Call to the public to express their experience with family law mediation.

The public served by the court is invited to voice their experience with mediation services in the Riverside Superior  court and if their appointed child custody recommended counselor complied with the ethics that govern mediation conduct as defined in CA rules of court.  

  http://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=five&linkid=rule5_210

Other comments including information on cases is welcomed and can be included in the poll.

Results will be presented to the CA State Auditor and the AOC.

Advertisements

4 comments on “Call to the public to express their experience with family law mediation.

  1. This is somewhat difficult to answer, While one mediator filed absolutely full fabrication and recommendation in denial of submitted evidence of compliance, I did file a rebuttal and won. Her recommendation was tossed out. However, I met, if I remember correctly, three separate times with mediators. The first and last mediation was the same woman. In the first mediation, she sided on the side of the petitioner, but in the last mediation, she sided with me as the respondent and realized she had made an error in the recommendation of the initial mediation. And at one point, said, “how are you doing this?” by that she meant compliance with what were extremely hard demands by her first recommendations. She had every reason to believe in the first mediation that I would not be able to comply due to the hardship it required. I do not believe a mediator should have the power to ‘recommend’ any given requirements, in this she would have to be a licensed attorney of law to fully understand the illegal demands of compliance with family law. A mediator to keep the situation in a professional arena of negotiation does happen outside of court for those parents who seek to make an agreement without the courtroom, entering the courtroom for the sole purpose of filing their final agreement reached in mediation. In these cases, mediation is successful.

  2. I also agree that the mediator should be well educated, not allowed to pass judgement or put anything not pertaining to the well being of the children in there.
    If there is no agreement here is no agreement. No one no matter how well educated can figure out in one hour which parent is better suited to take care of children. Especially when one parent has a degree in human services and know what to say and how to act.
    I do believe they are a good idea and parents should definitely try them first.
    as long as the mediator only presents the subjective data to the judge and not what he said she said, or any kind of opinion.
    subjective data being both parents present, which one willing to participate
    If one was angry or not willing to compromise. .
    t

  3. the mediator created a hostile environment. she did not build upon “trust” as she is required to do. No agreement was reached. I repeatedly asked her to call the psychologist that we had spent hundreds of hours with to get his professional opinion, despite signing a release for her to due so, she did not do this. Instead she made, upon spending 1 hour with us, an assumption that I was “angry” and lashed out, insinuated I must have sabatoged reunification, straight out said that there is “God, then there are Judges, and then everyone else is below that…”, said I must have “swayed” the mental health professionals, and joked with biodad that “you must be a really bad criminal or something….” and made a recommendation of IMMEDIATE visitation with child. A week later, that psychologist that the mediator failed to talk to, said to the court “I have extreme concerns,” “this is going to be very emotionally challenging on the child” and create allot of “anxiety”, and also said I have concerns about the minor child’s physical wellbeing due to biodad’s “level of anger, animosity, and frustration.” Psychologist’s went on to describe a confrontation in his office with biodad and how therapy had been “extremely challenging” due to biodad’s anger. He concluded the slow pace was in the child’s best interest and because of biodad’s inability to grasp the significance of his own actions. I just ask-did the mediator do her job? NO! If she had called the psychologist, as she is required to do to “gather balanced information” on both parties-maybe she would have understood the pace of reunification based on the psychologist’s advice and perception and not blamed it on me.

  4. Reblogged this on News and Views Riverside Superior Court and National Family Law Abuse and commented:

    So far the poll results reflect that in 38% of cases mediation did not comply with the CA rules of court; in 25% of cases there was no agreement at mediation and a recommendation was made; in 25% of cases there was no agreement at the hearing or in writing and the recommendation was adopted as the order of the court. Please don’t forget to add your vote and your opinion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s