Ethics Governance
Ethics & Governance - Resources and Articles |
| Articles indexes: a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | k | l | m | n | o | p | q | r | s | t | u | v | w | x | y | z | other | |
|
|
| Article - Abstract. To view full article click on the article title. | |
Mediation Capacity and Self-Determination: A Recommendation On The Model Standards Of Conduct Mediation Capacity and Self-Determination: A Recommendation On The Model Standards Of Conduct, Committee on Legal Issues Affecting People with Disabilities, Association of the Bar of NY. The recommended revision of the Model Standards of Conduct, submitted by the ADR Committee and the Committee on Legal Issues Affecting People with Disabilities of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, addresses the current bias that mediation capacity has a primary impact on people with disabilities. The recommendation points out that when capacity issues arise, whether disability-related or not, the mediator has an ethical obligation to explore the issues with the party. Your selected article and the entire Mediate.com Library are yours for free. First we need a small amount of information to best serve you: I am: a member of the public a mediator (including attorney-mediator) an attorney other dispute resolution professional My area code is: or no area code (International) Thanks for the opportunity to serve you. Privacy Why we ask Many mediator ethics codes, including the widely used Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators (American Bar Association Sections of Dispute Resolution and Litigation, Society for Professionals in Dispute Resolution and American Arbitration Association) in its section on "Quality of the Process," refer to the mediator terminating or postponing the session if a party cannot participate due to "physical or mental incapacity." Limiting the concept of mediation capacity to the area of disability is stigmatizing to people with disabilities and may lead to the exclusion of persons with disabilities who, with or without accommodation, could fully participate. This type of restriction has been used, for example, to exclude unfairly persons on particular medications (e.g., Prozac), with particular diagnosis, as well as other persons with psychiatric disabilities who do have the capacity to participate. Full Article: http://www.mediate.com/articles/nycbar1.cfm |
|
2006 Ethics-Governance.com |
|||