top of page

Behind the Scenes of Family Mediation: Procedural Pitfalls and Collaboration with Lawyers and the Judiciary

  • Jun 4
  • 2 min read

Updated: Jun 30

Following yesterday’s supervision, and based on the results of my work and participation in the Interagency Coordination Council under the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, Hanna Bobnieva and I wrote an article about our practice and the challenges of developing the institution of family mediation in our country.


The full text of the article can be read via the link below.


Behind the Scenes of Family Mediation, or Collaboration with Lawyers and Proper Support for the Judiciary

Tetiana Bilyk, Hanna Bobnieva


Are there common touchpoints in the work of a mediator, a lawyer, and a judge? Each has their own tasks, and every professional always tries to do their job in the best possible way. The best lawyer is the one who maximally advocates for and protects the rights and legitimate interests of their client. Meanwhile, a mediator stands in the middle between the conflicting parties and, from this balanced position, helps them direct and combine their energy into developing mutually acceptable solutions, instead of wasting it on fighting in an adversarial judicial process.


Very often, when comparing mediation and litigation, mediation is portrayed as "good" and litigation as "bad", but such simplistic comparisons create a misconception of both systems. Mediation is not always appropriate, and even where it is applied, it does not always result in an agreement, because some issues require a court ruling.


– Good afternoon, I am Mr. N's lawyer. Could I get a certificate confirming that my client applied to you as a mediator?

– No, because this is confidential information.

– Then I will send you a lawyer's request, which obliges you to provide an answer.


(From a recent supervision session in family mediation)


The first question that arises for the mediator is, "Why does the lawyer need this certificate"? However, the answer lies on the surface. The lawyer's task is to gather as many facts and evidence as possible to strengthen the client's position during the case hearing.


In family disputes involving the interests of a child (mostly claims regarding the child's place of residence and determining the visitation schedule for the non-custodial parent), the situation is particularly sensitive. The court, guardianship authorities, or social services evaluate not only the legal arguments of the parties but also their behavior, willingness to cooperate, and ability to act in the best interests of the child. Under these conditions, the mere existence of a certificate confirming an application to a mediator can create a certain impression about a party to the dispute, even if there are no factual grounds for such conclusions, since the parties never actually entered the mediation process.


In this context, the institution of mediation risks turning from a tool for constructive dialogue into an instrument of procedural strategy. Instead of creating a space for negotiations, it starts being used to build an evidence base and demonstrate one's own "good faith". At the same time, the primary goal of mediation - as a voluntary, out-of-court dispute resolution method - fades into the background.


bottom of page