Frequently, in ordinary jurisdiction it happens that a problem “is isolated.” On it, evidence is provided with its corresponding defense arguments, and generally it is the judges who, ultimately, dictate a sentence to resolve the case in question in accordance with the law.
However, in mediation it is very different: the professional mediator must analyze the problem from a global and neutral vision, taking into account the different perspectives of the case that may arise and without leaning towards any of the parties.
This fundamental characteristic of mediation, which a priori may seem difficult to carry out in practice, is what makes it possible to explore and discover alternatives that even the parties might not have thought of, but that would provide benefits for the two people in conflict.
Confrontation vs. dialogue
In today's society, most conflicts are perceived as "confrontations", that is, we tend to think that in a dispute between two parties there is always one who is right (right) and another who is wrong (wrong).
This paradigm of polarizing the conflict for the benefit of only one of the parties can further aggravate the already existing tensions caused by the problem itself since, Perceptions, feelings and emotions also intervene in a fight. (which the mediator must know how to decipher and interpret, in order to promote disagreement that allows the conflict to be unblocked and an agreement to be reached).
Precisely the role of the mediator, with his knowledge and skills in the art of mediation, is to knowing how to move away from the problematic focus and being able to take a “panoramic” perspective, paying attention to all possible variables and channeling the dialogue in such a way that the joint search for possible solutions is fruitful and the resolution is satisfactory for both parties.
In previous posts we also talked about another of the basic pillars on which the discipline of mediation is based: the principle of voluntariness.
