Tuesday, February 15, 2011

"Fairly Legal": Fairly Accurate?

Thanks to USA's new TV series about a San Francisco mediator, mediation as a profession is getting some unusual attention. But how realistic is the show's, and in particular, Kate Reed's (the main character) portrayal of everyone's favorite form of alternative dispute resolution?

Kate found her way to mediation the way many of us do - attorneys who no longer wish to engage in the often-trying world of litigation. We seek a new path where we can still use our legal knowledge, but in the spirit of collaboration rather than competition. So far, so good.

But Kate's mediation style is what some might call directive, if not downright unethical. She lies to her clients, misleads them, and bullies them into 'solutions' using threats of legal action and blackmail. She utilizes force, swears, and is perennially late for meetings. She visibly chooses sides, and works towards her own envisioned resolution (irrespective of what her clients want). Suffice it to say, this mediator thinks Kate Reed lacks a mediation style worthy of emulation. I would be loathe to employ virtually all of her, um, techniques.

Despite stock cliché phrases, usually preceded by "mediation is where/when/how....," the show has very little to do with mediation in practice. USA has succeeded in making a show that is perhaps most interesting for its brief glimpses of San Francisco (most of which, unfortunately, is stock footage), and for the farcical interpretation of the life of a professional mediator. Personally, I rely much more on my active listening skills in the mediation room, and I believe in maintaing an atmosphere of civility and collaboration. But then again, I'm not trying to market a television show, I'm working to build a longterm practice. The less drama, the better, from my perspective. Not so with cable TV.

Nonetheless, with a show about a San Francisco-based mediator on the air weekly, the odds are good I'll still be sucked into watching the occasional episode.

Nicole Gesher now a mediation panelist for the San Mateo Superior Court

Gesher Mediation is pleased to announce that Nicole Gesher has been accepted to the Mediation Panel for the Civil ADR Program of the San Mateo Superior Court.

Gesher Mediation is honored to be a member of this distinguished panel, and looks forward to serving the mediation needs of San Mateo County.

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Ethical Concerns in Volunteer Mediations: One Woman's Fight Against the Exploitation of a Non-Commercial Space

Occasionally, I am honored to serve as a volunteer for Community Boards, the nonprofit organization where I did my initial 40 hour mediation training.

There are many things to love about Community Boards, but perhaps the most beloved aspect of their mediation model lies in their volunteers. They train ordinary community members to mediate neighborhood disputes, regardless of the volunteers' professional background. As a result, many San Francisco neighborhoods have benefited from Community Boards mediations, which resolve a wide range of conflicts. Through their volunteer program, I have mediated landlord tenant issues, noise disputes, family concerns, planning commission hearings, and many other types of conflict. The city uses them on a regular basis to resolve conflicts that would otherwise clog our agencies and courts.

However, when I serve as a volunteer mediator, I leave my own private practice out of the mediation room. I feel very strongly that a Community Boards mediation is not the place to engage in marketing for my own business; rather, I am there as a representative of the nonprofit, and nothing more. While I can tell you that not every mediator feels similarly, for myself this is the only ethical option. I was a mediator in a case where one of the other panelists told me he planned to give his business cards to the parties before the mediation, and that I should feel free to do the same. When I told the other panelist I found this inappropriate something unexpected happened. He thanked me for keeping him honest. Neither one of us distributed our cards. The lesson to be learned? I'm not sure that there is one, except maybe to listen to your internal moral compass. Others might appreciate your integrity, but that's really besides the point - the impetus in my decision was the parties, and their comfort level. In the end, we provided a mediation that was focussed on the issues before us, rather than our self-promotion. And that, to me, was really the point.