About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

10 Mediation Q. 173 (1992-1993)
On Toward a new discourse for mediation: A critique of neutrality (MQ 9:2)

handle is hein.journals/cfltrq10 and id is 177 raw text is: READER COMMENTARY On Toward a New Discourse for Mediation: A Critique of Neutrality (MQ 9:2) Michael Feer For some time Janet Rifkin and her colleagues have engaged the practition- ers and theoreticians of mediation in a much-needed discussion about the nature of neutrality. It is true that neutrality is a prime tenet of mediation and just as true that tensions exist in its real-life application to resolving conflict. Rifkin, Millen, and Cobb (MQ, vol. 9, no. 2) have contributed observations in two significant areas. The first addresses neutrality and its stressors. The second concerns discourse analysis as a tool to promote more effective communications between parties in conflict. It is the contention of the authors that through a more appropriate use of discourse, for example, storytelling, the tensions inherent in applying neutrality will be obviated. While this hypothesis may be valid, I seriously question the premises and analysis presented as the basis for this hypothesis. This concern and questioning arises out of my recognition of a number of logical fallacies and risky assumptions presented in Rifkin's critique of neutrality and proposi- tions in support thereof. There are occasions when the foundation for a theory may be so overconstructed that it risks the very erection itself and the view of anything above it. The remainder of this commentary will attempt to explicate these concerns. In the text I cite Janet Rifkin's name most often not to make her a target nor to diminish the contributions of her colleagues, Jonathan Millen and Sara Cobb, but out of convenience and recognition of her work as primary author. Neutrality Fundamental to Rifkin's analysis is the assumption that neutrality is composed of two elements, impartiality and equidistance, and that these elements are, by definition, contradictory. This contradiction inevitably leads in practice to a paradox. MEDIATION QUARTERLY, vol. 10, no. 2, Winter 1992 @Jossey-Bass Publishers 173

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most