In past postings I’ve written about the mediation of restraining orders. While most are the result of issues dealing in marital and domestic partner disputes or between neighbors, friends and ex-lovers, they are also filed by roommates and co-workers who seek a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). Generally the applicant must show in a signed, sworn affidavit that immediate irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to them. TROs are only issued for a limited number of days, generally up to ten.  After the adverse party has been given notice, a hearing is held to determine if a permanent restraining order should be issued.

I participated in a court program that gave the parties the opportunity to try mediation prior to the court date for the permanent restraining order.

One such case was a mother who applied for a TRO on behalf of her daughter against another young girl. Both girls and their parents attended the session. After explaining the purpose of the mediation I asked the party that applied for the TRO to tell her story. The mother spoke for her daughter. It seems she felt bullied by her classmates who had been taking pictures of her as she exited the school bus and texted comments about her weight to other students in their class. Her mother also said that the girls were making comments about her daughter’s weight in the cafeteria and in the school hallways. Her mother did most of the talking. Her daughter only confirmed what her mother was saying to be true.

The other girl’s mother spoke next and only said that the victim had really been the instigator by spreading rumors about the other girls. Her daughter had much to say about how the victim of bullying had really been the offender.

 California school districts are required to adopt policies prohibiting bullying. When school personnel become aware of bullying they are encouraged to refer students to the school counselor or other support services and must inform parents when students are involved and provide parents with resources on bullying. When I asked if the school had been informed, the girl’s parents said they had but she still wanted the protection of a restraining order. The offender’s mother did not want a mediation agreement in which identified her daughter as committing these alleged acts. As a consequence, no agreement was reached during the mediation.

Should this case have been referred to mediation since neither of the girls seemed willing to take responsibility? Both mothers appeared to want to have the behaviors stopped, but were unable to make that happen on their own and clearly wanted the court to make it happen.

Not all mediations end the way an outside observer might want them to. But a mediation agreement is dependent on the parties wanting to reach an agreement. If the parties don’t want to settle, a settlement is not going to happen. I did check the court’s records for this case. It was dismissed by the judge and no restraining order was issued.

In his classic book, “On Leadership,” author John Gardner addresses the subject of conflicts.

He wrote that we’ve become a combative species with an infinite capacity for contention within families, tribes, nations, races, politics, classes and religions, neighbors and businesses. While disagreements, “are part of the necessary noisiness of a free society,” protracted conflicts must be dealt with.

 Anyone with an interest in dispute resolution in any setting knows the importance of listening. I’ve written many times about limitations to our listening, including thinking about what we’re going to say rather than listen to what is being said, and assuming we understand what another means by thinking about how we would be reacting to the situation the person is describing.

 My guidelines for more effective listening include:

• Controlling the environment to minimize distractions

• Being totally present in the moment (don’t be thinking about other things)

• Not interrupting

• Asking for help to understand words and concepts, which the listener is not familiar

• Asking questions to clarify what was said, to gain additional information, and encourage the party to continue speaking

• Don’t engage in fact-finding, interrogation style questions. They put anyone on the defensive.

• Don’t assume we can know what another is feeling by thinking about what we would be feeling in the situation they are describing. Listen to understand the other person in order to understand what they are feeling—not what we would be feeling if we were in their position

• Finally, summarize what we heard

 I don’t know how many management seminars I’ve attended where attendees are given lists of ways to improve listening. Quite frankly, most don’t adhere to the list because they assume they can be a good listener since they’ve been listening their entire lives.

The point is that they may not have been listening effectively.