Vol. 9, No. 5, Pg. 19. Mediation Myths.

• Author: By Sydnor Thompson

South Carolina Lawyer

1998.

Vol. 9, No. 5, Pg. 19.

Mediation Myths

19Mediation MythsBy Sydnor ThompsonA "myth" is a "widely held belief that is not subject to proof"

By Order dated July 1, 1995, the Supreme Court of South Carolina suspended the implementation of its experimental programs in court-mandated arbitration and mediation after the governor's veto of a significant portion of the appropriations made to the Judicial Department.

This Order indicated that the Court would consider its options for implementing court-mandated arbitration and mediation in South Carolina to include reducing the number of counties involved or otherwise scaling back the scope of the programs to permit implementation within the limits of available funding.

In January 1996, the Court decided to go forward with court-mandated arbitration and mediation in the circuit and family courts in Florence and Richland counties. The Circuit Court Arbitration Rules, Circuit Court Mediation Rules and the Family Court Mediation Rules became effective on March 15, 1996 in those counties.

In view of the success of the program in Florence and Richland counties and the general popularity of such programs in other jurisdictions, it is anticipated that the

20 programs will eventually be established on a statewide basis when funding is available.

North Carolina has successfully operated a statewide program of court-mandated mediation in its Superior Courts for several years. During that time, a number of views have surfaced in some quarters that the author believes to be without sufficient foundation. The purpose of this article is to expose such myths for public discussion.

MYTH NO. 1: Many cases cannot benefit from mediation.

While there are perhaps a few cases that cannot benefit from mediation (e.g., cases that involve a disputed principle of law that a party must have resolved in court, or "strike suits" of no merit) such cases are few in number.

The goal of the mediator is to take account of all issues in the case, including those that might at first blush appear to prevent the conference from achieving settlement. Indeed, even if the case does not settle at the conference, there are sufficient other benefits to be derived from the mediation to the minimal time and expense involved. See Myth No. 7.

MYTH NO. 2: The mediator should be an expert in the field...