TITLE OF ARTICLE: Is the Mediator a Therapist? A Critique of the Role of the Mediator in Bush and Folger’s Transformative Model of Mediation
AUTHOR:
UGOCHINYELU CHIKODILI NERISSA OKOLO, LL.M (Lond.), BL, MICMC (Nig), Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus.
ABSTRACT:
Mediation as a dispute resolution process came into being in response to the need to manage the growing problem of overflowing court dockets. By implication, the Mediator’s role in mediation proceedings could be said to be that of dispute settlement. However, divergent views exist as to the actual role of the mediator and one of such views given by the originators of the transformative model of mediation, Robert .A. Baruch Bush and Joseph. P. Folger is the subject matter of this paper. A careful perusal of the objectives of the transformative model of mediation suggests that the role of the transformative mediator is akin to that of a therapist as he is not expressly charged with the function of ensuring dispute settlement between the disputing parties. He is primarily concerned with helping disputing parties achieve the joint goals of developing the capacity for strength of self (empowerment) and developing the capacity for relating to others (recognition). This, I believe, defeats the purpose of mediation because the primary reason for the parties’ referral of their dispute to the process is the resolution of such dispute. I believe that since the object of mediation is dispute settlement, it follows that the role of the mediator should primarily be that of problem-solving. This essay therefore seeks to compare the role of the transformative mediator to that of the ‘traditional’ problem-solving mediator as well as that of the therapist in a bid to show the deviation of the role of the transformative mediator from the original idea of mediation.