One of the great mediators of our time, Marshall Rosenberg, says that when someone speaks to us in an upsetting way, we have three choices: 1. We can take the words personally (ex: “He is out to get me!”); 2. We can pass judgment on the speaker, (ex: “My boss isn’t nearly as smart as he thinks he is.”); or, 3. We can listen empathically,
There is a saying that you can’t connect the dots until you collect the dots. Mediation, in part, is about collecting dots. Two people meet to hear one another’s story, (one dot), explain their version of the same story, (another dot), problem solve possible solutions, (more dots), etc. Once these dots are on the table, connections can be made. Some connections are minuscule, a small detail cleared up. Some are considerable, a softening of a position, perhaps. Some are huge, veritable paradigm shifts, that allow warring factions to make peace. Most dot connecting happens over time. Mediation gets the dots rolling.
On this last day of the year it feels natural to consider trends and changes in the mediation world as we look forward to 2011. I am seeing changes in my practice, and the mediation profession as a whole. More of my clients are seeking mediation on their own volition, without a court order to mediate. Some are anticipating divorce, and want to have a preliminary conversation to begin the process. For them, mediation is an opportunity to make lists, set priorities, and check in with one another in order to grow more focused, calm and clear.
On my way to a mediation services board meeting last night, I was trolling my mind for an answer to the night’s ice breaker question. Our director emails the agenda before each meeting, and the meeting opener is usually a question that we all answer in turn. The question last night was, “Tell one thing you’ve learned about conflict this month.”Hmm. Where to start?
When a friend called to say she wanted to purchase a mediation for her friend on the brink of a divorce, I responded enthusiastically…until she informed me her friend would be coming alone. I stammered, “Um, gee, mediation is between two parties. I’m not a counselor, you know.” Reaching, I threw in a joke to underscore the absurdity of a one person mediation: “I guess I could mediate between your friend’s head and heart.” My friend didn’t laugh. I regrouped. “How about I meet your friend for coffee instead? I’ll tell her about mediation and we’ll get a chance to get acquainted as friends.” “No,” my friend responded. “She already knows about mediation. I want you to be professional about this and meet with her. Send me a bill. I’m giving her your number.” Click. I sat holding the phone, perplexed. Now I had my own conflict to resolve – how to do right by my friend and adhere to my mediator training and standards of good practice.
Mediator neutrality is recognized more frequently in its absence than its presence. Over the last month, I heard three real life mediation stories that underscored this point – one story came from a friend, one from a colleague and one from our court magistrate. All three stories illustrate the exquisite care that must be taken to treat clients impartially.