Family conflicts can involve a great deal of bitterness. Family members and relatives know each other well. They know a lot about each other and are bound by emotional ties. Yet, they do not necessarily know how to communicate with each other. Friction and clashes arise, after which family operations are usually easily restored. And there can also be those after which things remain broken for a long time. Often, imperceptibly, tiny grievances and anger pile up crumb by crumb, eventually building a wall between family members or relatives.
A common setup is that a conflict erupts over a relatively simple issue (say, child-rearing, caring for an elderly parent, inheritance, maintenance of jointly owned property, distribution of tasks), but the passions are somehow much intensity than the given issue deserves. Attempts at a solution fail, and the situation only becomes more and more distressing.
Involving a mediator at such times can steer the conflict into an entirely different channel. In more severe cases, or when resolving conflicts involving many participants, co-mediation (with two mediators) may be warranted.
But why would things be resolved by the presence of a mediator if those involved could not reach an agreement on their own?
The Role of the Mediator The mediator must definitely be someone who is not committed to either party. It is best if they are an outsider to the family, perhaps a completely stranger person, who has no prior bias toward any of the parties participating in the conflict. (In more severe cases, or when resolving conflicts involving many participants, co-mediation may be warranted, with the contribution of two mediators.)
Since they do not know the conflict and are not involved in it, the mediator must first get to know the situation and circumstances, as well as the perspective of those involved. Often, even this step sets off new trains of thought in those involved, and the preliminary conversation with the mediator sometimes puts past events in a different light.
On the Way to Agreement It can be a frightening and tense moment when everyone involved sits down at a shared table. Sometimes the parties are simply not capable of it—for example, in the case of a difficult divorce—in which case the mediator can also conduct the mediation activity by consulting with first one party and then the other until they manage to agree on some package of solutions acceptable to both parties. Even so, the best thing is if those involved can sit down and negotiate directly with each other under the facilitating and framework-providing contribution of the mediator.
What does providing frameworks mean in practice? What does framing actually mean? Mediation has its own rules—for example, that each party must listen to the other without interruption; you must not hurl insults or belittle the other party, etc.; and the mediator ensures that the parties participate in the negotiation according to the pre-established rules. If any party violates them, the mediator steps in and does not allow passions to escalate. Ultimately, therefore, the mediator also ensures that everyone involved can feel safe.
Of course, the mediator is not present merely as a moderator. They help the parties better express what is causing them difficulty and better understand each other. They remain impartial, do not take sides, but through their questions, for example, they help the parties involved in the conflict bring to light the deeper reasons—needs, fears—lurking behind their positions, through which the emerging solution can respond to genuine human needs.
– "I want this and this." – "I understand. Why is that so important to you?" – "Because that's fair." – "Explain what fairness means in this case. In what way is this fair?" – "Because this is also good for the kids." – "So the kids... Please elaborate in more detail, exactly how would this serve the children's best interests?"
Look how quickly we got from the starting position of "I want" to the point of talking about what the children need, what serves their best interests! Of course, this is still far from a solution, but something did happen: the emotional threads working in the background became more understandable. The mediator's questions and interventions create an opportunity for the underlying causes and needs to become visible behind the clashing wills. And those can then be meaningfully addressed and taken into account in the solution being developed.
Breaking Down the Conflict into Manageable Parts Mediation essentially breaks the conflict down into manageable questions. Smaller, more manageable sub-elements that are easier to negotiate. A complete, comprehensive, or all-encompassing solution may not be born, but often it is already progress if a long-standing deadlock becomes more workable in at least a few areas. Difficult feelings do not necessarily vanish as a result of mediation either, but they usually at least ease.
Of course, mediation sometimes does not bring an agreement—sometimes the situation has already soured so much that those involved cannot or will not reconcile their ideas. But in any situation where the parties participating in the conflict must cooperate in the future, it is worth trying before things are taken to legal paths.
