The issue of compulsory mediation is exercising legal minds on both sides of the Border and, as the appetite for change in Scotland increases, the matter of its feasibility or desirability becomes ever more relevant.
Mediation is an assisted negotiation, where parties voluntarily attend a neutral venue with a third-party who facilitates communication between them. In most cases, it is an appropriate and cost-effective means of dispute resolution.
But should it be compulsory? In England and Wales, it was proposed that mediation become mandatory in all suitable low-level family court cases, excluding those which include allegations or a history of domestic abuse, and funding was planned for implementation.
However, after extensive consultations, the plans were dropped in favour of encouragement that couples take early legal advice.
The arguments against compulsion include that it is a contradiction in terms. The basic concern is that mandatory attendance at mediation is at odds with the consensual ethos at the heart of any alternative method of dispute resolution. Entry into mediation on a voluntary basis is widely considered to be a fundamental principle of the process.
Another issue with the concept of mandatory mediation is the potential for inequality in bargaining power between the parties. Such inequalities manifest themselves in various forms.
There are, in contrast, many arguments in support of the introduction of mandatory mediation in Scots family law. Supporters highlight the potential cost and time-saving benefits of mediation compared to traditional litigation.
They argue that mandatory mediation could help alleviate pressure on the court system and facilitate more efficient resolution of family disputes.
Before mandatory mediation will be successful in Scotland, a change of mindset is needed among many solicitors and the judiciary. The legal profession must lead the way in creating a more non-litigious culture in family law matters.
Moving forward, there is a need for further discussion and collaboration among participants, including solicitors, Sheriffs, and policymakers, to determine the most appropriate approach to integrating mediation into the Scottish legal process.
While mandatory mediation may not be suitable for every case, it could offer significant benefits in certain circumstances, particularly for families navigating complex disputes involving children.
With Scotland's civil courts under increasing pressure, relief is necessary - and mandatory mediation could provide it. Whilst some will always prefer to view mediation as a “complementary” method of dispute resolution, this is, arguably, not potent enough.
The gradually growing acceptance that mediation is the best forum for resolution of family disputes, coupled with the present under-utilisation of the process in Scotland and evidence of the success of mandatory mediation elsewhere, demands that serious consideration be given to the incorporation of mandatory mediation into the Scottish legal process.
Mediation has the ability to keep those people who are most important to children, their parents, communicating and making decisions about them in a safe, structured and respectful manner.
Mediation will not be the answer for every family, but in many cases, there is no harm in trying, at least for the sake of the children.
Molly Somerville is a Senior Solicitor at Complete Clarity Solicitors and Simplicity Legal.
Agenda is a column for outside contributors. Contact: agenda@theherald.co.uk
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here