Description

“A proper restorative engagement, if done well, can be transformative — not only for the survivor, but also for the institution.”

— Robyn Bailey

In this episode of Humankind – Bridging Dialogues, I had the honour of welcoming Robyn Bailey, Australian mediator and Senior Member of the tribunal in New South Wales, to explore her extraordinary work and commitment in restorative justice — especially in cases of sexual abuse involving religious institutions.

In Australia, this process is known as Restorative Engagement. It is showing remarkable results, well aligned with the court system.

Robyn shares with us a powerful and deeply moving story from her practice: Joseph, a survivor abused by a priest in childhood, who found not only recognition, but also dignity, shelter, and connection — through a restorative engagement with the institution.

Joseph’s story will echo for a long time in Humankind.

We also dive into:

🔸 How to create emotionally and culturally safe spaces for difficult conversations

🔸 Navigating trauma in mediation

🔸 Why kindness is not a soft skill — but a professional compass

🔸 How mediators protect themselves from vicarious trauma

This conversation is not only about mediation.

It’s about our capacity to face the past, to hold space for truth — and to imagine healing outcomes after long term silencing and inner suffering.

Enjoy listening, and please stay in touch:

🌐 www.faizaallegdolivet.com

👥 www.linkedin.com/in/faiza-alleg-lawyer-mediator

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Transcription

• Speaker #0

  Humankind, Bridging Dialogue, the podcast that gives a voice to those around the world who make a difference in the mediation field. I am Faisa Alec d'Olivier, lawyer at the Paris Bar and certified mediator. Each month, I break down practical aspects of this field with an expert. Far more than just a tool for negotiated justice, mediation is primarily a process of conflict transformation through the emergence of constructive dialogue in all the challenging landscapes of our lives, whether they are economic, social, environmental, or simply human. Humankind is a space for exchanging and understanding the mechanism and teachings of mediation with those who bring it to life on the ground. And for those listening who are still wondering about what mediation can do, here is my invitation. Be creative. Change your perspective. Explore. Be bold. Be brave. Be vulnerable. Define your intentions. Project the future. Bring change. Be the change. Now, welcome to the table. In this episode of Humankind, I wanted to explore a special dimension of mediation, which is restorative justice, a practice that brings together those who have caused harm and those who have experienced it, not to erase responsibility, but to acknowledge and to make room for repair, understanding and transformation. It's a justice that listens, a justice that dares to believe in the power of dialogue. To talk about this powerful approach, I'm very happy to welcome Robin Bailey. Coming from Australia, a country at the forefront of restorative practices, Robin has made healing justice her path, her passion and her expertise. Welcome Robin. pleasure to have you with us today.

• Speaker #1

  Thanks, Faisal. It's lovely to be here.

• Speaker #2

  One question for you. Do you describe yourself as a lawyer, a judge, a mediator, or all three at the same time?

• Speaker #1

  Well, I'm qualified as a lawyer, but I no longer represent clients. I have the dream job, I think. I work as a mediator, but I also have the great privilege to have been appointed to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal. I'm at one state and a territory in Australia, so I do have the opportunity to preside on hearings, but my title is senior member, not judge. So it's hard to describe in simple terms what I do.

• Speaker #2

  That's what we're going to dive into to understand a little bit better how you navigate those different approaches. So maybe first, since you started your career as a lawyer and did the shifts towards mediation, can you tell us a little bit more about why?

• Speaker #1

  That's actually a funny story. I was a litigator and I really enjoyed the litigation and being in the court and seeing what outcomes were available for people in courts. And the reason I originally decided I wanted to train as a mediator were not for the right reasons, I now realise. I decided quite early on that I would like to eventually be appointed to one of the tribunals to preside on hearings. And I was advised by a very wise woman that I wouldn't be considered a suitable candidate unless I had done mediation training. So I started the training for all the wrong reasons. But in the first day of the training course, I realized that I had found my place. And I couldn't believe just how wonderful this option was for me and how it played to my particular temperament and I think into personal skills. And I have never looked back.

• Speaker #2

  It's very interesting. to understand that the skills of a mediator are essential to preside a hearing and to be involved in the court system.

• Speaker #1

  Well, they certainly do inform how I conduct hearings, particularly because a lot of the people who appear in front of me are not legally represented. The skills that you learn as a mediator can really assist the parties to better understand the legal issues that they might be facing without running their case for them. and help them to perhaps come to a resolution once they realise that litigation may not give them the answers that they're really looking for, but they can be empowered to explore conflict resolution themselves.

• Speaker #2

  If we dive a little bit more into the cases that you work on in your hearings.

• Speaker #1

  It would encompass a wide range of things. Disciplinary matters for medical practitioners and lawyers, guardianship issues for people with disabilities. So a lot of the people who appear in front of me have disabilities, child protection issues. But interestingly, in the empowering legislation, there is a section which gives the tribunal members the right to compel mediation or to use their own best endeavours to bring the parties to settlement. So that's actually enshrined in the legislation, which I think is wonderful.

• Speaker #2

  Interesting. I think it really says something about your practices and how... this effort of finding common ground becomes a step that people become more familiar to engage in. And probably the parties also are more adamant to negotiate or try to build dialogue.

• Speaker #1

  I can't say that all the parties are completely enthusiastic about being compelled to mediate because whilst the legal profession is slowly getting the hang of what mediation means, The community doesn't necessarily really understand what it involves or how it might be approached. And so when I do have the opportunity to encourage them to negotiate, I use a very similar opening statement to what I would use if I were actually the mediator. So I want to make sure that they understand the basics of how they might approach it or where they could go for help.

• Speaker #2

  So you're touching about the opening statement in mediation. Maybe we can... Stop here for a moment. Why is this opening statement so important? What is an opening statement actually in mediation?

• Speaker #1

  Well, I'm not going to deliver one now, but it does have some very important components. One of them is to explain what is mediation and why is it so important? What are the special elements of mediation that make this a really good idea for you? And why is this a safer way to try this before you come back to me and ask me to decide your case for you? So what is mediation? What is the role of everybody in the mediation process? You explain the confidentiality, you explain the risks of litigation, which they may not have really considered because everybody comes to court or to a tribunal thinking that they're right and that the other side is wrong. And you explain to them very clearly that someone's going to come second and they don't know who that is. And what might be the effects of that? bit. And you try to get them to really look at that. And then you explain to them that they need to approach this courteously and they need to look at not so much their legal case and what's right and wrong, because that can be decided by the tribunal member or the judge later. What they need to focus on is what might they need to do to avoid taking the risk of the judge. And I give them some ideas of not what they might. consider as options, but how they might approach that problem-solving exercise. I only get a few minutes to do that. In some cases, I can actually act as the conciliator. I can take off my decision-maker hat and put on my conciliator hat. That has all sorts of issues that pop up there in that kind of process, but I do have legally the power to do that.

• Speaker #2

  For the parties, it's very powerful to receive. this information in the first place from you and knowing that potentially you could also take this approach as a conciliator. If they accept the mediation, how does it work?

• Speaker #1

  They can either go away and get their own private mediator or in some divisions of the tribunal, I can put them through the mediation stream that is provided by the tribunal. That's not available in every stream. Or in some cases such as a small claim, a consumer claim or a small civil claim, I can say to them, I do have the power to assist you as a conciliator. That would involve me taking off my decision maker hat. That means that anything you say in this process, I cannot use if I then have to go back onto the bench. So we'll have to start again from the beginning as if I've not heard anything. And if you're not comfortable about that, you tell me and we'll get someone else to come and you the matter. Because it's got to be handled in a way that if it ultimately has to be determined by a tribunal member, they need to know that it's... Fear.

• Speaker #2

  And the same principle of independence and impartiality would be expected. So that's for the work that you're doing at the tribunal. And it sounds like your mediation approach is really present in every aspect of the work that you do.

• Speaker #1

  Absolutely.

• Speaker #2

  The rest of your time is dedicated to private mediation.

• Speaker #1

  Yes.

• Speaker #2

  Is there any particular field in which you're practicing at the moment?

• Speaker #1

  I do a lot of commercial disputes referred to me either by members of the profession or by judges in the court. But my real passion is restorative engagement. And historically, I have done that in the field of historical child abuse or institutional abuse. And that's something that I find really worthwhile and fulfilling.

• Speaker #2

  Why is that?

• Speaker #1

  Because it can be so transformative. whilst it's satisfying. for the parties, I hope, to resolve their commercial dispute and they can go away and save the emotional costs and the time costs of litigating. When someone has been affected or traumatised by something that's happened to them in the past, a proper restorative engagement, if done well, can be transformative not only for the survivor of that abuse, but also for either the perpetrator or the representative of the perpetrator. In other words, the representative of the institution. There can be healing on both sides of the table.

• Speaker #2

  I think we're going to talk about this into more detail and dive into the practice of restorative justice. We talk a lot about this in France at the moment and the question of why restorative justice is not used more regularly. This is still a very exceptional process in the criminal field and the person conducting the restorative justice process is not a mediator. It's someone who is specifically trained to conduct the restorative justice process with a victim and a perpetrator, either the perpetrator from her case or his case or another one that is convicted for similar offenses. It's very slowly developing maybe because there's a lot of engagement from the judicial institution to put this framework in place. In Australia, it seems like this is... a practice that is widespread, if I can say.

• Speaker #1

  I don't know that I could agree that it's widespread, but it is certainly something which has been mandated by some government departments, but also is starting to get a bit of a foothold. And even mediations that come to me from the court, when I discover that they involve historical abuse claims, I still conduct that, although it's still called a mediation. as more of a restorative engagement.

• Speaker #2

  So what does it mean in practice? How do you approach this area?

• Speaker #1

  A restorative engagement is a process where the survivor, I'll use that term, is able to be heard, able to have their voice heard, be acknowledged, be affirmed. Where they might receive an apology, they can have their story acknowledged and receive a response. from the institution, which is often really powerful. Generally in a court process, they will never get an apology, at least not voluntarily. The court might impose some kind of monetary penalty on the institution, but they're not going to necessarily get the recognition that they crave. And so often for a survivor, they want to be believed. They want to be heard. They're very often silenced. We all know that for many adult survivors, it can take decades for them to come forward with their story. And they face all sorts of obstacles and prejudice from community that is inclined to disbelieve them because it's taken so long or because so many of them, as a result of their trauma, are now alcoholics or they use drugs or they've come into contact with the criminal justice system. So they're often very vulnerable people and they're lost in the legal world very often. And even if they have lawyers, the lawyers may not be fully trauma-informed and may not necessarily know how to give their clients a voice and they speak for them instead, as we all know. So restorative engagement gives them a voice. It also gives the institution the chance to be heard. And I'm going to use the word institution. That can include the perpetrator in person, but in my practice generally. with the historical claims the perpetrator might be dead. And so the institution who employed that person is left to respond to the survivor.

• Speaker #2

  You know that in this podcast, we work around important stories for you as a practitioner. And since you're talking about some aspects of the work that you do in the field of abuse, but you've also mentioned trauma, and it sounds like you have a very specific approach, which takes All those dimensions into account. Maybe you could share a story with us in order to dive into this fascinating practice.

• Speaker #1

  Yeah, there's one story that will stick with me forever, I think. And I'm going to change the names, obviously. So I'm going to call this man Joseph. So Joseph was a 68-year-old man when I met him. He was a lovely man. He had had a career in radio and as a voiceover. actor because he had the most beautiful voice. He was a very gentle and courteous man. He was lovely. He told me that his religion was very important to him. That was his central value. And he told me why. When he was about five, both his parents died shortly, one after the other, and Joseph was placed in an institution. There he received shelter, he received an education, but more importantly for Joseph, he felt nurtured and cared for and loved, which is not always the case in these institutions. So much so that he came to refer to the church as his mother. So this is an indication of how important his faith and the church as an institution was to Joseph. Unfortunately, he also shared with me that between the ages of 8 and 14. He had been repeatedly sexually abused by one of the priests at the institution. Now, obviously, this had had a huge effect on Joseph. He didn't ever tell anyone because the priest to him was second to God and also was a representative of this church that he considered to be his mother. So he kept it to himself, as so many survivors of abuse do, and managed to live with the feelings of shame and embarrassment and confusion. trauma that had stayed with him. And he managed that for many years. Because of his faith, he had studied theology and had become a chaplain and was working in a hospital providing ministry to dying patients. Something happened that finally caused Joseph to completely break down and he was no longer able to work. He couldn't really even care for himself properly. It was really sad to see how this elegant and articulate man had fallen so low. He was called to the hospital to provide ministry to a dying patient. And when he turned up at the hospital, he recognized his abuser. The abuser didn't recognize him, but Joseph's job was to hold his hand and to pray for the forgiveness of his abuser's sins in his dying moments. I can't even begin to imagine how difficult that must have been and how Joseph would cope with that. But he did his job, and then afterwards he completely broke down. He was persuaded to go and seek help from the institution, and they got in touch with me. They already knew about the abuser's track record. They didn't know about Joseph. And because they knew about the abuser, and because they were a member of a group of institutions that were signed up to a protocol for addressing claims of abuse, They agreed to a mediation without making Joseph go through litigation. So that was a good thing. Okay, so I had the job of conducting this restorative engagement. I met with Joseph and it was really clear that it was going to be very difficult for him to engage. He was really reluctant. Obviously, he'd never told anyone his story before and that was embarrassing for him. But also, he didn't want to ask. the church for money because the church was his mother. And he was adamant that he wasn't going to engage in a process that caused him to ask for any money. So I had to make sure that it was going to be safe for him to participate, that it wouldn't cause him any further harm. So I spent a long time with him in preliminary conference. It got to the point where we even had to work together so he could write down a script and be really prepared for the day. He asked me that if he felt he couldn't do it on the day, could I start reading that for him? So we put a framework in place. He did not want to have a support person with him. I then had to meet with the... new leader of the institution because the perpetrator was dead. Now, the leader of the institution had dealt with a number of abuse claims and was wary of false or exaggerated claims and also wanted to reduce the amount of money he might have to pay to any survivors of abuse. So he was a little defensive, but he was willing to come. I had to assess whether he was going to be a suitable person to meet with Joseph or whether he was the sort of individual that might cause more harm. So I had to really be sure that he understood trauma-informed principles and how to engage with Joseph in a way that would be helpful and not harmful. After a really fruitful preliminary conference with him, I decided, yes, I think this man can engage with Joseph. And so we proceeded. The mediation took two days because Joseph needed lots of breaks, but he did really well. He managed eventually to speak for himself. And a really nice conversation between the two men flowed. It started with Joseph telling his story. This is the really important part of restorative engagement. And the leader of the institution just listened and gave him the space to do that. Then he responded to Joseph by apologising, not just on behalf of the institution, but also one man to another and saying how sorry he was and the shame that he felt. as a member of the same institution, as a human being, was a very human response. He also told Joseph that he believed him. That was a really transformative moment. I can tell you there wasn't a dry eye in the house. So that's the first part of a restorative engagement, and that takes as long as it takes. And then, of course, we have to work out the next part of the process is, how can we help? What can the institution do now to help Joseph? within the realms of what's possible for the institutions. Joseph's interests became really clear in what he had said, and they were, I don't want to accept money. I do want somewhere to live because I'm really scared I'm going to end up homeless. I can't pay the rent anymore because I can't work. I've never married. I don't have any family. So I'm really lonely. I really want a community. and I want an ongoing relationship with the church that I call my mother. So Joseph's interests, shelter, security, ongoing community, ongoing relationship with the church, but not money. The church institution had never responded to a claim for abuse in any other way other than paying money because it had never really come up before. They understood Joseph's need for accommodation, but certainly couldn't afford to give him enough money to buy a... a property for himself in Australia. So it really took a long time to think, well, what are the options here? The church's interests were to reduce the amount of money, but also to prevent litigation because of the reputational damage. Also, I didn't want to set a precedent in court as well. We had to work out a way where both parties could get as much as possible of what they wanted. In the end, what was decided was a beautiful outcome for everybody. The institution decided that it would purchase in its own name a property for itself in a retirement community and would give Joseph the right to live there for the rest of his life. It was in a place where there was also an aged care home with full nursing care on site so when Joseph got older he could move across to the aged care facility. That was part of the agreement. It was also agreed that the leader of the church authority or somebody would visit Joseph every week to see how he was and make sure that he was okay. And that's what happened. And for years later, I got letters from Joseph telling me how happy he was in this community. He felt connected to his mother church. He had people around him that were like-minded. He felt that the church had heard him and had cared for him, continued to care for him, just like it had when he was a child, apart from the perpetrator. And he was very happy. And about six months ago, I got a phone call from the leader of the institution to tell me that Joseph had passed away. He told me that he'd continued his relationship with Joseph and that he had really enjoyed it. For me, this was a real example of how an outcome was available that was healing for both sides. Both parties received huge benefit from that, and it did nobody any harm. But really importantly... It's an outcome that just would not have been available from the court. It could never have been possible. That's a story that will stay with me forever. And I was really proud and privileged to be part of that.

• Speaker #2

  Wow, that's an incredible vision of what restorative justice can do. And as you say, it goes way beyond someone making a decision on a particular situation. It's about bringing the sense of justice in a human framework for people to respectively express. and share and also go through because when I hear your story, I understand how it has been a process that started somewhere and landed in a very different place.

• Speaker #1

  Yeah.

• Speaker #2

  And this probably could not have been expected in the first place. No. So the quality of the skills that you've offered to this moment and challenge for Joseph. and also for the institution, was what made the situation a transformative one for both parties.

• Speaker #1

  It was wonderful to work with this particular leader of the institution because I could see him transform. And in fact, he reflected this to me. He told me this and has thanked me for it, which is lovely of him, but it was him that did it, not me, because he was understandably, I think, defensive and worried and anxious about. what this might mean for his religious community. It occurred to me that often these religious leaders who are asked to respond to victims, they don't get enough training to support them, to do what is a really difficult job, to talk to somebody who's so damaged, damaged by one of them.

• Speaker #2

  Absolutely. There's been a large number of scandals and they continue to be throughout the world, a number of stories. Then the question about... how an institution can address it very much relies on accepting that this has happened. It sounds like in your experience, you were with an institution that did not necessarily know how, but was not in denial of a situation that has existed in the past.

• Speaker #1

  Yes. And it's interesting that you raise that because restorative engagement can work even when the person who's responding is a little unsure about whether this is true or not. I'm not going to identify the government department, but there was a large government department who set up a very, I think, wonderful framework and trained its senior officers in the department, really, really well-selected ones, to respond to survivors of past abuse. And they were specifically told that you can do this even if you personally... For we as an institution have our doubts about whether this is completely true or not. And they were trained so well that they did that, in my experience, very beautifully and very usefully and in a way which was really healing. And one of the reasons I think that's important is because adult survivors of historical abuse don't always present as the most plausible people. It takes a long time for them to come forward generally. Often they have mental illnesses which... rightly or wrongly, undermine the reliability that people attribute to their testimony. They might be angry and aggressive. They might not be calm communicators. And that makes it difficult for someone to listen to their story. That kind of training is really important. But the point about whether you actually believe it or not, it is important, but it's not essential in my experience. Well,

• Speaker #2

  that's also interesting to Bear this in mind. So it kind of expands the spectrum of where restorative justice may be the right path, making sure that it provides an opportunity, even if there are some bias or a situation in the party's history that prevent them from accepting that this may have occurred in the past. And the question of bias actually is very strong in those matters where... The society may resist very heavily in recognizing history and past grievance. We know that there has been, in Australia, a lot of active steps and engagement towards rebuilding dialogue with the communities.

• Speaker #1

  I've been really privileged with some wonderful leaders of some Aboriginal communities, and it has been such an eye-opener for me, and it's been wonderful. can't speak as an expert in that field. There are people that are much more experienced of working with communities.

• Speaker #0

  We call it outback in Australia. But that's been interesting for me because I've had to try, however inexpertly, get my head around some of the cultural differences that are at play in those restorative discussions or attempted restorative discussions and how what I've had to try to do to make sure that what I'm doing there is safe because it's got to be culturally safe as well as safe from the perspective of... doing no further harm to somebody who's traumatised. That is something that I think we need to look at more. There are some practitioners in Australia doing wonderful work in that field and I think what I'd like to see more of is our Aboriginal Australians getting involved in this because some of our practices may not work for them but some of them might and if we can learn from each other more then I think that could be better for everybody.

• Speaker #1

  You're making a pattern. between those two approaches and just taking into account all the differences to start with and building common ground by recognising history and providing different remedies than what money can bring, right? This is not just about money.

• Speaker #0

  Yes, it is interesting because sometimes people do want just the money in these spaces as well. But generally speaking, I find even if that's the case, there is always that piece about recognition and understanding and acknowledgement. That's something that when I've been asked to mediate disputes between institutions and historical survivors of abuse, or not even what we generally consider to be abuse, but we have this term stolen generation. And it is very definitely a form of... trauma and terrible harm has been done, even if it didn't involve sexual abuse every time.

• Speaker #1

  What was the student generation?

• Speaker #0

  Where Aboriginal children were removed forcibly from their homes by members of churches or government institutions to be educated in white schools as white Australians, which completely offended every cultural need that our Aboriginal Australians have. So they are deeply rooted to their land and to their ancestors and to their community and to their family and to their language. And that's for so many Aboriginal Australians that's been completely disrupted and that has a multi-generational impact for them. Many Aboriginal languages have been lost, Aboriginal communities have been fractured and we really have to address this more. Even though I now accept that there are some institutions who were in their mind, thinking they were doing the right thing. And I had to mediate one such case where a young man from one of the island communities had been removed from his land. We call it his country. He'd been removed from his country to go to a Catholic school, an institutional school, run by well-meaning but completely misguided people. And he recognizes today, and he told me, They gave me... an education that I would never have got otherwise. I really appreciate that education. I know they care about me, but they still ripped me away from my country and from my culture and my language. And I didn't get any choice in that. And I want to be recognized for that. And it was really hard because he had still a really good relationship with these women that educated him and wanted to maintain that relationship. but was so angry with them for taking him away from his family and his country, where he could no longer be really accepted because he'd had this other experience. So he was in this terrible situation. The women in question couldn't understand what they had done that was so wrong. So I realized that I couldn't handle this on my own, and I worked with a beautiful friend of mine. I asked her to co-mediate with me, and she was a woman from an Aboriginal country. closer to where I come from. But she was able very calmly and very kindly and very lovingly explain to the women why this was such an offence and such a terrible thing that they had done, even though we had to acknowledge they had done what they thought was the right thing to do. But clearly, we all know it was not the right thing to do. With our modern eyes, we realise what a scandal it really was. But there's no way I would engage in one of those processes without help from. someone from an Aboriginal background to make that culturally safe for everyone.

• Speaker #1

  It's very intense to project those moments of dialogue, which requires a lot of courage to confront the past and decisions that do not necessarily belong to you. But nevertheless, that had an impact for the rest of your existence. I think the angle of creating this, you said, culturally safe environment, making sure that they are the right person. around the table to handle the conversation, to bring the cultural vision and explanation, and in a way build bridges. That's probably the power of mediation, but even more the power of restorative justice. So building bridges and providing safe environment for people wondering and questioning who needs to be present for this conversation to happen. I think it gives also a not a perspective. Like I said, in France, we're not using this mechanism because it's not sufficiently institutional. And having a framework that is well established will also give an opportunity to individuals to come forward.

• Speaker #0

  The framework gives safety to people who are trying to conduct these processes. But we all know that sometimes the framework, it needs to be very flexible and you need to adjust it to each individual case. But it is better to have a path, the framework, a scaffold, because not only is it helpful for the practitioner, but it also gives you something, a way of preparing the people who are going to be meeting each other across the table and saying, look, this is what might be step one. And you give them an idea of what might happen.

• Speaker #1

  So Robin, you've given us a lot of your practice and in fact a little bit about yourself as well. But is there something you want to share? that people do not already know about you?

• Speaker #0

  I have to say music. Music's probably my biggest passion in life. I also find that you can use that a lot in mediations because if you can find some kind of common topic of conversation, you find out that they both like the same kind of music and they're very nervous when they come into the room. I often talk about music. It's a way of helping them start that difficult conversation if they already had a bit of a laugh with each other first. Not always appropriate. not always possible, but sometimes.

• Speaker #1

  I like what you say, because it's true that mediation dialogue can be about creating musicality as well. And it's true that it's so inspiring to listen to music that sometimes you would even want to play a music in the mediation setting so that you can cool the pressure and just bring things a bit more closer to earth.

• Speaker #0

  Yes, I've had parties turn up with their music and they've asked me, do you mind if I play this in the middle of it? It may have a particular lyric. This happened a couple of times, actually.

• Speaker #1

  Well, Robin, we are nicely coming to the end of our episode. In order to wrap up, I wanted to invite you to our closing ritual. What would you consider as the essential mediator skill?

• Speaker #0

  Kindness.

• Speaker #1

  Can you elaborate?

• Speaker #0

  If you're not someone who values kindness, you're probably going to be less equipped to identify the things that are important for both sides so that you can help support them to articulate their interests and their needs. And kindness matters, I think, in all your engagements in these things.

• Speaker #1

  Is there one movie, one book or an event that particularly inspired you in your work?

• Speaker #0

  The book, of course, is considered to be the Bible of mediators, I think. It's Getting to Yes by... Fisher and Urey. And I think every mediator has been advised to read it at some stage.

• Speaker #1

  At least as the start of your journey, you have to read Getting to Yes. So thank you for reminding this. Finally, your advice for a happy life in mediation and restorative justice.

• Speaker #0

  Advice for a happy life is to remember that you can do your best, but it's up to the parties, whether they want to resolve the matter or not you. can't force them to. And if you put too much stake in the numbers, the percentages of settlements, you're going to create stress for yourself. But also, it's really important in restorative engagement to make sure that you have support, that you have someone you can speak to, so you don't experience vicarious trauma. And to recognize those signs. And fortunately, in our community of mediators, there is much support to be found. And I find it's a very generous. and giving community. I derive a lot of help and support from my fellow mediators.

• Speaker #1

  That's great that you're mentioning this and how mentoring and professional support is critical for this profession, considering the difficulty that the party experience and the potential impact it can have on your mental health as a mediator. So that's a great advice. Thank you so much, Robin, for your Participation in Humankind podcast. You're definitely bringing another perspective. perspective about what mediation can bring in a more human and restorative and transformative justice. So thank you so much for that. It was really great conversation.

• Speaker #0

  Thank you, Farzah. I've really enjoyed it.

• Speaker #2

  This episode of Humankind Bridging Dialogue is over. If you enjoyed this podcast, don't forget to rate it or share it with your social media. And if you'd like to continue the conversation, find me on LinkedIn page, Faiza Alec d'Olivier. I would like to thank Espace F360 for welcoming us today. This independent library in the heart of Paris embodies the values in line with Humankind podcast to contribute through arts, literature and culture to a more human world.

• Speaker #0

  Bye.