首页> 外文OA文献 >How Can a Mediator be Both Impartial and Fair: Why Ethical Standards of Conduct Create Chaos for Mediators
【2h】

How Can a Mediator be Both Impartial and Fair: Why Ethical Standards of Conduct Create Chaos for Mediators

机译:调解员如何既公正又公正:为什么道德行为标准会给调解员带来混乱

摘要

Currently, a mediator is faced with a dilemma. All state ethical standards of conduct (“Standards”), whether promulgated by a governmental entity or professional organization, require mediator impartiality. Yet many Standards also require a mediator to attain a fair result, achieve other concepts of fairness, balance power struggles and promote informed decisions. Is it possible for a mediator to conform to all of these qualities?This article provides extensive research and analysis regarding Standards that focus on mediator impartiality and fairness. The research establishes that Standards create chaos for the practicing mediator to the extent they include vague and internally inconsistent provisions.To avert the chaos, therefore, we must begin a dialogue. Although this author is not ready to commit to a single course of action, various recommendations are posed to help start the conversation, while at the same time recognizing the fluid nature of mediation. The recommendations include:1. Take no action, otherwise known as the no-action alternative. This alternative is limited to those states that have not yet developed Standards.2. Revise ethical standards of conduct and definitions of mediation to delete requirements of mediator impartiality. By simplifying the definition of mediation – “a process of using a third party to assist disputants to reach a desired goal” – this alternative deletes requirements of mediator impartiality and aligns with the current trend toward achieving some aspect of fairness.3. Modify existing Standards to clarify otherwise vague provisions, enhance corresponding commentary, and where necessary, create a hierarchy of ethical concerns within a single set of Standards.
机译:当前,调解员面临困境。无论是政府实体还是专业组织颁布的所有州道德行为标准(“标准”)都要求调解员公正。然而,许多标准还要求调解员获得公正的结果,实现其他公正概念,平衡权力斗争和促进明智的决策。调解员是否有可能符合所有这些素质?本文针对专注于调解员公正性和公正性的标准进行了广泛的研究和分析。研究发现,标准在包括模糊和内部不一致的规定的范围内为实践中的调解人造成了混乱。因此,为了避免这种混乱,我们必须开始对话。尽管作者还没有准备好采取单一行动,但提出了各种建议来帮助开始对话,同时也认识到调解的流动性。建议包括:1。不采取任何措施,也称为不采取行动。此替代方法仅限于尚未制定标准的州。2。修订道德行为标准和调解定义,以删除调解员公正性的要求。通过简化调解的定义(“使用第三方协助争端方达到预期目标的过程”),该替代方案删除了​​调解员公正性的要求,并与实现某些公平性的当前趋势保持一致。3。修改现有标准以澄清其他含糊的条款,增强相应的注释,并在必要时在一组标准内创建道德关注的层次结构。

著录项

  • 作者

    Exon Susan Nauss;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2006
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号