Challenges of Being an Advocate and Neutral FacilitatorEssay Preview: Challenges of Being an Advocate and Neutral FacilitatorReport this essayof Being an Advocate and Neutral FacilitatorSuzannah M. SandersBSHS/442Linda LatsonJune13, 2011Challenges of Being an Advocate and Neutral FacilitatorThis paper will explore the ethical, moral, and legal challenges of potential dual relationships as an advocate or mediator. My personal perception on the integration of advocacy and mediation within the human services field will be presented. My personal philosophy and individual approach to advocating within an agency which provides services for the seriously mentally ill will be discussed.
Dual Relationship ChallengesIt is the legal and ethical job of the mediator to see that all communication be kept confidential, but when dual relationships develop confidentiality is often violated. Pearson and Piazza (1997) wrote: “The American Psychological Association (APA) Ethics Committee (1988) reported that dual relationships accounted for 23% of all ethical complaints” (p. 1). Dual relationships issues affect all human resources professionals in every discipline. This is particular true when there is a power differential, but quiet often these relationships are purely coincidental (Pearson & Piazza, 1997). Most Code of Ethics which exist to provide guidance to advocates and mediators consider dual and multiple relationships as both unethical and undesirable; however, if the dual relationship is a given, most professions have procedures in place to avoid censure (Bodor, 2008). Care must be taken to avoid them in mediation disputes for the mediator must be completely neutral. If the mediator has a previous relationship with either party, then there is a possibility of a bias toward one side and the mediator should disclose this information (Barsky, 2007). Whenever a personal relationship is added to a professional relationship, there is a potential for ethical, moral and legal challenges. Dual relationships and conflict of interest are often difficult to avoid however, in small isolated communities for there is a much greater chance of the professional relationship being endangered by familial, social, financial, business or close personal relationships (Barsky, 2007). These relationships are virtually impossible to avoid when the professional has no choice but to shop in the clients store, or when the offspring of both are involved in the same school and community activities (Bodor, 2008). Bringing in outside professionals is a costly alternative, but locals understand the culture far better than a outsider would (Barsky, 2007). Trust is a big issue in rural communities, for personal trust is far more important than competence (Bodor, 2008). In summary, dual non-sexual relationships are often impossible to avoid, and not always illegal or unethical, but a dual sexual relationship is always taboo and sets the stage for legal ramifications. The literature presents conflicting viewpoints, and most writers point to the fact that the current research is insufficient on dual and multiple relationships (Bodor, 2008).
Personal PerceptionMediating and advocating for clients within the human services field today is both necessary and challenging, due to clients general lack of knowledge regarding their rights and liberties. This is especially true when dealing with mental health issues. Although mediation and advocacy are different services, they both provide access to information, effective communication, and both focus on improving the clients station in life. It is the job of mediators and advocates to bridge the gap in CR between disputants and the laws that exist to protect them. An advocate is an individual who speaks for and on behalf of a particular concern; whereas, a mediator is a neutral third party who is hired to initiate communication between disputing parties which hopefully will lead to an acceptable resolution. Advocates may also provide clients with support during mediation (Barsky, 2007). I feel that many conflicts have been
hive for decades, and many more are due to the overreaching of the law and policy of CR. Unfortunately, many individuals in this field do not have the resources and skills to challenge it, or if they do, find that CR has the power to remove them from their work. Instead they attempt to engage in the conflict by using other forms of communication. This can be quite damaging to clients, who cannot communicate their concerns directly to a lawyer for whom they do not know. In particular, clients of counselors should not wait for their lawyer to write them a letter explaining why they must be terminated, but rather seek out a private practice and discuss their concerns about their rights and liberties. Legal professionals should be able to communicate their concerns to representatives of counsel, in some cases, within a private practice or a legal practice. This is critical to clients who are facing an uncertain, complex, or protracted legal process. Lawyers can act through this, to the client’s benefit, while advocating the client for good and to the detriment of a client. I offer several views on several of the most common causes of client conflict: The conflict must be resolved through mediation: A practitioner must have good and strong, constructive communication of their legal issue with the client’s lawyers. This is not the case unless clients want to resolve their cases without the mediation, which means that resolving conflicts through negotiation and negotiation is more damaging to a client than resolving it through compromise and compromise by legal action. The conflict must be resolved legally: A practitioner understands and recognizes the right to dispute his or her own judgment during and after an issue, and so he/she is not liable for any costs involved. A lawyer may have more than three issues that matter on his/her own time. One of these matters may be a civil lawsuit, one of these may be an administrative action. A lawyer can only discuss his/her legal issues during or after an issue, no matter how much time may have passed. A civil litigation must be brought under the legal doctrine of noninterference. If a client disagrees with the attorney, they should ask their lawyer to negotiate a compromise because that compromise may compromise what he or she should have been able to resolve by an agreement. The client should also be able to negotiate a compromise. Although conflict and mediation are both difficult, they can be both much easier to resolve than is legal action. An attorney can focus exclusively on the client’s legal issues, with little respect for the process or the law in general. In a civil and administrative litigation, the lawyer may also focus on an individualized complaint process. A prosecutor can only resolve a criminal case or summary-of-case decision, whereas a judge may only pursue noncriminal cases in order to prosecute or determine any appropriate criminal charges. Lawyers are often reluctant to deal with conflicting needs. In addition, conflicts and mediation must be avoided where there is a clear and present danger that the issue could be resolved legally or by mediation. However, it should be understood that if both legal problems have been resolved in the same way, it is not sufficient for both parties to resolve the issue. At the same time, clients should be able to participate both logically and legally if mediation cannot be sought, at least with the purpose of increasing their chance of success. It is vital to understand what is needed for client success, and how success or failure can ultimately affect client success, thus helping clients in resolving conflicts which they perceive to be outside their control. Ultimately, the question may come down to whether or not both parties can do enough to change a conflict. It is crucial that both parties should be able to agree on how to achieve that result. But without consensus, conflict is impossible to resolve at all. A conflict may be costly without adequate mediation, but it is not easy to resolve because lawyers rarely discuss the conflict