Be neutral: a publication of the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution, 2012 May

Be Neutral
May 2012 A Publication of the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution
From the Director: Mediators and the New Child Abuse Reporting Law
Governor Deal recently signed HB1176, which in part amends the "mandated reporter law" for child abuse and neglect, O.C.G.A. 19-7-5. The amended law takes effect July 1, 2012. HB1176 adds definitions for some organizations whose employees and volunteers are required to report child abuse and neglect. Here's a link to the relevant section of HB1176 (underlined text has been added, and crossed out text has been deleted).
Mediators are not mentioned specifically in the current law. GODR has always advised that mediators as a profession are not legally required to report child abuse or neglect, while adding that some mediators may be required under the law to report abuse because of other professional hats they wear (i.e., teacher, doctor, dentist, counselor, police officer, etc.). Those professionals are always mandated to report abuse regardless of whether they are serving as mediators of court cases.
Mediators are also not mentioned specifically in the amended law. However, language in the new law is so broad that mediators have asked if it could be interpreted to require that court mediators as a profession report child abuse and neglect. Their concerns focus on the newly added definition for child service organization personnel:
(5) 'Child service organization personnel' means persons employed by or volunteering at a business or an organization, whether public, private, for profit, not for profit, or voluntary, that provides care, treatment, education, training, supervision, coaching, counseling, recreational programs, or shelter to children."
After talking with some experts, it seems a bit of a stretch to fit a court or court ADR program into this new definition of a business or organization, and therefore it also seems a stretch to consider court mediators to be personnel of such organizations. Also, mediators do not engage in the activities or provide the services described in the definition. Moreover, in mediating disputes where children are parties and participants, the mediators' contact with the child is severely limited, with no expectation of the kind of ongoing professional relationship implied by the services listed.
So under the new law, we would still advise that mediators as a profession are not mandated reporters of child abuse and neglect. Of course, we can agree that reporting suspected child abuse or neglect is generally a good thing to do. And if you want to be cautious and conduct yourself as if you as a mediator are a legally mandated reporter, then you are free to do so. Nothing prohibits you from reporting suspected child abuse or neglect to the proper authorities. The ADR Rules create an exception to the confidentiality obligations of mediators:
B. Exceptions to Confidentiality:
Confidentiality on the part of program staff or the neutral does not extend to the issue of appearance. Confidentiality does not extend to a situation in which
a) there are threats of imminent violence to self or others; or
b) the mediator believes that a child is abused or that the safety of any party or third person is in danger.
Be sure to discuss the confidentiality exceptions in your mediator's opening statement and include it in your agreement to mediate or mediation guidelines that participants sign before beginning the mediation. If you are a mandated reporter, or your policy is to conduct yourself as if you are a mandated reporter, tell the participants.
Remember that accusations of child abuse and neglect are serious and should not to be made casually. If you are unsure if abuse or neglect is occurring, take a quick break and discuss the situation with your local court ADR program director. Court programs routinely assist mediators who have reason to make a referral and support their mediators regardless of their mandate.
To report suspected child abuse or neglect:
* If you believe a child is in immediate danger, call for a break in the mediation and call 911 right away.
* If you do not believe a child is in immediate danger, report your suspicions to your local ADR program director, and together you should call the Department of Family and Children's Services (DFCS) as soon as possible within 24 hours:
-- During regular DFCS office hours (weekdays 8 a.m.-5 p.m.) call the DFCS office in the county where the child lives or the county in which the suspected case of abuse/neglect is witnessed. Contact information for county DFCS offices can be found here .
-- Outside of regular DFCS office hours (weekdays 5 p.m.-8 a.m., anytime on weekends, holidays, and furlough days) call the DFCS Child Protective Services AfterHours Call Center at 1-855-GA CHILD (1-855-422-4453):
More information can be found at the DFCS website.
Shinji Morokuma, Director, GODR gaodr@godr.org

Income Withholding Procedure for Child Support

Most of you are already aware that Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a revised Income Withholding Order (IWO) on May 31, 2011, that is required to be sent to employers with ALL income deduction orders issued on or after May 31, 2012. The consequence of not using the required IWO form is that the employer must reject the income deduction order and return it to the sender, potentially causing an unnecessary delay in the custodial parent receiving the child support.

Income deduction is and continues to be a complicated, burdensome procedure. This additional requirement does nothing to alleviate that. However, inspired by the release of the revised IWO and the potential consequences of not following the procedure correctly, we collaborated with the Georgia Division of Child Support Service (DCSS) to create a guideline to help streamline this process. We are hopeful that you will use this guide in your practice and will find it helpful. Click here for the guide. The guide, along with frequently asked questions, forms and other resource materials are also available at the following website: www.georgiacourts.gov/csc/iwo.

Special thanks to DCSS Legal Policy Specialist Stephen Harris, Child Support Guidelines Coordinator Elaine Johnson with my office, and the rest of our workgroup for their contributions to this project. As always, we welcome your comments and feedback.

Alice W. Limehouse

Staff Attorney to the Child Support Commission/ Collaborative Child Support Project Manager

Administrative Office of the Courts 244 Washington Street, S.W., Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30334

Direct: 404-463-0040 Fax: 770-357-7331

Alice W. Limehouse

alice.limehouse@gaaoc.us

Should Mediation Go to the Dogs?
Hospitals, medical centers and mental health agencies have long used therapy dogs to help reduce stress, anxiety, and even pain in their patients. Now schools like Emory University Law School are seeing the benefits of inviting specially trained dogs onto campus to help stressedout students deal with the academic pressure cooker.
So why not bring dogs into mediation? That's the audacious idea proposed by California attorney, mediator and arbitrator Mitchell Chyette in his blog post "Getting to Woof." They help parties deal with the rigors of the mediation process, he proposes that mediation include not just therapy dogs but even the family pet, especially when children are involved in the mediation process.
Aside from the practical issues allergies, access to courthouses what do you think of the idea? Should mediation go to the dogs?

ACR-GA Hosts Workshop on Biblical Conflict Resolution
The Association for Conflict Resolution's Georgia Chapter is sponsoring a seminar titled, "The Way to Resolve Conflict: Workshop on Resolving Conflict Using Biblical Principles," on Saturday, June 16, from 9 am to 2 pm, at the Merle Manders Conference Center, 111 N. Davis Dr., Stockbridge, GA 30281. 4 hours of neutral CE is available. The workshop is free to ACRGA members. The cost is $25 for non-members (includes lunch), but the workshop fee is included for new/renewing members who pay their annual dues of $50. ACR-GA's annual meeting will be held immediately after the workshop from 2:15 to 4 pm. For more information, go to this link or contact www.acrga.net.
CaseWatch for Mediators: Self-Employment Income Complicates Child Support Calculations
Child support negotiations can be among the most heated in mediation. And difficult income calculations can become even more daunting when one or both parties to a divorce are selfemployed. In this month's CaseWatch for Mediators, Mary Ellen Cates, Esq., divorce attorney and registered mediator, examines a Supreme Court case that shows how one trial court cut through the conflicting information to arrive at a just level of child support.

CaseWatch for Arbitrators: Arbitrator Can Interpret Contract Text to Allow Class Actions, Court Says
Arbitration clauses, designed to simplify and clarify the process when disputes arise under a contract, can themselves be the source of headaches, especially if they are ambiguously or poorly drafted. In this month's CaseWatch for Arbitrators, John Allgood, Esq., veteran attorney, registered mediator and arbitrator, examines a recent federal circuit case that reveals what powers arbitrators can wield when the arbitration provisions are murky.
Marketing Tip: E-Marketing v. Your Physical Safety
In our competitive business environment, you must be aggressive in marketing yourself using the latest in online technology and social media. But in putting your professional name out there, are you putting yourself and your loved ones in personal danger? In this month's Marketing Tip, master marketer and mediator Michele Gibson tells you how you can balance your desire for professional exposure with your need for personal privacy and security.
Theory to Practice: A Spoonful of Sugar Makes the Mediation Go Round
Do you ever get tired of making decisions? It turns out that choosing takes energy, and if you're forced to make too many decisions, your brain can run out of gas. Your mediation parties have to make decisions, often lots of very difficult ones under stressful circumstances. How can you help them to combat "decision fatigue" and to get on with the work of mediation? In this edition of Theory to Practice, Heather Pincock, assistant professor of conflict management at Kennesaw State University, highlights research that confirms the healing power of ... sugar ... in rejuvenating people's ability to make decisions.
GODR MEMBER BENEFIT SPOTLIGHT PET INSURANCE
VPI Pet insurance - 5% discount for members and employees of members
GODR Registered Neutrals and employees of members seeking medical coverage for their pets may qualify for a 5% group discount with the leader in Pet Health insurance, VPI Pet insurance. A VPI Pet insurance policy helps pay for your pet's treatments, surgeries, lab fees, x-rays, and much more. VPI provides peace of mind knowing you can care for your pet no matter what the cost.
Group discount of 5%.
Freedom: Free to use your choice of licensed veterinarian (no pre-approval necessary).
Flexibility: VPI's plans are licensed in all 50 states.
Additional savings: Receive discounts when enrolling multiple pets - up to 5% and 10%.
Extras: Enjoy discounts on pet products and services, a policyholder newsletter, online support, and more.
Get a Quote Online >
Program is administered through VPI Pet Insurance, the nation's oldest and largest provider of Pet Health insurance.
If links in this email are not working, please visit www.memberbenefits.com/godr
Products sold and serviced by BPC Financial, the administrator of the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution (GODR) Insurance Programs. GODR is not a licensed insurance entity and does not sell insurance.
Publicly Available Resources for Georgia ADR Professionals
We encourage you to visit the blog created by Georgia State University law professor Doug Yarn and GSU law students Alex Salzillo and Alicia Mack to inform and encourage discussion. Please add it to your reading list, send the link to your colleagues, and visit often. The address: http://georgiaadr.wordpress.com/
And don't forget the Georgia Mediators Network, a great Facebook resource for the latest mediation news and articles from around the world. The page has been visited tens of thousands of times in just the few short months it's been around. Use the information there to pump your own professional web pages and your expertise. The Georgia Mediators Network is the brainchild of registered mediator Michele Gibson, our marketing columnist and newsletter producer.
Benefits: Exclusive Insurance Products for Registered Neutrals
Georgia-registered neutrals are entitled to participate in several insurance and retirement programs that have been designed specifically for them. If you need insurance, are planning for retirement, talk to the experts at BPC Financial. They manage our new exclusive insurance and retirement program, and they can advise you on your insurance needs and help you find good deals on major medical insurance, healthcare savings accounts, dental and vision insurance, term life insurance and more. Registered neutrals receive the benefits of underwriting concessions, enhanced benefits, or reduced premiums and fees compared to shopping for similar products on the open market. Check out the GODR Registered Neutrals Insurance and Retirement Programs website.
We've also arranged for special benefits on professional liability insurance for registered mediators and arbitrators with Complete Equity Markets. See our website for more information or contact Betsy Thomas, 800-323-6234, ext. 472, and tell her you're a Georgia registered neutral!
Upcoming CE and Training Offerings
Check frequently at our website for the latest CE and training offerings. Remember, any ADRrelated training you take counts as CE as long as you took it since your last renewal or your initial registration, whichever comes later. Lawyers, any CLE you took during that same time period counts as CE. Likewise, judges and CJE. Accountants and other professionals with CE requirements, same thing.
And remember, we posted three videos on our website that registered neutrals can watch for free to earn CE credit. Each video is one-hour long. Neutrals are free to watch the videos as many times as they wish, but we can only award 1 CE hour credit for each video once a renewal season. Please note the date you finished viewing each video so you can report it on your renewal form. Remember, registered neutrals are required to take at least 3 hours of CE each year in order to renew their registrations. Look for the link, "Continuing Education Videos," in the main menu of our website. For more information on what qualifies for CE, please see the "Help! I Need CE!" link on our website.
Be Neutral Back Issues Available Online
Be Neutral is sent monthly to all registered neutrals, generally at the beginning of the month. If you missed an issue, our back issues are posted at the bottom right of our website, under "Newsletter Archive." Please take a look. If you know people who want Be Neutral, please direct them to our subscription box at the bottom right of our website, where they just need to enter their e-mail addresses. Please forward this newsletter to anyone who might be interested in ADR in Georgia courts. Forward it just as you would any other e-mail. If folks who are not registered neutrals want to receive the newsletter free of charge, they can submit their e-mail addresses in the subscription box at the bottom right of our website. And sending us feedback is easy just reply to this e-mail as you would any other e-mail. We want to hear from you!
Spread the Word
Please forward this newsletter to anyone who might be interested in ADR in Georgia courts. Forward it just as you would any other e-mail. If folks who are not registered neutrals want to receive the newsletter free of charge, they can use the subscription box at below this text or submit their e-mail addresses in the subscription box at the bottom right of the home page of our website. And sending us feedback is easy just reply to this e-mail as you would any other e-mail. We want to hear from you !
Sign up for our Email Newsletter
GO
For Email Marketing you can trust

Forward email
This email was sent to gadocs@uga.edu by gaodr@godr.org | Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribeTM | Privacy Policy. Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution | 244 Washington Street, SW | Suite 300 | Atlanta | GA | 30334-5900

Be Neutral
A Publication of the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution
Case Watch: For Mediators
The following case analyses are part of a regular series we publish to help neutrals broaden their knowledge of rulings of Georgia's appellate courts that may affect your practice. Remember: mediators should not give legal advice or opinions
Review of Ellis v. Ellis, S11F1506, decided February 27, 2012, appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court of a ruling by Judge David T. Emerson, Douglas County Superior Court.
CaseWatch for Mediators:
Self-Employment Income Complicates Child Support Calculations
Seasoned domestic mediators know that disagreements about parental income and child support are among the most heated. And nothing ratchets up tensions around child support more than a child's monthly extracurricular expenses that the custodial parent insists upon receiving. Ellis looks at how a trial court reconciled vastly conflicting monthly income claims of the parents in trying to determine the correct amount of child support. It shows what consideration one trail court gave to the cost of a child's extracurricular activities. And it shows what additional documents you as a mediator might inquire about to find clarity and a middle ground in the financial negotiations.
Complicating matters in Ellis was the fact that Husband was self-employed. Anytime a mediator has a divorcing party who is self employed, a caution flag should go up in that it is notoriously difficult to verify income figures, particularly when the spouse disagrees with what has been submitted. After all, the spouses have lived together and should have an accurate idea of their disposable income. Income and expenses from self-employment or operation of a business should be carefully reviewed to determine an appropriate level of gross income available to the parent to satisfy a child support obligation.
Financial affidavits and child support guidelines are the bread and butter we use to determine child support. But what happens when the self-employed Husband submits a financial affidavit showing a monthly income of $3,000 and a child support worksheet showing a monthly income of $4,474, and Wife submits six months of deposits from Husband's business showing his monthly income to be $20,446.25?
The Ellis trial court examined the parties' testimony; their 2008 joint tax returns; and the Husband's profit and loss statement. The court also relied on the Georgia code to calculate Husband's income for child support purposes. O.C.G.A. 19-6-15 (f)(1)(B) defines income from self-employment as gross receipts minus ordinary and reasonable expenses required for business operations. Thus the court determined that Husband's income was not the monthly salary he paid himself ($3,000), or his business's gross monthly receipts ($20,446.25), but was the net profit of his business, the most credible evidence of which was the $4,474 on Husband's child support worksheet and profit-and-loss statement.
In a rare public expression of frustration, the Supreme Court noted that neither party had hired an accounting expert to determine the Husband's monthly income. Rather, the parties presented "just kind of a mess thrown up to the Court" which it then had the "opportunity and privilege of sorting." Sound familiar? The next time your parties don't make the effort to control their own financial futures, ask them if they would rather have a very annoyed court making those decisions instead.
As to the Ellis child's competitive cheerleading expenses, Wife wanted an increase from the support guidelines ranging from $237 to $385 per month. The statute (O.C.G.A. 29-6-15 (i)(3)(J)(ii)) provides that a trial court may deviate from the presumptive amount of child support in the event of special expenses incurred for child rearing, including school sponsored extracurricular activities. The Ellis trial court, however, declined to award an increase deviation for that expense, finding that the competitive cheerleading was not a necessity. The Supreme Court upheld the trial court's findings as they were not clearly erroneous. The trial court is free to reject a claim for a deviation from the presumptive child support amount, the Supreme Court said.
"Subjective" and "discretion" are two words that the parties should always be reminded of as it pertains to what a trial court can do. Keeping those words in mind, it appears the parties' odds for success at trial are holding at 50/50. Make sure they are also reminded of the time, expense and emotional toll of trial, and maybe they will make a more concentrated effort at mediation.
Mary Ellen Cates is an attorney and registered mediator in Avondale Estates, Ga. She has practiced domestic law exclusively since 1985. A divorce mediator since 1998, she is also a domestic arbitrator, and she has been appointed as special master for DeKalb County Superior Court.
Phone: 404-292-3803; fax: 404-292-1510; mary.cates@att.net or mecates@mindspring.com

Be Neutral
A Publication of the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution
Case Watch: For Arbitrators
Arbitrator Can Interpret Contract Text to Allow Class Actions, Court Says
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld an arbitrator's interpretation of a broad arbitration provision as allowing for the possibility of class-action arbitration. While the provision at issue did not expressly allow for or prohibit class-action arbitration, the appellate court found that the arbitrator's interpretation was permissible and did not violate Supreme Court precedent. Sutter v. Oxford Health Plans LLC, ____ F.3rd ____, 2012 WL 1088887 (C.A.3 (N.J.)
Sutter contracted to provide medical services through Oxford's managed-care network in exchange for reimbursement based on established rates. Disputes arising under the contract were to be resolved through binding arbitration:
No civil action concerning any dispute arising under this Agreement will be instituted before any court, and in all such disputes shall be submitted to final and binding arbitration in New Jersey, pursuant to the Rules of the American Arbitration Association with one arbitrator.
At some point during the contract, Sutter claimed that Oxford failed to properly reimburse him for services and filed a complaint in the New Jersey courts on behalf himself and a class of service providers. Oxford moved to compel arbitration, and the New Jersey Superior Court agreed. The court directed that an arbitrator was to decide all procedural issues.
The parties disagreed on whether the contract permitted class-action arbitration, and so they submitted the question to an arbitrator. The arbitrator looked at the plain text of the arbitration provision, which he found to be broader than usual, and determined that the phrase, "No civil action concerning any dispute arising under this Agreement" encompassed any conceivable court action, including class actions. He then noted that the rest of the provision required that all such disputes were to be settled by arbitration and concluded that the parties' intention was to allow for class arbitration. To avoid this conclusion, the arbitrator said, would require that the contract contain language that expressly carved out class actions from the otherwise broad scope of the arbitration provision.
Oxford filed a motion to vacate the arbitration award, arguing that the arbitrator had exceeded the scope of his powers and manifestly disregarded the law. The district court denied Oxford's motion. Oxford appealed, relying upon the Supreme Court's decision in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp., 130 S.Ct. 1758 (2010), which generally held that arbitrators may not direct class arbitration where the arbitration agreement was silent on that subject.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals began its analysis in Oxford by restating the four exclusive bases for vacating an arbitration award set out in Section 10 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). Oxford's appeal relied upon Section 10(a)(4), which applies when an arbitrator "decides an issue not submitted to him, grants relief in a form that cannot be rationally derived from the parties' agreement and submission, or issues an award that is so completely irrational that it lacks support altogether." The court noted that in Stolt-Nielsen as in Oxford the contract made no express reference to class-action arbitration. However, the Stolt-Nielsen parties had stipulated that they had no agreement related to class actions, whereas the Oxford parties had no such stipulation. Further, the arbitrators in Stolt-Nielsen had based their determination on principles of common law, while the Oxford arbitrator based his decision on provisions of the contract. These facts distinguish Oxford, the court said:
The arbitration clause ... is not "silent" in the way [it was] in Stolt-Nielsen... the parties dispute whether or not they intended to authorize class arbitration ... . [T]he arbitrator ... made first resort to the text of the arbitration clause ... [and] reasoned... that the ... first phrase ... is broad enough to include class actions... . Thus, its second phrase ... sends all conceivable civil actions --including class actions -- to arbitration... "All such disputes" must go to arbitration.
The court went on to say that the Oxford arbitrator had relied on the breadth of the arbitration contract language, and noted that his method of arbitral examination was not proscribed under Stolt-Nielsen. Stolt-Nielsen had rested on the parties' stipulation that they had no agreement as to class action. Therefore, the court said, Stolt-Nielsen could not stand for the proposition that the arbitrator was prohibited from examining the contract language and further from inferring the parties' consent in construing the arbitration contract language in this instance:
We are satisfied that the arbitrator endeavored to interpret the parties' agreement within the bounds of the law, and we cannot say that his interpretation was totally irrational. Nothing more is required under Section 10(a)(4) of the Federal Arbitration Act.
Note to Georgia Arbitrators: The Oxford decision refines the Stolt-Nielsen holding. It authorizes the arbitrator to interpret the parties' contract language as part of a dispute and to determine whether class actions are permitted. The appeals court clearly states that such a textual examination does not require the parties to have expressly used the phrase "class actions" in their drafting. The arbitrator may construe the contract language to give effect to an interpretation even in the absence of language directly referencing class actions.

John Allgood is of counsel at Ford & Harrison. For more than 20 years he has arbitrated and mediated cases in commercial, employment, construction and securities law, as well as in real estate and anti-trust matters. An adjunct professor of ADR at Emory University School of Law, he was a member of the U.S. Olympic Committee panel of arbitrators during the 1996 and 1998 Olympic Games.

Phone:

404-888-3832;

fax:

404-888-3863;

jallgood@fordharrison.com

Be Neutral
A Publication of the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution
This is one in a series of marketing articles that will explain e-marketing in layman's terms. This information is provided to help you modify your online presence to get your practice noticed.
Marketing Tip: E-Marketing v. Your Physical Safety
Recently I had a conversation with a mediator who was stalked by a party and that individual made it all the way to her driveway at home. The police were called and the threat was removed, but it left her scared because her chosen profession had inadvertently compromised her family's security. Her feeling was that this had happened because she had a presence on Facebook. Have you exposed your family in the same way ?
We all put mountains of information out on the web daily... often without a single thought for our own security. In the case of mediators, as we often walk away from a settlement with one party who is very angry with us, this stray data can lead them right to our front door. There are databases available for free or a small charge that can reverse almost anything landline number to address, cell phone to address, email to address, and more. While you can't stop marketing your practice you can be smart about how you do it.
Physical Addresses This is the one piece of information that you don't want anyone but your friends and family to have access to. Therefore you can't put it out there on your social media profile or on your website. But the real problem is more complex than that.
Mediators who rent office space are normally fairly safe in publishing their office address, assuming that there is a modicum of security in their building. However, those of you who work at home can't afford to publish your "office" address because it is also your home address. There are a number of solutions, including limiting the address information that you list to city and state, renting a PO Box, and using that as your address, or joining a group that offers mediation space and using that as your physical address. Consider the mediators who mediate out of their homes (yes, some of those exist !) and include maps on their websites to their offices they've just given an angry party all the information needed to find them.
In many instances mediators have their addresses on their websites without even realizing it do you include a PDF version of your CV or perhaps you publish a series of articles with your address in the author bio ? What about public directories like the Georgia Bar, GODR, ACR, or even the Secretary of State's corporation registry ? How much address information are you publishing there and how much can you reduce it in order to safeguard yourself ?
Phone Numbers Did you know that there are services on the web that will allow anyone to take a phone number (landline or cell) and reverse it to get the physical address associated with it ? It might cost them up to $30 to get the information but if they really want to find you they can. Clearly you have to publish a phone number so people can contact you to make an appointment to use your services, so how are you going to safeguard your address ? There are some options for you:
Use an answering service as your primary published number (including on your business cards)
Have your office address (assuming you don't use a home office) listed as your billing and physical address in the phone directory. While this happens automatically with a landline you, need to make a conscious decision to do this with your cell phone as that is often in your personal name.
Use a "re-director" service. This is basically a number that is owned by a third-party service that will automatically redirect calls to whatever number you want. I use a company called Accessline, and for less than $20 per month any call to my re-director number will automatically dial up to 5 numbers that I have predefined. In my case it calls my desk phone, primary cell phone, secondary cell phone, and finally home phone. The fact that the call is being re-routed is hidden from the caller. If you choose this option it is important to remember to hide your outgoing number when you call the caller back !
Do you list your phone number on Facebook or LinkedIn ? If you've published an alternate number for security purposes, it is important that you do not list your direct cell phone number or (worse) your home phone number but instead use the redirector number or answering service number. If your friends don't know your phone number they probably aren't your friends, and they can cope with using the alternative number and waiting an extra minute or two to get through to you.
Social Media While LinkedIn is a fairly safe environment because it is business oriented and most users don't put personal information out there, the same cannot be said of Facebook. Today we share everything in this space pictures of our grandchildren, notes about our travels, our political opinions and more. This is not information that should be available to the general public. There are a few tips that will safeguard you:
Maintain a business page for your practice on Facebook. To do this you must first be a personal member (you can create a "dummy" personal account for this) because you have to be the administrator of your business page. Your personal page should be restricted so only friends and family can see it. This is a standard Facebook setting. When you set it the public will know that you have a personal page on Facebook, but if you set security at the max only people you have approved for your friend list will be able to see the information that you publish.
If you publish photos on your business page in real time (such as those from a conference or training event) it is critical that you turn off geotagging on your cell phone. Geotagging is a feature that allows a viewer to see exactly where and when these photos were taken. You do not need to publish a photo that effectively notifies the viewer that you are at the ACR conference in New Orleans and will be there for the next 3 days ! Here is a series of instructions to disable geotagging on your iPhone, Android or Blackberry: http://tinyurl.com/3v4xznm
Geo-Locators You may have also joined one of the geo-locators such as Foursquare. Using these tools, you add locations to your profile (e.g. airport, courthouse, office, McDonalds, a conference hotel) and "check in" when your phone is in that location. Many people take that information further and set the software to automatically post their check-ins to their Facebook profiles. Do I really need to say how bad an idea this is ? You may want to know which of your friends has already arrived at a conference that you're going to or who is at the same airport you are when you've got a long layover, but do you really want the entire world to know where you are ?
While Foursquare requires you to create an authorized viewer list (similar to Facebook friends), if you haven't set the necessary privacy settings for your personal Facebook page and you have Foursquare automatically post your check-ins to that page, then you've potentially put yourself in real danger.
Domain Registry One other way people can find you through the internet is by researching your website registration. When you buy your domain name you are required to furnish your name, phone number and other identifying information (basically everything that you'd need to use your credit card online). All of that information is then stored in a publically accessible database. If someone executes a WHOIS search (e.g. http://www.networksolutions.com/whois ), they'll get all your identifying information merely by looking up your website information. Typically domain registrars charge less than $15 for this service, and if someone really wants to find you, $15 is well worth the expense. Most domain registrars now offer domain security that will put your information into the national database as required but will hide the information from the general public.
The internet is a wonderful tool for marketing your practice. People need to be able to find you, and you can't count on trusted referrals as the sole source for growing your business. Therefore you need to be smart about the information that you publish and how you publish it. Think about how the information you are posting could lead an angry party to find you and your family. If you have any doubt, don't publish it. Make sure your security settings are at their max, and update them regularly. When you set up a room for mediation, you always put yourself closest to the door for safety and ensure that you know where the security people are located doesn't your online marketing deserve the same attention ?
Michele Gibson is a Georgia-registered neutral and a certified emerging media consultant. She is the president of Digital Smart Tool, LLC an e-marketing firm offering website design, SEO, electronic newsletters, social media coaching, and marketing training seminars.
Phone: 404-592-3367 E-mail: mgibson@digitalsmarttools.com

Be Neutral
A Publication of the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution
Theory to Practice: A Spoonful of Sugar Makes the Mediation Go Round
Creative brainstorming and creating value are generally seen as hallmarks of good mediation and negotiation process. The standard wisdom goes: the more options on the table, the better the chances of a "wise agreement." Generating multiple options for resolution is especially encouraged in negotiations with integrative potential that include multiple, complex issues. But with so many decisions for the parties to make, can you have too much of a good thing? In other words, might parties in complex negotiations be susceptible to what scientists call "decision fatigue"?
Researchers in the fields of social psychology and neuroscience have coined the term "decision fatigue" to explain a mental process that reduces a person's capacity to make good decisions. The concept emerged from broader research focused on willpower and self-control, which was summarized in a recent book by New York Times science columnist John Tierney and Florida State University Social Psychologist Dr. Roy F. Baumeister, Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength (Penguin, 2011). Let's explore the practical implications of their work for mediators and negotiators.
In an allusion to Freud's idea that the "ego" constrains the passions, Baumeister coined the term "ego depletion" to refer to the taxing effect of self-regulation on our brains. In a series of experiments, Baumeister and his collaborators showed that we expend mental energy to exert willpower and that over time this results in a kind of mental fatigue. Baumeister's initial experiments required participants to engage in a self-regulating task like suppressing tears while watching a sad movie or resisting the temptation to eat a freshly baked cookie. Following this challenge, participants were less able to carry out a second task also requiring self-discipline, like solving a challenging puzzle or squeezing a handgrip.
Baumeister and colleagues later explored the application of ego depletion to decision making in a series of experiments that replicated the kinds of decisions shoppers make. They asked one group of participants to make a series of choices about pairs of items (i.e., pen or candle? scented or unscented candle? candle or t-shirt? black t-shirt or red t-shirt?). The control group spent the same amount of time contemplating all the same items without having to make any decisions. The participants who had to make choices were afterward less successful at a classic self-regulation task holding their hands in ice water. The decision makers lasted an average of 28 seconds while the control group withstood an average of 67 seconds. The results suggest that making decisions is mentally tiring in the same way as other exertions of willpower.
These findings have been replicated in other behavioral studies where participants made a series of decisions about the purchase of custom-made suits, cars, and computers. These studies highlight further the consequences of decision fatigue by demonstrating that exerting mental energy on decision making reduces the quality of subsequent decisions. In a state of decision fatigue, participants were more likely to defer to the salesman or to stick with status quo, and were less likely to compromise or make tradeoffs. Evidence also suggests that when resources are scarce, the effects of decision fatigue are more pronounced. Through field experiments conducted in 20 of India's poorest villages, Princeton economist Dean Spears found stronger decision-fatigue effects on poorer villagers. The mental trade-offs required when resources are scarce are more taxing. Those making decisions under constant conditions of resource scarcity have, in a sense, the deck stacked even higher against their willpower.
What might the implications of decision fatigue be for mediators? Certainly many mediations require parties to control impulses and make frequent decisions, often in circumstances of resource scarcity (i.e., how to divide the family's overwhelming credit card debt, who takes over the mortgage for a house whose value has declined, how to split the assets of a declining business). The process is mentally taxing, and thanks to what we know about decision fatigue, we can now be quite sure that over time this will reduce the parties' abilities to make good decisions. Of course self-determination is the watchword of mediation, and mediators are not responsible for the decisions parties make. But the research on decision fatigue also suggests an intriguing way that mediators can help the parties make better decisions.
The surprising answer was discovered by accident in Baumeister's lab. Initially setting out to test whether one could build up willpower by first indulging in a pleasurable activity like eating, researchers found that consumption of sugary food countered the effects of decision fatigue. This result held up regardless of how good the food tasted. In a follow up experiment, researchers found that drinking lemonade sweetened with real sugar mitigated ego depletion and sometimes reversed it entirely, while drinking the same lemonade with artificial sweetener had no effect. Those participants who consumed glucose after a series of mentally taxing decisions subsequently made financial decisions oriented towards long-term benefits instead of quick payoffs. The researchers concluded that glucose is capable of restoring willpower.
Exploring the glucose findings further, Dartmouth professor Todd Heatherton and colleagues scanned images of participants' brains while they looked at pictures of food both before and after they were subjected to an ego depletion task (suppressing laughter while watching a comedy video). They observed that under conditions of ego depletion, there was lower brain activity in the part of the brain called the amygdala, associated with impulse control, and higher activity in the part known as the nucleus accumbens, the brain's reward center. When the participants were mentally fatigued, the images of food had stronger appeal and their brain activity suggested a reduced capacity for self-control. Heatherton and colleagues found that administering glucose reversed these effects on brain activity.
What that means is when your body's glucose level is low, your brain stops controlling impulses and starts seeking quick rewards. The result is a stronger response to immediate rewards and a lower attention to long-term consequences. The experiments suggest that a quick dose of glucose can alter your brain activity in a way that helps you make decisions oriented to the long term.
How do these findings on glucose pertain to best practices in mediation process design? While breaking up a lengthy mediation over several sessions is already common practice, you may want to think about the time of day these sessions take place. Have you ever gotten cranky when you've been hungry? Mediating after the parties have had a good meal may increase their ability to control impulsive outbursts and to improve the quality of their decisions at the table. Arranging for food to be served during a break could be the best way to ensure that parties are in ideal condition to make decisions. If you can't have food or meals, having candy or some other quick burst of glucose available may help parties avoid making decisions they will later come to regret. Remember that diet soda or artificial sweetener won't do the trick, so it would be wise for the mediator to periodically push the candy dish in the parties' direction!
References
Baumeister, Roy F. and John Tierney (2011). Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength (Penguin Press).
Pinker, Steven (2011), "The Sugary Secret of Self-Control," The New York Times, September 2.
Tierney, John (2011), "Do You Suffer from Decision Fatigue," The New York Times, August 17.
Heather Pincock is Assistant Professor of Conflict Management at Kennesaw State University, where she teaches in the Masters of Science in Conflict Management program. She earned her Ph.D. in political science from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University. She can be reached at hpincock@kennesaw.edu