Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Peer Mediation
Heartwarming video story about my former employer, L.A. County Bar Association's Dispute Resolution Services, and their peer mediation program. The problem is that the meritorious program is in only a few schools, when it should be in ALL of them! The funds allow for only a couple of on-site trainers, when there should be an army of them. This is our best hope for teaching peace to the next generation. This program has been around for 20 years now, with outstanding results, and yet instead of growing, its budget keeps getting slashed. Very dispiriting, especially as campuses become increasingly violent. Every lawyer in L.A. should be required to contribute $100 per year to keep this program alive and flourishing.
Verdict: Mediation Saves Time & Money
Nice to see the mainstream press stumble upon the concept of mediation. Someday mediation will be as commonplace as lawsuits, and hence not newsworthy, but until then we should be grateful whenever a reporter discovers its existence, marvels at its superiority to litigation, and shares those observations with readers.
Here's reporter Paula Schleis in the Akron Beacon Journal :
Great in-depth story follows, with lots of interviews and examples. Go read it!
Here's reporter Paula Schleis in the Akron Beacon Journal :
Look in the Akron Yellow Pages under ''attorneys'' and you'll find a section so thick it has its own color code.
Look under ''mediators'' and you'll find a grand total of six listings.
Read into that what you will, but it might explain why mediators scratch their heads and wonder why more folks drain their bank accounts chasing costly litigation when a thoughtful afternoon with a mediator might resolve their problem.
Great in-depth story follows, with lots of interviews and examples. Go read it!
Friday, May 30, 2008
Stonequake Redux
More to this apology than meets the eye. Or ear.
After seeming genuinely contrite, now the star (who has been banned for life --onscreen and offscreen -- from the Shanghai film fest) is, by turns, irritated, hedging, backpedaling, defensive.
“I misspoke for four seconds and it’s become an international incident.”
It seems that the apology had emanated not from Sharon Stone herself, but rather from Dior, with whom she has a modeling contract. The company, fearing consumer backlash, hastily hammered out a contrite statment on her behalf. Stone scoffed and resisted.
But then she viewed a videotape of her own remarks (ironically about karmic retribution) -- and understood for the first time what all the fuss is about. Lesson: if we could only hear what we sound like to others, we'd tread more cautiously -- and more respectfully.
UPDATE: Who the hell cares what Sharon Stone has to say about China anyway?
After seeming genuinely contrite, now the star (who has been banned for life --onscreen and offscreen -- from the Shanghai film fest) is, by turns, irritated, hedging, backpedaling, defensive.
“I misspoke for four seconds and it’s become an international incident.”
It seems that the apology had emanated not from Sharon Stone herself, but rather from Dior, with whom she has a modeling contract. The company, fearing consumer backlash, hastily hammered out a contrite statment on her behalf. Stone scoffed and resisted.
But then she viewed a videotape of her own remarks (ironically about karmic retribution) -- and understood for the first time what all the fuss is about. Lesson: if we could only hear what we sound like to others, we'd tread more cautiously -- and more respectfully.
“I had absolutely no intention of saying that, which I did say,” she said, “and
now, looking at it on the tape, I look like a complete ding-dong.”
UPDATE: Who the hell cares what Sharon Stone has to say about China anyway?
Labels:
China,
Earthquake,
Shanghai,
Sharon Stone,
Sichuan,
Tibet
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Bonjour!
We've got international interest in our TV show, thanks to the Réseau Médiation blog (Les dernières nouvelles, infos, idées sur la médiation, la négociation et la gestion des conflits).
Even if you're not entirely sure what it means, you've got to admit it looks impressive... and to auteur Dominique Foucart, we say, "Merci!"
Even if you're not entirely sure what it means, you've got to admit it looks impressive... and to auteur Dominique Foucart, we say, "Merci!"
C’est encore à Victoria Pynchon et à son blog Settle It Now! que je dois cette nouvelle: une émission de TV en direct qui va proposer de vivre des médiations. C’est aux Etats-Unis, bien entendu. Mais cela aurait-il du sens chez nous ?
Lorsqu’il s’agit de promouvoir la médiation, la question de savoir si tous les moyens sont bons doit être posée. Pour Jerry Lazar, médiateur à Los Angeles, la réponse permet en tout cas d’aller jusqu’à amener des clients et leur problème sur un plateau de télévision et à les faire participer à une médiation en direct. Autant pour la confidentialité des débats…
Daprès l’article publié par Victoria, le numéro 0 de la série a été tourné avec des acteurs, mais la série proprement dite devrait faire appel aux personnes qui sont réellement dans le conflit. L’émission commence par une présentation formelle du processus de médiation, suivie de la médiation proprement dite.
Cela me rappelle furieusement le succès de “Ca va se savoir”, la version francophone de “The Jerry Springer Show”. Pour rappel, le principe de la version originale est de faire venir sur un plateau, “à l’insu les uns des autres”, les protagonistes d’un drame (le plus souvent familial) le plus sordide possible. Au plus les protagonistes rejoignent le plateau, au plus le caractère sordide de la situation apparait, et au plus les acteurs se retrouvent en confrontation. Dans la version française, ce sont des acteurs qui prennent des rôles qui ne viennent pas de la réalité, mais ont été inventés par des scénaristes professionnels.
Dans quelle mesure une telle approche peut-elle aider à promouvoir notre métier de médiateur? Un apport important d’une telle approche est qu’elle donne une meilleure vue aux médiés potentiels de certains points qui sont aujourd’hui des freins à la médiation, comme par exemple que “la médiation est faite pour les gens qui veulent se réconcilier”, ou comme la magie du passage d’un combat de position à un travail de co-créativité. Par contre, la mise à mal du caractère confidentiel des débats me parait totalement inacceptable. Existe-t-il une “voie du milieu”, c’est sans doute à explorer.
Je vois par exemple deux possibilités de promouvoir dans les médias le processus de médiation: utiliser des cas proches de cas vécus, mais les faire jouer par des acteurs (ou mieux, par de bons improvisateurs), ou dans une approche plus “Pierre Bellemare”, faire un travail de conteur de médiations.
Voilà de quoi faire vibrer nos petites cellules grises.
Labels:
Francais,
Reseau Mediation,
Settle It Now,
Victoria Pynchon
Joyce Kilmer Weeps
If two neighbors are fighting over the placement of a tree on their property line, they can seek sane remedies in mediation.
Or they can tell it to the judge, who will issue a Solomon-like decision.
Sigh. It's always the trees that suffer.
Or they can tell it to the judge, who will issue a Solomon-like decision.
Sigh. It's always the trees that suffer.
Obama's Global Diplomacy
Mediator extraordinaire Ken Cloke paints an optimistic picture of what international diplomacy and global dispute resolution strategies might look like in an Obama administration:
Those questions, which Cloke parses brilliantly, are:
He concludes:
Consider a key element in the Obama campaign and one of the key questions for many voters – should the US negotiate with its enemies?
Most mediators, I think, would immediately answer, “Yes.” We understand that negotiation is based on differences; that negotiating doesn’t mean agreeing; that negotiating draws people away from violent alternatives; and that negotiation is preferable to power-based solutions such as war and terrorism. Notice, however, how use of the word “enemy” automatically builds into the question an assumption of implacable hostility and an implication that negotiation must fail. To reverse this assumption and consider not just whether, but how we should negotiate with our opponents, we need to answer a number of questions.
Those questions, which Cloke parses brilliantly, are:
1. How does effective diplomacy and negotiation differ from "appeasement?"
2. How can America best negotiate our future?
3. What does capable international diplomacy look like - what are positive
examples?
He concludes:
As mediators, we need to recognize that we also are global citizens, and responsible by virtue of our knowledge and experience for helping to save the planet. We need to weigh in on the important issues of the day that directly touch on our expertise, including not just who we negotiate with, but how we negotiate and why. Without it, Obama and the perspective he represents may succumb to those who think patriotism requires war and the slaughter of innocents. The time to speak up is now.
Labels:
Global Diplomacy,
Ken Cloke,
Sen. Barack Obama
Another Apology, Another Lesson
Like those pastors who attributed AIDS and Hurricane Katrina to divine wrath towards homosexuality and hedonism, actress Sharon Stone stepped in it when she suggested that the horrific Chinese earthquake was karmic retribution for mistreating Tibetans.
And now she's apologized.
But the best part of the story, underscoring the necessity of humility in pursuing the path toward peace, is buried at the bottom:
And now she's apologized.
"Due to my inappropriate words and acts during the interview, I feel deeply sorry and sad about hurting Chinese people...I am willing to take part in the relief work of China's earthquake, and wholly devote myself to helping affected Chinese people."
But the best part of the story, underscoring the necessity of humility in pursuing the path toward peace, is buried at the bottom:
Stone also said she received a letter from the Tibetan Foundation asking her to help the quake victims. "They wanted to go and be helpful, and that made me cry. It was a big lesson to me that sometimes you have to learn to put your head down and be of service even to people who aren't nice to you," she said.
Labels:
AIDS,
China,
Earthquake,
Katrina,
Sharon Stone,
Tibet
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)