation is cost implications to the parties in dispute. In addition, the implementation of the regulation process is mostly mandated to state-funded agencies (Diaz and Oretskin, 2002). These are the bodies entrusted to oversee the process of legislation. The self-regulators lose the benefits of providing the industry with expertise. This could also imply impartiality in the regulatory process. The government can opt for a dictatorial rather that democratic process of decision making.

The cost of paying the mediators is borne by the parties in dispute. There are no clear guidelines on how to determine these costs. Often, parties are forced to incur additional costs in case of delays in dispute resolution. This is against the principles guiding the mediation process. As a result, the aim of uniform mediation to provide mediation services at a low cost remains a pipe dream.

Conclusion

The debate on whether to adopt or not to adopt the Uniform Mediation Act still rages. In my opinion, it is important to analyze the mediation needs of different states and parties involved and then come up with a comprehensive guide to application of this Act. In its whole, the Act would go along way in ensuring equality and fairness in conflict resolution across the states.

References

Brown, M. (2005, June 16). Legislation Where the Uniform Mediation Act stands in the states.

Retrieved https//www.cpradr.org/news-publications/articles/2005-06-16-legislation-

were-the-uniform-mediation-act-stands-in-the-states-web

Diaz, L.M. Oretskin, N. (2002, March 18-19). The US Uniform Mediation Act and the Draft

UNCITRAL model law on International Commercial Conciliation. Retrieved

https//www.mediate.com/articles/daiz2.cfm

Menkel-Meadow, C. (2013). Regulation of dispute resolution in the United States of America

From the formal to the informal to the semi-formal. Retrieved from https//scholarship

.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgiarticle2300contextfacpub

Mediation Regulation VS Self Determination

PAGE MERGEFORMAT 3

FGHO_kqs K

bcufZfh

fHq hhfHq h

hwY5h

h5hhe hThhwY hjhhDE hhhHg hh5h5hh5h

5 hB h_hEth_ hEthEthEthEt5 

GHI-DM agdEt-DM gdI_abcdefghijklmnopqrs-DM gd-DM agdEt mc1id-DM gd

d-DM gd

d-DM gdd-DM gdd-DM gd

d-DM gdE-V48C_k01wpldph)hxh

he5h

hhehhxhxhhvghhFh

hx5hhChhqhhUhhU hXhhh

h5hwfHq h2fHq hhfHq hg0fHq 1xS4 x y dgdEtgd)gd)d-DM gd)d-DM gdd-DM gd

d-DM gd

FGH x y z vnjnjnjnjOKhEthEtCJOJQJaJhEthEtCJOJQJaJhJHjhJHUhh)h)h)6CJOJQJaJh)h)CJOJQJaJh)h)h)h)6PJfHq h)h)PJfHq 0h)h)6CJOJQJaJfHq -h)h)CJOJQJaJfHq h

h)5 d-DM gda dgdEt hh)hJHjhUmHnHuhwmHnHuhjhUh ,1h/ j666666666vvvvvvvvv6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666hH6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666662 0@Pp2( 0@Pp 0@Pp 0@Pp 0@Pp 0@Pp 0@Pp8XV OJPJQJ_HmH nH sH tH JJNormaldCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA D

Default Paragraph FontRiR

0Table Normal4 l4a(k (

0No ListZOZ text-leaddddCJOJPJQJJaJ@0Normal (Web)dddCJOJPJQJJaJWStrong5dOdcontentsubheaddddCJOJPJQJJaJ4U14 0 Hyperlink ph.XA.@Emphasis64@R4Et0Header

H6oa6Et0Header CharCJaJ4 @r4Et0Footer

H6o6Et0Footer CharCJaJR@R

Et0Balloon TextdCJOJQJJaJNoNEt0Balloon Text CharCJOJQJJaJPKContent_Types.xmlN0EH-J@ULTB l,3rJBG7OVa(7IRpgLr85vuQ8CX6NJCFB..YTe55 _g -Yl6NPK6_rels/.relsj0Qv/C/(hO Chvxp_P1H0ORBdJE4bq_6LR70O,En7Lib/SePKkytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlM @w7c(EbCA7K

Y,

e.,H,lxIsQ ,jGW)E 8PK0C)theme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w tocvu-MniP@Iama4lGRX6)OrCy@/yH)UDbqJX)InEp)liV1MOP6rzgbIguSebORDqu gZolAplxpT0jzAV2Fi@qv5NleXdsjcs7f

W7gJjh(KD-

dXiJ(x(I_TS1EZBmU/xYy5g/GMGeD3Vqq8K)fw9 xrxwrTZaGy8IjbRcXI u3KGnD1NIBs RuKV.ELM2fiVvlu8zH (W

JTeOtHGHYKNPT9/A7qZcqUnwNOi43N)cbJ

uV4(Tn 7_m-UBww_8(/0hFL)7iAs),Qg20ppf

DU4p MDBJlC5 2FhsFYn3E6945Z5k8Fmw-dznZxJZp/P,)KQk5qpN8KGbe

Sd17 paSR

3K4rzQ TTIIvtKcKv5DO@w_nNL9KqgVhn RyUn/HrT

t.T S ZP9giC B,X,I2UWV9lkAjAP79sYMChfooY1kyVV5E8Vk80X4D)fv

uxA@T_q64)kuV7ti9s9x,-45xd8d/YtLILJ -Gt/PK

theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0woo5

6Q

,.aic21hqm@RNdo7gK(MR(.1rJT8VAHubP8g/QAs(LPK-Content_Types.xmlPK-60_rels/.relsPK-kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-0C)theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-

theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK xml version1.0 encodingUTF-8 standaloneyes

aclrMap xmlnsahttp//schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main bg1lt1 tx1dk1 bg2lt2 tx2dk2 accent1accent1 accent2accent2 accent3accent3 accent4accent4 accent5accent5 accent6accent6 hlinkhlink folHlinkfolHlink/4 I1 8@0( B S Y - 2 @FaiyxGy3333_dsbccE , - - 01xy QV,

-7wpldp(Hg DE XCQg0V3ABJHU)_vgjMkEt

w3Uq2wYTxDyFXexTy@- - - - @UnknownGCx Times New Roman5Symbol3.Cx Arial7.@Calibri5..)TahomaABCambria Mathqhvv,,20mmKHP P2xxlenovolenovoOh0T 

(4DLlenovoNormallenovo21Microsoft Office Word@ZNc@T Z@L.,0hp

,mTitle 

()-./012356789BRoot Entry FA1Table WordDocument .4SummaryInformation(,DocumentSummaryInformation84MsoDataStoreUZ3WUSBLGR2Item PropertiesUCompObj r bSources SelectedStyleAPA.XSL StyleNameAPA xmlnsbhttp//schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography xmlnshttp//schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography/bSources

xml version1.0 encodingUTF-8 standaloneno

dsdatastoreItem dsitemID777946E5-2DC8-4459-A6CC-198BC0646C8F xmlnsdshttp//schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/customXmldsschemaRefsdsschemaRef dsurihttp//schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography//dsschemaRefs/dsdatastoreItem F Microsoft Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q