THE PATH FROM LITIGATION TO MEDIATION
A REFLECTION ON SYSTEMS, HUMAN BEHAVIOUR AND THE NEED FOR RELATIONAL REPAIR
After more than a decade of working in family law and child protection, I became increasingly disillusioned with the adversarial frameworks used to resolve what are, at their core, deeply relational issues.
In divorce and custody disputes, separating couples have often reached a point of entrenched conflict. Once a solicitor is instructed, matters are often rapidly escalated to court. I understand the rationale - securing legal jurisdiction, testing the other parties appetite for litigation - but in doing so, families surrender decision making power to the courts. They place profoundly personal matters in the hands of a stranger.
It is no small decision to invite a judge to determine where your child will live, how often you will see them, or whether overnight contact is ‘’ appropriate’’. Yet such determinations happen daily. I have witnessed heart- breaking decisions where a child’s relationship with the other parent was effectively severed by judicial discretion, even in finely balanced cases. The law, although designed to uphold fairness, is by its nature, a blunt instrument. It does not heal, it adjudicates and someone wins, and someone loses.
While many accept it as a necessary path, litigation can entrench patterns of ongoing legal dispute. It was never designed to address the underlying causes of family breakdown, which are rarely about contact schedules or financial orders in isolation. More often, what presents as legal conflict is an outward expression of relational pain, much of it rooted in early attachment dynamics and unresolved emotional trauma.
UNDERSTANDING THE WHY
Having also worked in child protection, I have seen firsthand the intergenerational nature of relationship dysfunction. When adult relationships breakdown, they frequently reactivate core wounds of abandonment, rejection and powerlessness. The legal system does not care about these patterns - they are legally irrelevant. Mediation, by contrast, creates space for heartfelt communication and the opportunity to understand the why, and when we understand the why, we can begin to address it.
I transitioned into mediation because I believe families in crisis need a different kind of space, one that honors emotional complexity, invites personal agency and supports honest dialogue. Mediation is not a soft alternative to legal action. It is a principled process grounded in informed decision - making, neutrality, and facilitation. It enables separating partners to retain control over outcomes that will affect their children, their financial stability, and their future co-parenting relationship.
What distinguishes mediation from litigation is not only self - determination but orientation. Mediation recognises that conflict often arises from unprocessed history and seeks to prevent that history from determining the future.
A CALL FOR RELATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
We are often quick to assign blame in the context of separation, but in my experience, very few people enter the relationship or exit them, with the intent to harm. Most are acting from fear, grief or unmet needs. What is needed is not polarization, but space to support relational repair.
In mediation we create a container where clients can speak and be heard, and not necessarily to agree - but simply to understand. From understanding, sustainable creative solutions often emerge.
I left litigation because I believe that families are inherently relational – even when fractured. Supporting families in crisis requires a model that honors this truth.
If you are a legal or mental health professional supporting separating families, or if you are navigating conflict yourself, please reach out or visit: https://www.mediationfirst.ae
