Everyone in agreement as the mediation progresses, there could

Everyone
knows the dreadful feeling of making a court appearance even without having
personally done so. Standing before a judge while lawyers debate about what
wrong was done, and the formality of the situation only adds to the stress.
What if there were a better way to deal with civil disagreements, instead of
giving them the same attention as criminal courts. Where instead of having high
priced experts present augments that clog up the legal system, while costing
tax payers vast sums of wealth. Well there is a commonly used alternative to
the courts, which might prove faster as well as economical, this method is
mediation.

Mediation involves the
participation of a neutral third party that assists with getting two opposing
sides in reaching an agreement. Using the example of a divorce, which can drag
on for years, the participates could have all property and items of monetary
value sorted, before appearing before a judge for something such as custody.
The first benefit with this is mediator would not need to be a legal expert
that would require years of highly specialized training and could instead be a
someone more versed in conflict resolution, with less specialized training, and
significantly less court room personnel needed. Secondly, opposing parties
would discuss what items mean the most to them, and divide the items themselves
without complex time consuming legal strategies employed. In addition, since
both parties would be advocating for themselves and be in agreement as the
mediation progresses, there could be less animosity after it has been
completed. Finally, an agreement could be reached for the majority of issues each
party has with one another, and whatever ever items cannot be agreed upon could
be brought before a judge to decide.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

With mediation, most aspects of a civil case
could be determined before a judge or lawyers ever get involved. The courts
would be free of many time wasting cases, and instead only focus on the serious
aspects of a case. The money saved for not only the parties involved but
society at large could be better spent elsewhere on other more pressing problems.
This is why I think mediation should be required before going to civil court,
and after a framework has been established, perhaps an exploration of
implementing mediation in petty crimes or property damage can be examined