Court-Connected Mediation Compared: The Cases of Argentina and the United States

This Article presents and compares data collected in Argentina and the United States during each country's initial experience with court-connected mediation. In the period 1990 to 1999, Argentina and the United States began ambitious court-connected mediation programs and achieved notable results. A comparative analysis of these results yields insights that should prove useful to countries contemplating the adoption of mediation laws. This analysis exposes how two very different mandatory mediation schemes have worked in practice and explores how the circumstances under which mediation is transplanted to a new place can influence its effects.I begin by analyzing the rationales for mandatory mediation and the laws that provide for its institutionalization. Then, my analysis turns to mediation's effects, exploring both empirical and anecdotal data. I conclude by discussing larger issues affected by mediation, such as market liberalization and power dynamics between social classes.