📄 Abstract
Mediation is intended to be a voluntary process that allows parties to settle disputes through a mutually acceptable resolution achieved through open dialogue. Yet in high-stakes matterssuch as family disputes, workplace matters, or human rights mattersthe true voluntary nature of mediation is often absent from the process. This paper discusses how consent to mediation is often built on pressure and structural or systemic power imbalances, resulting in an outcome that is more mandated or coerced than a truly voluntary choice. This paper also explores the difference between actual consent and one made under duress, exploring legal theorists and psychological spaces to understand what occurs in decision-making for parties when they are under duress. The research applies case studies comparing mediation from India, the United States, and South Africa to explore the varieties of ways in which each system can address the worthiness of consent. The paper also explores international principles of practice from UNCITRAL and the European Union to assess efforts at the global level to safeguard the autonomy of parties. The paper concludes with recommendations for advancing mediation practice: conducting consent screening for coercion and/or systemic trauma, providing mediator training with trauma perspectives, and improving opt-out provisions to clarify that consent was given. By focusing on issues of consent and coercion, this research built on the social justice goal of making mediation fairer and empowering for all participating parties.
🏷️ Keywords
📚 How to Cite:
K Ramya Srinithi, A Varshini , CONSENT AND COERCION IN MEDIATION: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF VOLUNTARINESS IN HIGH-STAKES DISPUTES , Volume 11 , Issue 11, November 2025, EPRA International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (IJMR) ,