Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Steven Gonzales, The Conflict Resolution Movement, bahai-library.com. ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The Conflict Resolution Movement Steven Gonzales Abstract The study and practice of conflict resolution has become a remarkabl worldwide social movement in recent years. Legislation creating cOI\f7ic resolution programs-writing into law nevi! forll1s of resolving conJli( fundamentally difFerent from existing models centuries old-has been en({cted i virtually every nation in the world in the decade since the late 1980s. What I the reason for conflict resolution's unparalleled proliferation in th comparatively slow-moving field of law, cUlting across so many natiofla cultural, racial, ethnic, and political lines ? What e:ulctly is conFlict resolution Why do so many different disciplines lay elairll /0 il? Where did il originate What are its implications for the jitture of handling social conflict? nle authe addresses these questions in the course of providing (1/7 introduction to thefieh a review of conflict resolution in history, Clnd a survey of contemporCli legislation worldwide in an appendix to the article. Analysis of/he con/lit resolution movement reveals that its strength results from a steael dissemination of ~piritual principles designed for the forging of world unity b Balu]'u'1l6h, the prophetJounder of the Baluf'! Poith, 1I10re than 0 century ago. Resume L' etude, comme la pratique, de la resolution de con/fits est de venue, cc dernieres annees, un mouvement social rnondial rem(/rqu(/ble. La legislatio creant des programmes de resolution de cOJ1flits - seloll lesquels sont enterilU de nouveaux modeles de resolution de cOJ4lits fondament{{lement differents dt formes actuelles qui datent de plusieurs siecles - a ete promulguce da" quasiment toutes les nations du monele, dan:\' lu decen.ie de/ntfant vers lei/in de annees 1980. Pourquoi y-a-t'il une proliferation sans precedent de resolutio de COJ1/lits dans Ie clomaine relativement slcible elL! elroit, ct ce, quelque soif I nation, la culture, la race, l'ethnie etle nWU1'em£n.t politiqlle? Au fail; qu'est-c que la resolution de conflits? POUl"quoi tUllt de disciplines se I' approprienl Quelles en sont les origines? Quelle en est la portee dOllS 10 maniere de traitt les cOJ1/lits sociaux futurs? L'auteur repond aces qllestions en prcsentunt I domaine, revoyant Ie role de la resolution de cOllfli/s dOllS l'histoire }Juis, t; annexe, en passant en revue la legislation contell7jJorain.e a travers le mond, L'analyse elu I1wuvement de resolution de con/lits rel'ele que sa force resi(, dans Ie fait qu' elle dissr!Jnine constamment des principes ,Ipirituels con~:lIs pm forger ['unite moneliale annoncee par Bah6'u'lldh, Ie propheteJondateur de I F oi balul' fe, et ce, if y a plus el' lin sieele. 2 THE JOURNAL OF BAHA'i STUDIES 9.2.1999 Resumen El estudio y practica de la resoluci6n de conflictos en alios recientes se ha convertido en un notable movimiento social de esfera planetaria. En los ultimos alios de la decada de 1980, en casi todas las naciones del mundo se han legislado programas de resoluci6n de conflictos que dan nuevas formas a la resoluci6n de conflictos fundamentalmente diferentes a los modelos existentes desde hace siglos. ~ Cual es el argumento para el avance inigualado que gom el concepto de resoluci6n de conflictos en el campo de tan lento movimiento como es la ley a la vez que atraviesa tantas barreras nacionales, culturales, raciales, etnicas y po[{ticas? ~ Y como precisar en que consiste la resolucion de conflictos? ~ Por que se aduelian de ella tantas otras disciplinas? ~ De donde origino? ~ Cuales son sus inferencias a considerar para efectos del manejo de conflictos sociales en elfuturo? El autor hace alocucion a estas preguntas en el transcurso de presentar un prefacio sobre ef tema, acompaliado de una revista de fa resofucion de con/lictos en la historia, y un reconocimiento de legislacion mundial en la actualidad en un apendice al articulo. Un antilisis del movimiento sobre resolucion de conflictos demuestra que su fuerza nace de la constante difusion de principios espirituales diseftados para forjar la unidad mundial por Bahti'u'lltih, el Profeta-Fundador de la Fe Baha'f. n recent years, the field of conflict resolution has blossomed into a I remaTkable worldwide movement. Although clearly focused upon the legal community from conception, 1 conflict resolution has a multidisciplinary and international ancestry, befitting its newly global appeal. 1. For example, in 1977, no United States state bar association and only two law schools had dispute resolution programs. In 1987, the number of such programs grew to 110 and 100 respectively. Even more remarkable was the expansion from zero to 4,500 jurisdictions providing child custody and visitation dispute resolution, and the number of conununity mediators from 5,000 to 20,500 in that same ten-year period (Kelly, "No Room to Dispute ADR's Promise" 11). The movement in United States courts has progressed from a few conferences and mediation programs in the 1970s to the Judicial Improvements and Access to Justice Act of November, 1988, Pub.L.No.100-702, 102 Stat. 4644, pursuant to which the United States Congress created a committee to study its use in the federal courts, to the committee's April 2, 1990, report to Congress reconunending six forms of conflict resolution for the courts, to the October 7, 1998, passage by Congress, by a vote of 405-2, of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998, signed into law by United States President William Clinton, October 30, 1998. This new legislation requires every federal distIict court in the nation to establish its own altemative dispute resolution program. For a review of the growth of ADR in United States administrative agencies, see Mester, "The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1966: Will the New Era of ADR in Federal Administrative Agencies Occur at the Expense of Public Accountability?" 169-73. An outstanding general research tool is the Ohio State University's Journal of Dispute Resolution 13.4 (1998), an entire joumal edition dedicated to a bibliography of dispute resolution. The Conflict Resolution Movement 3 Many questions arise when reflecting upon conflict resolution's phenomenal growth. What exactly is conflict resolution? How did the movement originate? How can scholars and practitioners from so many seemingJy disconnected fields claim to be engaged in its practice? Is itreally a worldwide movement, and if so, why? What explains the widespread interest from so many fields? What are its implications for future community life? This article seeks to (1) consider these questions while providing an introduction to the field; (2) examine the field's historical roots and worldwide proliferatioll; and (3) analyze i 1s popularity in light of what the teachings of the Bahcl'f Faith have to say about conflict, unity, and a world in the throes of convulsive transition. An Introduction to Conflict Resolution Given the persistent confusion of terminology, this introduction begins with a definition of terms. The phrase "conflict resolution" is a general term, embracing a variety of practices and procedures that resolve disputes using an intermediary other than a court. Alternative dispute resolution, dispute resolution, or just the initials ADR, are similarly general expressions, used principally by lawyers, judges, court personnel, scholars, and practitioners familiar with the field through the legal community. A few programs use the phrase "conflict management." Although some make fine distinctions between the management and the resolution of conflict, the programs are essentially the same. In this article, these terms are used interchangeably, although ADR is slightly more applicable to court programs (known as court-connected or court-annexed programs). Mention should also be made of the limited scope represented by the term ADR. It is as if the trial is seen as the normative standard for dispute resolution. Apart from the disruptive consequences awaiting a society fixated Oil lawsuits, the fact is that litigation seldom ends with trial, verdict, and judgment. In the United States, for example, most jurisdictions have pretrial settlement rates of 90-95% of civil cases. Thus, a vast, complex, expensive, inaccessible, and fearecllegal system exists for a relatively small number of displltes. Moore's Continuum of Conflict Resolution One of the best-known theoretical frameworks of conflict resolution was formulated by Christopher W. Moore, who viewedmethocls of intervening into conflict as falling along a continuum expressed as a horizontal line (Moore, The Mediation Process 7). At the left side of the continuum line are conflict resolution procedures that permit the parties (called disputants) to retain decision-making authority. An example is simple amicable resolution. At the right side of the continuum line are procedures in which disputants have lost control of decision-making authority. Examples are litigation, where a judge or jury decides the outcome, or even violence and war. 4 THE JOURNAL OF BAHA'i STUDIES 9.2.1999 Other undesirable consequences arise in moving from the left to the right side of the line. Decision making becomes vested in parties who are very likely s'trangers to the disputants and who know less about the problem, the relationships, and the case history than do the disputants themselves. The viability of the relationship between the parties and the probability of that relationship surviving the conflict lessens. This is particularly undesirable for disputants having interests in continuing the relationship, or at least ending it on amicable terms, such as divorcing parents of minor children, next-door neighbors, or some business partners. Equally troublesome in moving to the right side of the line is the shift from win/win to winllose outcomes. This terminology, now in connnon usage, was developed by mediators to depict the difference between resolutions requiring a "winner" and a "loser" (win/lose), and resolutions satisfying the underlying interests of all disputants (win/win). Lastly, with procedures on the right side of the continuum, the likelihood of the decision becoming final and the dispute concluding shlinks, while the chance of irreparable damage to health, safety, welfare, and financial well-being expands. The Practice of Conflict Resolution A variety of practices are associated with the conflict resolution movement. One example in North America is conciliation, a term often used in connection with labor-management negotiation or family law court programs designed to counsel divorcing couples. 2 In Europe and European-based legal systems, conciliation refers to a process arising during arbitration when a disputant seeks settlement. As noted below, conciliation and mediation are often confused. Other practices include group-facilitated decision making,3 often used in public policy controversies, and some forms of consultant training, particularly concerning race and ethnic relations, cultural diversity, or sexual harassment. Some universities and practitioners focus on negotiation as a discrete discipline. Although a related skill, negotiation is narrower than conflict resolution. Moreover, negotiation is as relevant to advocacy, that is, representing a particular point of view or disputant, as it is to conflict resolution. Some other court-related procedures are early neutral evaluation, with a court-appointed expert analyzing a case and informing litigants of its strengths and weaknesses; settlement conferences where litigants and judge discuss settlement; mini-trials and summary jury trials, which are abbreviated trials; and settlement weeks, where the court selects cases to bring before a panel of volunteer lawyers for settlement talks. 2. For example, 29 U.S.c. 172(a) creates the "Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service" to minimize labor strife, and Ariz. Rev. Stat. 25-38l.07 et seq. creates a "Director of Conciliation" to manage divorce case activity. For the term's use in arbitration, see appendix-discussion on arbitration in Europe. 3. See, for example, "Public Policy Disputes: Special Cases, Special Challenges." The Conflict Resolution Movement 5 After World War II, a number of uni versities founded peace studies programs, such as those at Colnmbia University, the University of Toronto, and Wayne State University. In recent years, most of these peace studies programs were in decline, losing student enrollment, funding, and influence. Today, many are moving toward conflict resolution and showing signs of rejuvenation. Because of this ill-defined scope of activities, people in many disciplines such as law, human resources, business and management, counseling, therapy, corporate consulting, teaching, administration, facilitation, and ombudsman programs may claim to be practitioners in conflict resolutioll. Many hear the phrase "conflict resolution" and conclude that since they occasionally settle disputes, they practice conflict resolution. However, a fundamental understanding of neutrality is often missing with such claims. The term third-party neutral, employing neutral as a nOUIl, has two meanings. In one sense, it refers to a person with no relationships producing in fact, or giving the appearance of, bias. It also denotes one with no decision-making authority. This concept partly distinguishes conflict resolution. For example, a middle manager trying to settle a conflict between disputing employees, all of whom are employed by the same entity, is not a third-party neutral aud is unlikely to utilize the procedures and strategies that mediators or arbitrators use. Moreover, there are no professional associations, ethical codes, professional journals, or other indicia of a discrete field connected with the manager's actions. There was a time, a few years ago, when many judges or lawyers claimed experience in conflict resolution from participation in judicial settlement conferences. Professionals in the conflict resolution field were duly chagrined. They see lawyers as experienced in advocacy or negotiation and judges as skilled in decision making. This view has prevailed, and the typical North American lawyer today acknowledges the differences among advocacy, decision making, opinion giving, and neutrality. Notwithstanding the many types of conflict resolution, the most important forms of conflict resolution are clearly mediation and arbitration. As such, they require closer analysis. Mediation: The Heart of the Movement Most of the excitement generated by conflict resolution concerns the North American mediation model. This is not a bias in favor of North Americans, who have generated their share of the world's heritage of connicl. H is simply a fact that the rapid growth, refinement, and new applications of mediation arose in North America. Further, the overwhelming majority of universities granting degrees in conflict resolution, and of academic faculty, authors, journals, publications, experienced practitioners, professional associations, conferences, and programs, whether public or private, ~re in North America. 6 THE JOURNAL OF BAHA'f STUDIES 9.2.1999 Now that other regions of the globe are becoming interested in conflict resolution as a field, there is reason to hope that other nations and cultures will improve on existing models and develop new applications, further enriching the field with breadth and insight. Indeed, one of the most striking characteristics of mediation is its capacity to touch on methods of dispute resolution stretching far back into familial and cultural traditions throughout the world. There is extensive cooperation among North American practitioners, and the model is substantially the same in Canada and the United States. This is particularly noticeable when compared to other models such as European conciliation, discussed below. The North American model typically defines mediation as a voluntary, confidential process where an impartial third-party neutral assists disputants to reach a mutually acceptable resolution. 4 These words have become terms of the art with very specific meanings. Voluntariness implies there should be no rules, orders, or procedures compelling participation, at least in the ideal setting. Parties are to remain free to use, continue, or discontinue mediation at all times, without any mandated consequences. The phrase "mandatory mediation" is thus theoretically an oxymoron. In reality, there are many mediation programs, particularly court- annexed and in-house ones (within a single organization), imposing official or unofficial sanctions for failure to participate. Confidentiality is equally essential. Ethical standards for mediators require the honoring of promises of confidentiality made to disputants. Mediators also assure disputants that any information confidentially revealed to the mediator will not be disclosed unless authorized by that disputant. 5 The mediator is most likely to acquire confidential information in a process mediators call the caucus. This term, despite its Latinate sound, has an Iroquois etymology, reflecting the Iroquois tradition of consultative decision making. Mediators confer separately with disputants for a variety of reasons. For example, a caucus may be used to 4. For a more detailed definition, see Moore, Mediation 15-20. 5. The Ethical Standards of the Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution (hereinafter "SPIDR" and "SPIDR Standards") and the Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators, developed jointly by the American Bar Association (ABA), SPIDR, and the American Arbitration Association (hereinafter "ABA Standards"), make mediator confidentiality a matter of ethics. SPIDR Standard 3 states "[mjaintaining confidentiality is critical to the dispute resolution process." ABA Standard, Section V, reads "A Mediator shall Maintain the Reasonable Expectations of the Parties with Regard to Confidentiality" and "[tlhe mediator shall not disclose any matter that a party expects to be confidential unless given permission by all parties or unless required by law or other public policy." Mediator confidentiality is variously protected by law. Most United States states have legislation protecting confidentiality, but few court decisions interpreting the laws. See, for example, Ariz. Rev. Stat. 12-2238(B); Cal. Evid. Code Sections 703.5,1152.5, Cal. Code Civ. Pro. Sections 1775.10 and 1775.12; Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. Section 46b-53 (West 1983); Fla. Stat. Ann. Section 44.101 (West 1998); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. Ch. 233 Section 23C (West 1995); Colo. Rev. Stat. Section l3-22-307; Okla. Sta. An. tit. 12, 1805-1813 (West Supp. 1993); Iowa Code Ann. Section 679.12 (West 1987); N.Y. Jud. Law Section 849-b (McKinney Supp. 1992); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. Section 154.073 (Vernon Supp. 1997). The Conflict Resolution Movenunt 7 break an impasse, to assess the strength of a disputant's adherence Lo a position, to assist a disputant to clarify a position, or to restore orderly communication. The caucus, like the third-party neutral, is an important distinguishing feature of mediation. In other procedures, such as litigation or arbitration, it is usually unethical for the third party to confer separately with the disputants. 6 Impartiality refers to the absence of bias favoring one party or the other. Academicians sometimes have difficulty with the notion of impartiality, pointing out it is probably impossible to remain completely unbiased. But practicing mediators seem to understand what is really meant is substantial or functional impartiality leaving the outcome little influenced by the rnediator. 7 This can only be fully understood when considered with the concepts of neutrality and mutually acceptable resolution: The word neutral stems from the Latin !le, meaning "not" and uter, denoting "either." This is complemented by the root of mediation, which is the Latin medius, meaning "middle." The mediator's lack of decision-making authority that could favor one disputant over another is the single most fundamental component of mediation, imperative in understanding how mediators fUllction. Like the neutral gear in a car, neutrality means incapable of making a decision in one direction or the other. The disputants are therefore free to communicate with the other disputant through the mediator, since the mediator will never make a decision or reveal a confidence. Although the mediator does not make a decision and avoids expressing any opinion tending to favor the positions of either side, resolutions reached in mediation are generally upheld as binding contracts by the courts. The concepts of mutual acceptability and process specialist (illl expert in the process of facilitating mutually acceptable resolutions) are related. This contrasts with content specialist, an expert in knowledge of the matter in controversy. For example, in a dispute between environmentalists and a lumber company, a content specialist may have knowledge about old-growth forests, the effects of lumbering on forest ecosyste}llS, or the economic, employment, and wage conditions of a particular community. Process expertise concerns negotiation, bargaining, impasse breaking, orderly communication, and procedural matters. 6. For example, the American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3 (A) (4) provides that a "judge should ... neither initiate nor consider ex jJarle or other communications concerning a pending or impending" case (where ex parle means contact with only one party). 7. Both the SPIDR and ABA Standards require mediator impartiality. See SPIDR Stnndard "Responsibilities to the Pm-ties, No. I" ("[tlhe neutral must maintain impartiality toward all parties. Impartiality means freedom from favoritism or bias either by word or by action"). ABA Standarcl II ancl accompanying comment is "A Mediator shall Conduct thc Mediation in an Impartial Manner. The concept of mediator impartIality is central to the meciiation proccss." Whi Ie most mediators eschew expressing opinions, a dwindling fcw believe disputants want an evaluation, sometimes called evaluative, as distinguished from facilitative, mediation. See, [or example, Moberly, "Mediator Gag Rules: Is it Ethical for Mediators to Evaluateor Advise?" 669. 8 THE JOURNAL OF BAHA'I STUDIES 9.2.1999 Why is the absence of power so important? To illustrate the power of nonpower, consider the experience of one public school in Phoenix, Arizona. In the mid-1990s, this school was suffering dangerous ethnic conflict among its teenage students, who were primarily of White, Hispanic, and African- American heritage. School authorities, rather than employing authoritarian tactics and "ordering" unity, as if that were possible, used outside mediators to work with the entire student body for many weeks. Eventually, the students hammered out rules reflecting ingenuous principles, such as "no ethnic jokes." The student-generated rules were nothing that any rookie assistant principal could not have distributed to the students in a handbook the first day of class. However, because the students had to produce the principles, negotiate, ventilate emotions, and gain a sense of ownership, they became the enforcers of their own rules, hanging them on banners in the school and reminding fellow students when a rule was violated. Does any parent of a teenager doubt that if school authorities had done all the work for the students, distributing the same rules on the first day of school, the effectiveness would have been far less? Harvard Law School professor Frank E. A. Sander stated that it is this quality that makes mediation the "sleeping giant of ADR."8 This aspect of mediation has come to be known as "transformation," as in the well-known 1994 work The Promise of Mediation by Bush and Folger. Mediators believe that disputants permitted to 'reach their own resolutions are more likely to empathize with other disputants and to honor their agreements. When disputants are ordered to comply with a decision made by a stranger, human immaturity unfortunately often produces a residual amount of resentment. Appeals, resentment, attempts to undermine, reprisals, and retaliation are the norm. The Stages of Mediation Mediators generally follow a mediation model, taking disputants through a series of stages. The number of stages vary, but essential procedures are standard. Initially, the mediator may engage in some form of pre-mediation research of the dispute and discuss issues with the disputants separately. Next, the mediator brings the disputants together, explaining the process (known as the "mediator's monologue"), and setting or negotiating ground rules 9 8. See Reuben, "The Lawyer Turns Peacemaker" 55. 9. The ground-rule stage is typically important yet simple. It can, however, be excruciatingly slow and difficult. One memorable example was the eighteen-month-long negotiation at the Paris Peace Talks in the early 1970s between the United States and Vietnam, over the shape of the meeting table. To experienced mediators, this was not so unbelievable. The disputants were engaged in a conflict of historic dimensions with grief, loss of life, political dogma, and countless social ramifications. Negotiators were as concerned with their constituencies as with the other disputant. They needed to look "tough," or political pressure could have forced an end to the talks. Also, a mistake over the shape of the table had minimal consequences; a mistake over other issues could echo tlu·ough generations. This experience also illustrates the role of patience in peacemaking. The Conflict Resolution Movement 9 regulating communication, such as no interrupting, no profanity, and commitment to the process. 10 At this stage, the communication is primarily from the mediator to the disputant. Third, disputants take turns making opening statements, explaining their positions to the mediator. At this stage, communication flows from disputant to mediator. The other disputant is asked to listen without interrupting. This allows the mediator time to understand the dispute and to model active listening (focused attention, no unnecessary interruplion, and body-language cues indicating intense interest) to the other disputant. Often, it is the first time a disputant has explained his or her views with the other disputant Jistening. Fourth, the mediator clarifies positions, starts building an agenda, and may start working with the disputants to generate options. There may be interim stages of bargaining and negotiation. At these stages, the mediator tries to get disputants to focus on an easel, blackboard, or piece of paper, which has the beneficial effect of "objectifying" the issues into a mutual probJem the disputants must together work on resolving. Eventually, but only if and when the time is ripe, the mediator shifts disputants to bargain directly 'liith each other. Lastly, the mediator works with the disputants to write an agreement expressing a settlement that is mutually acceptable to the disputants. During the entire process, the mediator utilizes a host of skills and tactics designed to facilitate agreement and break impasses. The skills are too numerous to detail here; however, mention should be made of a few key skills with some theoretical foundation. Mediators distinguish between position and interest. A position is a demand for a specific outcome or behavior. Positions are usually expressed emotionally as categorical imperatives such as "no," "never," "no way," and "must." To illustrate, assume two neighbors are disputing over a dog barking incessantly at night while the owner, neighbor A, is at work. A desires the clog for protection of her house while she is working at night. Neighbor B cannot sleep at night because of the barking. An example of a position A might take is ''There is no way I'm getting rid of my dog." B might take a position such as "The clog goes, orlsue."ll An interest may be defined as the underlying motive or reason why a disputant is making a specific positional demand. In this hypothetical scenario, A's interest is in protecting her house. B's interest is in sleeping. Notice that at the level of position, there is absolute conflict. The demands for outcomes that the dog stay or go are utterly incompatible. At the deeper level of interest, 10. This process can get dangerous; a standard ground rule 0[' the City of Phoenix's mediation program and of mediators at the Office of the Arizona Attorney General is "no weapons allow,~cl"! 11. This example is less humorous than it seems. The City of Phoenix, Arizona, receives an average of 100 complaints a month, more than 1,200 a year, abont barking dogs-so many that it lists an official phone number entitled "barking dogs." 10 THE JOURNAL OF BAHA'i STUDIES 9.2.1999 however, there is no conflict; the protection of A's house and B's sleep are not opposing desires. Indeed, the disputants may even find they have common interests such as neighborhood security. The main tool mediators use to assist disputants to recognize their interests and move off positions is reframing. This is a method where the mediator recognizes a position being stated by a disputant and then restates the statement in a manner expressing the interest, not the position. Other tools are BATNA and WATNA. These acronyms respectively stand for "best" and "worst" alternatives to a negotiated agreement. They are techniques of questioning a disputant, usually in a caucus, to get the intransigent disputant or one who has unrealistic expectations for the outcome, to understand the consequences of a failure to reach an agreement in mediation. To increase the likelihood of settlement, mediators sometimes negotiate media blackouts or promises of no discussions with nondisputants during the proceedings. Another tactic is the moving deadline, placing disputants on a strict timeline and threatening to end the mediation, but gradually extending the deadline as disputants edge toward settlement. 12 The mediator uses reframing, the caucus, and other techniques to bring the disputants toward mutual resolution. 13 The Many Applications of Mediation One reason for mediation's appeal is its application beyond civil court. In criminal cases, it has come to be known as restorative justice. Originating primarily in Canada and now spreading throughout the United States, restorative justice is found in court systems or prosecuting attorneys' offices and is often titled Victim-Offender Mediation Programs (VOMP). The format is substantially the same as that for other mediation, except it is generally conducted after conviction. The sole issue is how the defendant can make restitution to a victim. This method is often used in juvenile cases. 14 12. Striking examples of this technique were the United States-brokered 1995 Dayton Peace Accord talks concerning Bosnia and the Israeli-Palestinian talks in Maryland, October, 1998. In Dayton, the talks OCCUlTed over a weekend. United States officials publicly announced prior to the negotiations that if agreement was not achieved by midday Sunday, they would call an end to the talks and send the parties home, presumably to resume warfare. The United States diplomats publicly mlliounced extensions stm·ting Sunday afternoon, then throughout the day and into Monday until an accord was reached. In the 1998 set of talks, United States officials issued a similar statement. The talks were repeatedly extended until they nearly reached a fuII week. Another arena where this often occurs is United States labor-management collective bargaining where Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service mediators extend talks through nights into subsequent days. 13. For additional impasse-breaking techniques, see Chang, untitled chapter in ADR Personalities and Practice Tips. 14. There are two models of juvenile mediation. One is the combined juvenile-parent model developed in the 1980s by the Children's Hemings Project of Camblidge, Massachusetts. There are now more than sixty such programs in the United States. That model uses a family-oriented process involving structured "daily living agreements" between parent and teen. The other, more widespread model, is the VaMP model, bringing juvenile offenders together with victims who agree to participate, to negotiate restitution. See Smith, "Using Mediation in Juvenile Justice Settings" 10-11. The Conflict Resolution M overnent 11 School-based peer mediation programs have increasingly been established in public schools in what has become a major movement by itself. The programs date to the early beginnings of the modern conflict resolution movement, starting in the 1970s in San Francisco, Cleveland, and Cambridge. These peer mediation programs teach basic mediation principles to children and youth from elementary through secondary schools. Some school districts employ full- or part-time peer mediation coordinators. The model is very similar to adult mediation, except confidentiality is not necessarily protected, and there is always an adult with the student mediators. Most peer mediators work in teams of two, in a process known as co-mediation. Sometimes student disputants are given the incentive of avoiding or lessening impending discipline if they are able to work out a resolution. IS Mediation has been applied to domestic relations cases such as divorce and child custody, securities broker disputes,16 business contracts,17 environmental cases,I8 public and private employment,I9 Americans with Disabilities Act cases, employment discrimination charges with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under the Civil Rights Act of 1964:20 and other disputes. A number of religious groups have become noted for "faith- based" practice. Best known are members of the Baha' f Faith,21 the Friends (Quakers), and the Mennonites. Tn the United States, there are several national professional associations and organizations. Foremost are the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution, with legal professionals