Conjoint Mediation and Therapy

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The working practice known as Conjoint Mediation and Therapy (CoMeT for short) is a model for structured interdisciplinary cooperation between a mediator and a psychotherapist , psychologistor family counselors in a voluntary process in which agreements are to be made between the ex-partners after divorce or separation. Primarily it is a question of how to deal with common children, which has to be (re) regulated. The term "Conjoint Mediation and Therapy" was preferred to the term "Therapeutic Mediation", as the latter suggests that it is a matter of mediation to which a therapeutic element has been added. Conjoint Mediation and Therapy is rather a dual process to which both disciplines make an equal contribution.

aims

The ultimate goal of CoMeT is to help parents with a high potential for conflict after their divorce or separation to make agreements that are binding, sustainable and in the best interests of the children. With therapeutic help, entrenched emotional conflicts that previously stood in the way of parental cooperation are to be resolved. The ex-partners should be enabled to meet as parents and to put the needs of the children at the center of their agreements.

Origin of the model

High divorce rates and a high rate of separation from unmarried parents change, among other things, the demands on the judicial system , which as a result has to deal with a large number of parental and child concerns. Many ethical dilemmas arise especially when trying to remind highly controversial couples of their responsibility as parents or to protect a partner or child from domestic violence. Mediators from the Family Mediation Center (FMC) in Melbourne, Australia, found conventional mediation inadequate in such cases. The CoMeT model was initially designed as a pilot project in a cooperation between Relationships Australia (RA) and the FMC. The project was sponsored by the Commonwealth Attorney-General's Department.

Working method

The way of working is characterized by the structured interdisciplinary collaboration between a mediator and a psychotherapist, psychologist or family counselor.

  • The mediator supports the parents in reaching a mutual agreement.
  • The psychotherapist, psychologist or family counselor prepares the way for a mutual agreement by observing the mediation process and intervening whenever it gets stuck due to unresolved emotional conflicts.

In order to ensure successful cooperation between the professions, the integrity of each profession must be preserved. This includes, among other things, full transparency towards the clients, who are informed beforehand about the role and methods of the respective profession. Furthermore, the working relationship between mediator and psychotherapist, psychologist or family counselor must be based on mutual respect and trust. The strengths of the other profession are valued and supported by one's own actions. In a debriefing, which takes place after each session, especially at the beginning of the cooperation, there is room for honest feedback in the event of doubts and for questions about the other's working methods. Regular supervision serves to deal with possible open or subliminal conflicts and to optimize the work processes in the dual process of mediation and therapy . Ideally, the gender ratio is balanced. If this is not possible, cooperation between two women is preferred because female clients who may have experienced violence from their partner do not feel safe with two male colleagues.

At the beginning of the CoMeT process, family and judicial history, family violence and questions of security are clarified in individual sessions . The limits of confidentiality , duty of care and the legal obligation to report child abuse are explained. The occurrence of violence in the past as well as in the present must be queried. CoMeT is not indicated in the case of physical violence or threats of physical violence in the immediate presence. In general, a clinical judgment must be made as to whether it is safe for everyone involved to perform CoMeT. A contract is agreed that in the event of violence between meetings, the CoMeT team will take the necessary steps, including breaking off the CoMeT process. Also in the further course of each contact with the client, the possible occurrence of violence is queried.

In the subsequent CoMeT sessions, the couple meets. The focus within a session depends on the case and previous mediation experience. In the case of extensive mediation attempts in the past, the therapeutic focus can usually be reached more quickly. It is important that the mediator and psychotherapist, psychologist or family counselor understand each other's approach and approach in order to be able to react flexibly to the course of the meeting. The change in focus, the so-called "switching", usually takes place as a result of observation by the psychotherapist, psychologist or family counselor during the often stuck mediation process. As a result, the psychotherapist, psychologist or family counselor directs the focus from current events to past emotional wounds and unresolved conflicts. By dealing with contaminated sites, the psychotherapist, psychologist or family counselor opens up the space for the mediation process to continue with the option of reaching an agreement. The therapeutic methods used are oriented towards the client and can be based on approaches of systemic therapy, e.g. B. for the identification of dynamics between the parents, trauma exploration and psychodrama up to behavior therapy procedures, z. B. Training of communication skills are sufficient.

Further optional additions to the CoMeT sessions are individual sessions with the mediator or with the psychotherapist, psychologist or family counselor, mediation with two mediators and Child Inclusive Practice. In Child Inclusive Practice, the children are supervised by a third independent person in the absence of their parents trained to do so, interviewed. The children's point of view is presented to the parents in the subsequent CoMeT session. The interviewer explicitly takes on the role of the children's advocate and confronts the parents with their responsibility for the well-being of the children.

criticism

Studies on the effectiveness of the CoMet model have shown that highly controversial parents who participated in the project improved their well-being. Furthermore, conflicts between the parents, their bitterness and negative emotional ties were successfully reduced. The majority of the participating parents waived further legal action. However, long-term studies and investigations into the resulting or saved costs have so far been lacking . The implementation of CoMeT is very expensive. However, there is good reason to hope that by reaching long-term out-of-court agreements, the financial burden that society has to bear in the case of highly contentious parents can be reduced.

literature

  • Boyhan P., Foster L., Grimes A., Jaffe R.: Conjoint mediation and therapy: Emergence of the CoMeT model. In: Australian Dispute Resolution Journal. Volume 15, 2004, pp. 109-118.
  • P. Boyhan, F. Gerner: 'Doing what it takes': A family dispute resolution case study using a multidisciplinary approach. In: Journal of Family Studies. Volume 13, 2007, pp. 236-244.
  • N. Jacobs, R. Jeffe: Investigating the efficacy of CoMeT, a new mediation model for high-conflict separating parents. In: The American Journal of Family Therapy. Volume 38, 2010, pp. 16-31.
  • BM Smyth, L. Moloney: Therapeutic divorce mediation: Strengths, limitations and future directions. In: Journal of Family Studies. Volume 9, 2003, pp. 161-186.