Open Forum

communities_1.jpg
  • 1.  Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    Bronze Member
    Posted 25-01-2023 02:34 PM
    Observe John Haynes' mediation style in this Utube video as he works with Michael and Debbie to help them move forward from their current impasse.

    I suggest you view his approach from the perspective of flow - how Haynes keeps the flow going and his use of a sidestep to an 'adjacent possible' where he strikes an impasse. His use of time (time is the mediator's friend).

    You will note that he takes no notes, does not use a white board and does not have a set agenda.

    I would suggest ignoring the 'toolbox of skills' approach when viewing this video. His interventions are unique only to this moment in time. Merely listing them has no theoretical value outside this context. Context is everything with respect to mediation theory. Context is a fluid state.

    See the following link: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, Mediator - Michael and Debbie - YouTube

    This is the second U-tube video in the series 'Observing a Mediation'. This is the link to the first one.  Observing a Mediation, Greg Rooney Mediator. The Tennis Club Lease - YouTube 

    Both examples demonstrate how the law of flow is at the heart of the mediation encounter. 

    Notation: The John Haynes Utube is an old copy taken from a video and is a bit rickety - I have tried to source a better copy but have not been able to make contact with the estate of the late John Haynes

    ------------------------------
    Greg Rooney
    Mediator
    Mediator
    Mount George SA
    61405612789
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    Posted 26-01-2023 09:36 AM
    Thanks for posting this video of Dr John Haynes, a pioneer of family mediation in the US.  His famous quotes include "There is good in everybody and if you want mediation to work, you must find the good in people."  It is really wonderful to watch Dr Haynes at work, but I must say, some of what he is doing, is mediation of the past. In this video all of the communication goes  through the mediator, these days we would endeavour to have the parties communicating with each other, recognising that Michael and Debbie will be communicating with each other for at least 13 more years and the mediation is an opportunity to work out how to do that.  I remember the style of mediation that we see in this video, I think I had the same suit in the 80s that Debbie is wearing!  So for those of you who are newer to mediation I make the following comments, these days we wish to empower the parties in mediation, so they understand the process is not about the mediator, but about helping them to have the conversation they need to have, these days a mediator will assist parties to ask the questions they have wanted to ask, to improve their understanding(it is not about what the mediator wants to know or learn).  When Debbie and Michael start talking in the video, Dr Haynes very quickly shuts this down by asking more of his own questions, these days we would encourage the participants to speak to one another, intervening only when necessary, or to note progress.  The seating suggests that Debbie and Michael are visiting a Specialist or the School Principal's office, this seating is not conducive to good communication and would feel very uncomfortable when there are high levels of anger or emotion. In the video the mediator suggests options, such as 'What about if Jocelyn doesn't stay over for 2months?' this would be better handled by the mediator saying 'You have told us that you are concerned about Jocelyn staying the night, as things are new and might be confusing for the children, when do you think it would be less concerning?'  When Michael says 'I would leave you a note (about homework)', the Mediator says that wouldn't be a good idea.  These days we would ask the other participant for their view.  I actually thought a note about homework progress or problems would be workable.  I also need to note, I am not a FDRP, so it would be great to hear from some FDRPs on this video. 
    I am keen to produce a new video to demonstrate an exemplar of mediation, as so many of the existing videos do not demonstrate the NMAS standards or the RI model of mediation. 
    Thanks again Greg, for sharing this video of the late great Dr Haynes.

    ------------------------------
    Nina Harding
    Senior Mediator
    Nina Harding Mediation Services Pty Ltd
    NORTH SYDNEY NSW
    0408 447 525
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    Bronze Member
    Posted 26-01-2023 10:49 AM

    Thanks, Nina, for your commentary and reflections. It's a great resource to engender thoughtful discussions and analysis of what mediation is all about. It certainly makes you think whether you agree or disagree with this approach.

    This is my take on the video:

    I view this video through the lens of the science of complexity. Haynes, Michael and Debbie, in full discussion, is an example of a complex adaptive system which is an unpredictable dynamic network of interactions. It requires interaction rather than analysis and a multi-hypothesis approach.

    Using the Cynefin framework (Dave Snowden) the approach is to probe, sense and respond to the interaction. If things are going well, you encourage if they are going badly, you dampen it.

    Haynes does this when Michael gets angry and says maybe the children should stay with him all the time. Haynes dampens it by asking the names and ages of the children and then normalises it by saying it's difficult when people separate.

    The transformative moment in the mediation occurred at 18 minutes 30 seconds when Debbie said that 'Michael is a good father'. Haynes held a space and the silence (silence is an intervention) and for the first time they talked to each other.  This was the real solution and the outcome of the mediation not the alternate living arrangements agreed at the end which was a way of getting them to try something different before the next session. 

    The solution emerges out of the interaction.



    ------------------------------
    Greg Rooney
    Mediator
    Mediator
    Mount George SA
    61405612789
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    I'mLinkedIn
    Posted 27-01-2023 01:35 PM
    Hi Nina,

    As an FDRP I would agree with you. It is a little "old school". However, the benefits of watching it are still there because it makes one think about whether or not you would handle it that way, and, if not, why not? What would you do differently? It still offers the opportunity for thought and reflection.

    ------------------------------
    Jacky Stock
    FDRP
    J L Stock Mediation
    Gordon NSW
    404040866
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    Bronze Member
    Posted 29-01-2023 01:23 PM

    Australian author and academic Stephanie Charlesworth who worked with John Haynes in the 1990s said of him:

    'John Haynes maintains that the professional task of the mediator is to focus on the conversation between the parties. He explores the client's world through their own eyes, as far as it is relevant to the dispute'.

    'The focus is not on changing attitudes to problems, making them better people in themselves or worthy members of the community but simply to help them make decisions that are mutually satisfactory and workable about matters in dispute.'

    Charlesworth noted that Haynes's ideas were constantly evolving. She stated:

    "For many years I thought Haynes was a gifted, even brilliant practitioner but that his theory, (I see a model as an operational view of the theory), was basically simple. I now see it has coherent, sophisticated, highly adaptable if perhaps as yet in complete."

    John Haynes approach is based on the principle that you take the parties as you find them not as you would like them to be.  If the parties can jointly solve the problem, it can have a therapeutic effect on each of them and their relationship, but it should not be promoted as having therapeutic benefits per se.  It is just helping them get through an impasse.  Anything else that comes out of it is just an added bonus.

     The way I would express it is the following quote from my recent mediate.com paper:

    "I have no idea what I will do when I go to mediate a matter. After 30 years of mediation practice the only thing I know is that the parties are stuck.

     I don't have a toolbox of skills, insightful questions, or any mediation theory that I bring to the room.

     I have no desire to change people, to teach cooperation or to understand their emotions or their so-called bias. I don't look for patterns, create hypotheses and I don't try to predict or control what will happen.

     As a mediator, I am no hero. I don't seek to help, find a solution or solve the parties' problem.

     I am a blank canvas. I have no answers. 

     I just help get the interaction going and then get out of the way. Things happen during interactions. Something will emerge. I improvise. It's a multi-dimensional experience. It's noisy, messy and imperfect but they are the ingredients for change."

     See The Art of the Simple in Mediation - Mediate.com

     This is the link to the John Haynes Michael and Debbie U-tube mediation:  https://youtu.be/l5mBchRroQI   I would encourage you to look at it with an open mind.



    ------------------------------
    Greg Rooney
    Mediator
    Mediator
    Mount George SA
    61405612789
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    Early Adopter
    Posted 27-01-2023 02:34 PM

    Thank you Greg for posting the video of Dr Haynes in action and to Nina for your thoughtful comments in response. I found it interesting to observe Dr Haynes' line of questioning and reflect upon how his highly effective technique has evolved into the more party-led approach described by Nina and adopted by the National Mediator Accreditation System (NMAS). The difference between the two approaches seems to go to the very heart of what we aim to achieve as mediators. Which is more important - to achieve resolution or to empower parties to find their own path through the issues in contention? If it is the former, then Dr Haynes' approach – solution-focussed questioning under tightly controlled conditions – has much to recommend it, especially considering his very skilful and astute framing of questions. On the other hand, when the solution is effectively achieved by the mediator rather than the parties themselves, what has been lost? As Nina points out, Michael and Debbie will be communicating with each other for at least 13 more years. Dr Haynes' approach, as effective as it was in reaching a solution, represented a missed opportunity for them to work out for themselves how to do that. Why does it matter? Perhaps I could put it like this (with apologies to Lao Tzu): if you give a couple a solution, you fix one problem. If you help them find their own solution, you empower them for life. As a mediator, I, myself waited a long time for that particular penny to drop.



    ------------------------------
    Gail Cork
    NMAS Accredited Mediator
    Hobart, Tasmania
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    Posted 31-01-2023 12:31 PM
    Empowered for life.  Marvellous.

    ------------------------------
    Nina Harding
    Senior Mediator
    Nina Harding Mediation Services Pty Ltd
    NORTH SYDNEY NSW
    0408 447 525
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    Bronze Member
    Posted 31-01-2023 05:06 PM

    Hi Everyone

    I feel we are having one of those frustrating definitional debates.

    How do you define empowerment and what is good empowerment and what is bad empowerment?

    If we start with first principles, then we start with the proposition that people stuck in intransient conflict are, by definition, disempowered.

    They choose mediation over litigation or therapy because they want to be involved in the process of finding a way out of it, they want to be able to sign off on the outcome and they want someone, the mediator, to help guide them through it.

    They want to find a solution or a pathway moving forward as a transition into a re-empowered state. The outcome is central to the re-empowering issue.

    My argument is that empowerment has to be within the context of where Michael and Debbie are now which is in a heightened conflictual state. Haynes honors them by sitting in their uncomfortable state and saying it's okay. He does not start where he would like them to eventually get to. He has the confidence that where they will eventually get to will emerge unbidden from the encounter.

    Michael and Debbie have been separated for four weeks and are sniping with each other right from the start. Haynes has to engage with them at that level. The Aikido principle.

    This initial entry point into conflict can be personally very uncomfortable for mediators.  It freaks out lawyers who keep the parties apart and can be very emotionally difficult for people who are conflict averse, many of whom are attracted to the mediation profession.

    Haynes shows that with a confident and caring attitude that you can sit with people in high conflict and work with them. He honors them by sitting with them in their distress. This is the mediator's act of empowerment and is at the heart of what it takes to be a mediator.  

    It is messy and a bit all over the place but as long as it is moving forward then that's okay. By the end of this first session, Michael and Debbie now have a constructive way forward although they will still have to do the hard work over a number of sessions.

    If you look at the video from a static point of view you can pick out phrases here and there and say good or bad. But life, like a river, keeps flowing.  As the Greek philosopher Heraclitus said: ''No person stands in the same river twice for it is not the same person nor the same river'. No two mediations are the same. Nothing is repeated in life and in mediation and there is no one-way or right way to mediate. There is no universal solution.

    A mediation session is more than the sum of the parts. It's all about the flow. Haynes kept the flow going and this fluid process has given Michael and Debbie a chance over time to re-empower themselves. They have to do the re-empowering not the mediator.



    ------------------------------
    Greg Rooney
    Mediator
    Mediator
    Mount George SA
    61405612789
    ------------------------------



  • 9.  RE: Observing a Mediation - John Haynes, mediator - Michael and Debbie

    Early Adopter
    Posted 26-01-2023 03:01 PM
    Edited by Peter Pullicino 26-01-2023 03:10 PM
      |   view attached

    Hi there interested fellow mediators,

    I'm attaching chapter 4 in John Haynes' book 'Mediating Divorce' (1989) that is now out of print.

    This chapter pertains to this video that Greg kindly posted (this is a rare video, so thank you thank you thank you!). The chapter includes John Haynes' notes on this session.  I feel this gives this great and sadly deceased mediator some chance to explain what he is doing.

    A note regarding copyright: You can still find this book second hand, but it is difficult to come by and has not been re-printed.   I therefore feel that for educational purposes sharing a portion of this book is fine.

    best regards from Canberra

    Peter



    ------------------------------
    Peter Pullicino
    Deakin ACT
    410109964
    ------------------------------