The debate over whether mediators should "evaluate" revolves around the confusion over what constitutes evaluation and an "evaluative" mediator. An "evaluative" mediator gives advice, makes assessments, states opinions—including opinions on the likely court outcome, proposes a fair or workable resolution to an issue or the dispute, or presses the parties to accept a particular resolution. This Article presents ten reasons demonstrating that those activities are inconsistent with the role of a mediator.
Full Text of Article
Back to the Law Review home page