The ADR process refers to the alternative means of solving a particular dispute facing two parties (O’Leary & Raines, 2001). The process would often involve a third party who in most instances is neutral and has no role or is affected by the decision that would be made from the resolution. In the case of Elaine and Nora, the best ADR process that may be applicable is the use of arbitration. It is the resolution of a particular argument outside courtrooms. However, the decision arrived at by the third party is always binding to the two groups that are in argument.
….middle of paper…
Arbitration provides an opportunity to resolve a given dispute but demands that both of the arguing sides bind to the decision made by the third party. In the case of the two women, the doctor can serve as a neutral party who is bound to make a decision that is in the best interest of the patient. The end effect is that David would be well treated as per the decision that would have been made. Arbitration requires that the disputing parties bind by the decision made by the third party.
Hensler, D. R. (2003). Our courts, ourselves: How the alternative dispute resolution movement is
re-shaping our legal system. Penn St. L. Rev., 108, 165.