The Effect of Mediation on Human Values

As a society, we face many issues stemming from a lack of communication. However, the main problem is that we often fail to recognize that these issues arise from communication failures.

So, what is communication? There are many definitions, but the most fitting one is: Communication is the verbal exchange of thoughts. It is two people understanding each other, and one person conveying their thoughts to another.

Now, let’s move on to our main topic: The impact of mediation on human values.

What is mediation, a concept so new in our country that many of you may not have even heard of it? Legally, “mediation” was introduced into our legislation in 2012. To define it without getting too technical, mediation is the process of helping parties in a dispute resolve their issues through proper and healthy communication. The mediation process is one of the important steps towards resolution.

To understand how mediation can impact human values, let’s compare two scenarios:

Consider an issue in neighborly relations. This issue could be anything like one neighbor making too much noise, keeping pets, causing damage due to negligence, etc. To resolve the damages caused by these issues or to eliminate the problem, the parties might either go to court or opt for mediation.

First Option: The Process and Outcome of Going to Court

The parties initiate the court process either by themselves or through their lawyers. The already tense atmosphere becomes even more strained during the court process. Even if the case is handled by lawyers, the parties still encounter each other daily. Tensions rise further, especially when other neighbors get involved as witnesses, leading to polarization. The already fragile relationship worsens as communication breaks down, and everything is left to the lawyers and the court. The trial process involves filing petitions, presenting evidence, hearing witnesses, possibly involving expert reports, and finally, the judge’s evaluation and decision. If one party is dissatisfied with the decision, they may appeal, prolonging the wait for a resolution. During this long wait, the parties remain adversaries. Suppose the case is resolved in favor of one party after a lengthy process, and compensation is awarded. Is there any real gain? Can the neighbor who won the compensation feel that everything is back to normal? Or is the only gain monetary? Have they regained the chance to greet their neighbor, whom they see every day?

Second Option: The Process and Outcome of Mediation

The process begins when one or both parties recognize that the issue stems from a lack of communication and believe they can reach an agreement by talking, knowing they have the option to resort to mediation. One neighbor may suggest mediation as a better alternative to the court process, proposing to go to a mutually agreed mediator. Alternatively, the neighbor seeking resolution can directly approach a mediator, who then invites the other party to the mediation process. If both parties agree to resolve the issue through mediation and agree on a mediator, the process begins. The benefits of healthy communication start to manifest. The process itself comes to life through the parties’ communication. A mediator emerges as a third party. What does the mediator do? The mediator helps the parties understand each other and themselves better, fostering mutual understanding and facilitating the development of mutually acceptable solutions. An agreement is prepared, signed by the parties and the mediator, and holds the status of a “court decision.” If the process doesn’t end in agreement, at least an alternative resolution method has been tried.

Two methods and two outcomes. Which do you think benefits the parties more, and which method positively impacts human relationships?

Mevlana said, “There is a place beyond right and wrong. Let’s meet there.”

In the first option, one party may win the case, but a simple win is not always a true gain. There may be financial compensation, but the neighborly relationship is likely permanently damaged.

In the second option, at least the inherent communication nature of humans has been prioritized, taking a step toward meeting beyond right and wrong. If the process ends positively, they leave the table shaking hands, and the neighborly relationship continues to strengthen. Even if the mediation process ends without agreement, the parties have at least expressed themselves and tried to understand the other side. They haven’t burned bridges at the first step and have made an effort to find a solution.

Mediation is based on the principle of “Win-Win.” Instead of dwelling on the past, it aims to shape the future. The spread of mediation and its adoption as a culture will be a crucial factor in reviving our nearly forgotten human values.