Problem Of The Scope Of Mediation Today

This paper discusses the mediation scope that has recently turned into a pressing issue; it limits the mediation effectiveness and popularization. The authors discuss mediation trends: mediation styles’ differentiation, emergence of several different schools varying in their approach, growing interest in the mediation theory. We investigate mediation barriers and focus on the internal limitations resulting from mediation technology and ethics. The paper demonstrates the complexity and fundamental blurriness of the borderline between mediation and similar approaches to problems and conflicts, i.e., legal and psychotherapeutic approaches. It analyzes the inadequacy of the conventional separation criteria: casework duration and depth, focus on the future, etc. The authors suggest using relative rather than absolute criteria. The authors developed novel criteria that set mediation and other methods apart. They are the mediator’s neutrality and impartiality, the disputed matter which is the subject matter of negotiations rather than a symptom. We underline the crucial importance of moving from the position level (e.g., the lawsuit matter in court) to the level of interest and focusing on a win-win result; this transition is a distinctive medication feature. We discuss the procedural and substantive mediation evaluativeness and demonstrate their link to its neutrality, and the role they play in setting the mediation scope. Statistically significant data is retrieved from mediation practitioners’ datasets. Thus, the mediation scope is a problem calling for further consideration, as the scope of cases suitable for mediation, the development of mediation practices, prevention of occupational burnout in mediators, and some other issues are pressing.