Family mediation

theoretical and legal aspect

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52028/rbadr.v6.i11.ART18.RU

Keywords:

Mediation Institute, Family conflicts, Mediator, Protection of family rights

Abstract

This article examines the significance of the use of family mediation in the resolution of family conflicts from the point of view of theoretical and legal aspects. The context of the work also touches upon the significant issues of mediation regulation at the legislative level concerning the rights and obligations of the participants of the process. The author analyzes the basic principles of family mediation and identifies the advantages of this approach over court proceedings in resolving family disputes. Special attention is paid to the mediator’s role and functions in the conflict resolution process. The article also examines the legislative framework regulating family mediators’ activities, status, rights, and obligations. The article’s main idea is that family mediation is an effective tool for resolving family conflicts, contributes to the safety of family relations and allows the parties to come to a mutually beneficial solution to the problem independently. The article argues in detail the positive sides of family mediation, substantiates the need for its application in modern society and identifies the need for further research in this area for a detailed understanding of all the pros and cons of the use of family mediation in contemporary society.

Author Biographies

Yuliya Avdonina, Kazan Federal University

Candidate of Legal Sciences, Senior Lecturer of the Department of Environmental, Labor Law and Civil Procedure of the Faculty of Law of Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University.

Evgeny Vavilin, O.E. Kutafin Moscow State Law University

PhD in Law. Professor. Head of the Department of Civil Law of O.E. Kutafin Moscow State Law University. Retired judge of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation.

References

AKSENCHUK, L.A. Mediation agreement: content and classification, Human and civil rights and freedoms: theoretical aspects and legal practice: proceedings of the annual International Scientific Conference (Ryazan: Concept, 2016).

BERNARD, K. Mechanism fine-tuned for 20 years: Mediation in the Federal Court of Appeals of the Ninth Federal District of the United States, Mediation and Law, 2, 12-23, 2010.

BROOKE, G. Mediation should not be imposed, Mediation and Law, 4, 46-50, 2009.

ERMAKOVA, E.P. Features of Online Settlement of Consumer Disputes by e-commerce Platforms in the People’s Republic of China. Journal of Digital Technologies and Law, 1(3), 691-711, 2023. https://doi.org/10.21202/jdtl.2023.30.

DEMIDOVA, L.A., SERGEEV, V.I. Advocacy in Russia: Textbook (M., 2005).

FERREIRA, D. B., GIOVANNINI, C., GROMOVA, E., SCHMIDT, G. R. Arbitration Chambers and trust in technology provider: Impacts of trust in technology intermediated dispute resolution proceedings, Technology in Society, 68, 101872, 2022.

FERREIRA D.B., SEVERO L. Multiparty Mediation as Solution for Urban Conflicts: A Case Analysis from Brazil. BRICS Law Journal. 8(3), 5-26, 2021. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2021-8-3-5-29.

FERREIRA, D.B., GROMOVA, E.A. Hyperrealistic Jurisprudence: The Digital Age and the (Un) Certainty of Judge Analytics. Int J Semiot Law, 36, 2261–2281, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-10015-0.

FILIPCZYK, H. ADR in Tax Disputes in Poland – The State of Play and Perspectives. Revista Brasileira de Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR, vol. 5, n. 10, pp. 205-220, 2023.

GOLANN, D., FOLBERG, J. The roles of advocate and neutral (New York: Aspen Publishers, inc., 2006).

GROMOVA, E.A., FERREIRA, D.B., BEGISHEV, I.R. ChatGPT and Other Intelligent Chatbots: Legal, Ethical and Dispute Resolution Concerns. Revista Brasileira de Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR, Belo Horizonte, ano 05, n. 10, p. 153-175, jul./dez. 2023. DOI: 10.52028/rbadr.v5i10.

GROMOVA E., IVANC T. Regulatory Sandboxes (Experimental Legal Regimes) for Digital Innovations in BRICS. BRICS Law Journal, 7(2), 10-36, 2020. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2020-7-2-10-36.

HALOUSH, H.A. The Liberty of Participation in Online Alternative Dispute Resolution Schemes. International Journal of Legal Information, 36(1), 102-117, 2008.

ELISEEVA, A.A. Family Law at the turn of XX-XXI centuries: to the 20th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (M.: Statut, 2011).

ENTRINGER, F. Development with Insurance, Mediation and Law. Mediation and Conciliation, 1, 12-20, 2010. In the old days they used to say: “a notary is a secular priest”: Interview with M.I. Sazonova, Mediation and Law, 2,19-20, 2010.

KOZIATINSKAYA, A.V. Participation of a lawyer in extrajudicial dispute resolution (Kaluga, 2001).

KRYVOI, Y., DAVYDENKO, D. Consent Awards in International Arbitration: From Settlement to Enforcement, Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 40 (3), 843-855, 2015.

MELNICHENKO, R.G. Advocacy (M.: Statut, 2009).

MIKHEEVA, YU.YU. Mediation as a way to protect the rights and interests of spouses in resolving disputes related to the dissolution of marriage, Traditions and innovations in the system of modern Russian law: a collection of materials (Moscow: RG-Press, 2019).

MOORE, C.W. The Mediation Process. Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict (London: Jossey- Bass Publishers, 1986).

NOLAN-HALEY, J.M. Alternative dispute resolution: In a nutshell (St. Paul (Minn): West Publishing Co., 1992).

OMKAR, A., KRISHNAMURTHY, K. The Art of Negotiation and Mediation: A Wishbone, Funny bone and A Backbone (LexisNexis, 2015).

OTIS, L., REITER, E.H. Mediation by judges: a new phenomenon in the transformation of justice // Mediation and Law, 1-3, 34-39, 2011.

PARKINSON, L. On the development of mediation in other states, on the prevalence of family mediation in Europe and the USA (M.: Interregional Center for Management and Political Consulting, 2010).

RICHBELL, D. Mediation in Russia has huge opportunities, Mediation and Law. Mediation and Conciliation, 1, 48-50, 2010.

RISTIN, G. Not everything is resolved yet. Alternative dispute resolution at the level of appeal // Mediation and Law. 2010. No. 4. P. 18.

SHASHANK, G. Alternative Dispute Resolution: The Indian Perspective (Oxford University Press, 2018).

SOLHCHI, M.A., BAGHBANNO, F. Artificial Intelligence and Its Role in the Development of the Future of Arbitration, International Journal of Law in Changing World, 2(2), 56-76, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54934/ijlcw.v2i2.56.

PANCHU, S. Mediation Law and Practice: The Path to Successful Dispute Resolution (Lexis Nexis, 2022).

THANH, H.B. Applying Conflict Coaching to Handle Vietnamese Family’s Conflicts. Revista Brasileira de Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR, Belo Horizonte, ano 03, n. 05, p. 125-135, jan./jun. 2021.

TROFIMETS, I.A. Mediation and dissolution of marriage, Russian judge, 10, 17-19, 2014.

VAIPAN, V. Conflict of interests in advocacy. Commentary to Article 11 of the Code of Professional Ethics of the lawyer, Law and Economics, 6, 108-111, 2007.

VERMA, A. Negotiation for human beings: what, why and how? Revista Brasileira de Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR, Belo Horizonte, ano 04, n. 08, p. 17-37, jul./dez. 2022.

VLADIMIROVICH, M.A., SERGEEVICH, E.K. Alternative dispute resolution in digital government. Revista Brasileira de Alternative Dispute Resolution – RBADR, Belo Horizonte, ano 04, n. 07, p. 119-146, jan./jun. 2022.

Downloads

Published

2024-07-11

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 11 (2024): jan./jun.

Section

Artigos

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

No royalties or other compensation shall be due for the publication of the works. 

The opinions expressed by the authors of the articles and reviews are their sole responsibility.