Hence it is always interesting to look across the ocean to enrich our thinking and practice in ADR with some fresh insights and perspectives from the USA. As an add-on to my book on Constructive conflict and dispute management (Constructief omgaan met conflicten en geschillen. Inleiding in probleemoplossend onderhandelen en bemiddelen, A.-L. Verbeke & G. Vervaeke, Boomjuridisch Antwerpen 2022, 173 p.; also published in TMD 2021 (25) 2, 14-149), I have requested three American good friends and colleagues of eminent standing in the field, to give a brief reflection on video on a topic of each one of the three chapters of the book. You can watch these interesting perspectives via the QR codes in this article.

In the first clip, related to the first chapter on communication, Professor of Practice at Harvard Law School Sheila Heen comments on some aspects of "Difficult Conversations", the best-selling book of which she is a co-author. On the second chapter on negotiation, we focus on the complex question when to negotiate, when to fight when your opposing party feels like a demon. Professor Robert H. Mnookin, author of the best-selling book "Bargaining with the Devil", is our expert guide in the second clip. He is the Williston Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, Director of the Harvard Negotiation Research Project and Emeritus Chair of PON, the famous Program On Negotiation at Harvard Law School. We conclude with comments on the third chapter on mediation, in the third video clip presented by Professor Carrie Menkel-Meadow, who is the Distinguished and Chancellor's Professor of Law at UC Irvine and Emerita A.B. Chettle, Jr. Professor of Dispute Resolution and Civil Procedure at Georgetown University Law Center.

This contribution discusses judicial mediation and civil mediation, with a focus on their respective development, the sources of the power to mediate, the qualifications required from mediators, and the legal status or effect of mediation outcomes.
In addition, some recent developments in the field of mediation in China are highlighted, such as the advanced mediation system and the impact of the Singapore Mediation Convention.In addition, some recent developments in the field of mediation in China are highlighted, such as the advanced mediation system and the impact of the Singapore Mediation Convention.

Mediation is becoming ever more important in French law. For a long time, parties have been able to agree to mediate to avoid expensive and long legal proceedings. Recent reforms have extended the scope of mediation. The courts can ask parties to try and mediate, and in some areas of law, for instance disputes about less than € 5000, mediation has even become a prerequisite for being able to file a case. Whilst mediation is thus playing an important role in everyday disputes, national regulation for mediators is lagging behind. There are no thorough universal standards for mediators and there is no central disciplinary board, even though mediators’ organizations have been creating such professional rules and institutions. It is likely the advent of a mandatory attempt at mediation will lead the French legislator to adopt more universal rules for mediation.

This is a letter written by Brigitte Chin-A-Fat to the late Peter Hoefnagels, who was one of the Dutch pioneers in the field of divorce mediation and a professor of criminology and family law at Erasmus University Rotterdam. In 1997, TMD published an article from his hand in which he wrote how he had become inspired by the potential of divorce mediation and about his (first) experiences with this ‘new’ mode of dispute resolution in family disputes. The original article by Peter Hoefnagels, dating from 1997, is reproduced in 2021 in TMD in view of its relevance today and precedes the letter by Brigitte Chin-A-Fat.
Hoefnagels invented the so-called ‘divorce announcement’ and introduced psychology to the legal world of divorce and family mediation. Anno 2021, there are many (legal) developments which are bound to have an impact on the reform of Dutch divorce procedure.
The Dutch government has set up pilot projects experimenting with inter alia a ‘joint access’ to the family court. Many of these developments are in line with Hoefnagels’ suggestions to avoid harm being inflicted on the ex-spouses and notably their children to the largest extent possible. The author discusses some of the current pilot projects and connects the rationale underlying these experiments to Hoefnagels’ ideas as presented 25 years ago. She also looks into the future, notably which changes are likely to occur in the next 25 years in the field of divorce mediation.