Faculty Publications

This Article argues that mediators are following distinct models of practice that are significantly different from each other, and that each model is itself internally coherent and integrated. In other words, within each model the mediator’s purpose, practices, and premises are all consistent and congruent; and when comparing each model to the others, these three levels are not only different but incompatible. Yet, although these models and their differences are recognized in the literature and identifiable in practice, many mediators and policymakers do not clearly acknowledge them; even more, they are often discounted and ignored. For example, proposals have been made recently to ignore these models in favor of a "toolbox" approach in which mediators select their practices on a case by case basis from a toolbox of methods shared by all. This Article explores the reasons for the insistence that good practice is a matter of using a common toolbox rather than following different coherent, purpose-driven models, and shows how the latter approach provides greater service to consumers and facilitates better regulation of mediation practice and ethics.

Across every approach to mediation practice, self-determination--the right of
the parties to make their own decisions about all aspects of the mediation processis
seen as a robust ethical standard and an essential foundation for a quality process.
Inside the mediation field's big tent of divergent philosophies, virtually all mediators
are united by their universal desire to honor party choices. Yet we often have
trouble operationalizing this core principle. In this article, we quickly review why
choices matter and how practitioners may inadvertently compromise them. Then
we share a method for orienting mediation sessions toward party choices. We conclude
with a practical, user-friendly tool that can help any mediator adopt a choice
lens, as described below, when they practice.

The premise of the Symposium that occasioned this Issue was that mediation is presently underutilized almost everywhere, and that the reason for this phenomenon is that the public simply doesn't grasp the great value of the process due to inadequate out-
reach and education efforts about mediation as an alternative to the legal system. Some suggest that greater use of mandatory me-
diation policies is called for as a response, rather than continuing the fruitless effort to explain mediation's value to an apparently unreceptive public.' We disagree about both the cause and the solution for lack of public interest in mediation. We believe that me-
diation's lack of success in the dispute resolution "market" is not due to the public's lack of knowledge about the process, but rather to the public's dissatisfaction with the mediation process as they have actually encountered it, in the courts and elsewhere.

Most law school mediation courses teach a set of problem-solving skills that are seen as useful in lawyering and that are also taught in other lawyering skills courses. By contrast, some mediation courses present a relatively new approach called "transformative mediation" and teach a different set of skills focused primarily on "interactional support" rather than on problem solving. This Article argues that these interactional support skills are also useful in lawyering, especially in client-centered practice, and therefore courses that teach these skills should also be welcomed in the law school skills curriculum. Part I offers a summary of some of the primary skills taught in transformative mediation and clarifies how they differ from the problem-solving skills taught in a conventional mediation course. Part II suggests that "client-centered lawyering", an approach advocated by many lawyering skills teachers, shares some fundamental premises with transformative mediation. Part III explores in depth how each of the primary transformative mediation skills can be of practical value in legal practice, at many stages of a case - from the client interview, to the development of case theory, to settlement discussions and oral advocacy - especially for lawyers practicing client-centered lawyering. Part IV offers a model for integrating an introduction to client-centered lawyering skills in the design of a course on transformative mediation. Having shown how the interactional support skills taught in transformative mediation courses add concrete value to the lawyer's performance of key tasks, the Article argues that the inclusion of transformative mediation courses in the curriculum, along with existing skills courses, will enhance overall training for lawyering practice.

Published by the ABA Tax Section and now in its 8th Edition, Effectively Representing Your Client Before the IRS is a comprehensive collection of everything a tax professional should know when dealing with the IRS. Written by some of the most experienced tax controversy lawyers in the United States, this two-volume reference provides an in-depth discussion of the law and is replete with realistic examples and hundreds of practice tips to aid tax practitioners during all stages of representation before the IRS in controversy matters, including exam, appeals, Tax Court, refund actions, and collection matters. The companion website contains select audio and video recordings, gleaned from past ABA Tax Section meetings and webinars, and is supplemented with meeting materials relevant to your practice. No tax professional should be without Effectively Representing Your Client Before the IRS. It's your go-to manual to successfully navigate the challenging maze of rules governing tax controversies. New Chapters in the 8th Edition: Obtaining Authority to Represent Taxpayers or Receive Taxpayer Information Understanding Taxpayer Identification Numbers and Their Impact on IRS Return Processing Applying Administrative Law in Tax Cases New Chapters Expanding on the Collections Chapter: Offers in Compromise Collection Due Process and Equivalent Hearings Bonus Web Content: Select Audio, Video, and Meeting Materials.