Satisfaction with Custody Mediation: Results from the

YorkCounty Custody Mediation Program[1]

Tricia Jones & Andrea Bodtker

Generally, most disputants were satisfied with the short-term results of the mediation process…[However] for long-term satisfaction, 42 percent of respondents said they would not try mediation again.

With funding from the State Justice Institute, the York County Court of Common Pleas in New York established a database system for tracking custody cases to evaluate the custody mediation program. Jones and Bodtker evaluated the study’s short-term and long-term findings on disputants’ and mediators’ level of satisfaction with mediation process and outcomes. The average participant was Caucasian, earned under $25,000 per year, was relatively young, had been married for less than six years and had one child.

Generally, most disputants were satisfied with the short-term results of the mediation process. Disputants who had attorneys (70 percent of the total) indicated that they were more likely to feel satisfied with the mediator’s explanation of confidentiality, but they were also significantly more likely to feel that they were rushed in the mediation session than disputants who did not have attorneys. When caucuses were used, disputants were less likely to think that the mediation helped them think of options for settlement and were less likely to think that the other party was satisfied with the outcome of the mediation.

For long-term satisfaction, 59 percent of respondents indicated a rating of 6 or higher on a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being the least desirable rating and 10 being the most desirable. 41 percent said they would not want to try to mediate again and gave a score of 5 or lower. 20 percent gave the lowest possible rating, 1, for long-term satisfaction. 42 percent of respondents said they would not try mediation again. 52 percent of respondents gave a rating of 6 or higher.

A significant amount of people in the study were dissatisfied with mediation, which is why they indicated that they would never mediate again. 62 percent of respondents said they would recommend mediation to others and ranked the question 6 or higher. However 38 percent disagreed with the statement by ranking 5 or lower. The average score was 6.36 for the question asking respondents if they were willing to recommend mediation for others. People who were not satisfied with mediation generally had strong opinions and consequently brought the average rankings down for satisfaction.

Disputants who did not find the process to be rewarding provided the following answers to explain their discontent:

1)Mediation is good in principle, but both parties must be willing.

2)Mediation should be voluntary.

3)The cost of mediation is prohibitive.

4)Mediation should have legal or binding ramifications.

5)Mediation should occur earlier in the process.

6) Conciliation was problematic.

Mediators’ attitudes toward the mediation process ranged. Most were moderately satisfied with the mediation process. Coupled with the overall lukewarm scores disputants provided, the study indicates that the mediation process is in need of positive changes. Mediators were most positive about their perception that the parties were satisfied with the mediation process and outcome and their ability to gain the parties’ trust. However, they were less positive about the parties’ efforts, willingness to mediate and ability to problem-solve. Their responses relied heavily on whether or not the parties settled. Mediators in successful mediations thought that parties gave sincere efforts, were emotionally ready to mediate and had trusted the mediator, along with the ability to problem-solve. Mediators for mediations that resulted in no agreements or in partial agreements were less satisfied with the process.

Information & Analysis [MI]

-Program Effectives Measurement [MI-3]

Mediator Evaluation [VE]

-Variety of Feedback Provides Insight [VE-2]

States

-New York

[1]Jones, Tricia S. and Andrea Bodtker. “Satisfaction with Custody Mediation: Results from the YorkCounty Custody Mediation Program.” Mediation Quarterly 16.2 (1998)