Why Screening Matters and How Laurus Approaches Complex Mediation
Family mediation can be a highly effective way to resolve issues after separation, but it is not suitable for every situation and it should never be treated as a box-ticking step on the way to court.
In our next Q&A for Mediation Week 2026, Ingrid Starcic, Associate Partner at Laurus, explains when mediation is appropriate, why careful screening is essential and how experienced mediators identify risk factors such as coercive control and power imbalance. She also shares how Laurus adapts the mediation process to keep it safe, fair and focused on moving families forward.
1. When is family mediation appropriate, and why is careful screening essential before mediation begins?
Mediation is appropriate when a number of factors are satisfied, including that both participants genuinely want to mediate, and that it can be a safe space for each of them. Safety is paramount. As mediators, there are ways we can support and manage this, sometimes more effectively than the court can, but we still have to assess the risks carefully.
That is exactly what MIAMs are for: to assess whether mediation is suitable.
Based on what I hear, I may decide that it is an “amber” situation. In other words, mediation may not be suitable as things stand, but it could work with the right safeguards in place. In the past, if one person alleged domestic abuse, that could be treated as an automatic exemption from attending a MIAM, and the matter would go straight to court. That approach has changed. As mediators, we have a duty to properly assess suitability, and in some cases (though not all), mediation can still proceed where there are allegations of domestic abuse, provided it can be managed safely. That is why screening is so important. MIAMs should never be used as a box-ticking exercise simply to enable someone to apply to court. The rules have changed precisely because domestic abuse should not be treated as an automatic exemption in every case. That said, there are absolutely situations where mediation will not be suitable, and that may well be the case where domestic abuse is involved. Every case has to be assessed on its own facts, with proper screening throughout. It is essential that we identify where one or both participants may be unsafe or adversely affected, and also whether any children may be impacted.
2. How do mediators identify domestic abuse or coercive control before deciding whether mediation is suitable?
We use screening tools and we ask questions, but we also rely on the skills we are trained in, particularly around how we ask those questions and how we draw out information. We have to listen carefully and spot signs. Sometimes we will hear things that raise red flags, and we then need to explore those further. It is really important that mediators are properly trained and have sufficient knowledge of domestic abuse, including the statistics, the different forms it can take, and how to spot them.
Before the Domestic Abuse Act was passed in 2021, there was a common misconception in many cases that domestic abuse was the same as domestic violence. The legislation recognises different forms of domestic abuse, considers the relationship between the alleged perpetrator and the person experiencing abuse, and defines what constitutes abusive behaviour, which can take many forms. It is imperative that mediators are familiar with the legislation, even if they are not family lawyers. As mediators, we must be able to identify interactions between participants that may be abusive. Screening is not a one-off. It is ongoing. Alongside our training and the legislation, there are also other tools that can help identify possible abuse.
It is also important to remember that sometimes survivors do not necessarily recognise that abuse is taking place. In other cases, they may know, but do not feel able to say. That is why it is the mediator’s role to screen effectively and identify what may have been occurring. My personal approach combines training, the legislation, emotional intelligence, and models used by professionals who have worked with both survivors and perpetrators.
Coercive and controlling behaviour is a hot topic, partly because there is more awareness of it now. Dare I say, not everyone fully understands what it actually means. It is important to distinguish between controlling behaviour, patterns of coercive behaviour, and one-off heated arguments. Everyone argues. Not everyone is abusive.
Mediators need to listen. We are not there to be detectives or judges, so we do not side with either person or pass judgement. But we do need to be able to identify whether what is being described can be managed safely in mediation, or whether mediation is not appropriate at all. We also always need to consider the impact on any child in the family, and how their voice can be heard if mediation does proceed. Some statistics suggest that around 20% of children have lived with an adult perpetrator. Even if children are not taking part in mediation (for example, through child-inclusive mediation), we still have to consider the impact of mediating between their parents, and whether it is safe for everyone involved.
3. What is co-mediation, and when is it the right approach?
Co-mediation is where there are two mediators in the room, or on the screen, working with the same participants and using their skills and interventions together. William Hogg LL.M and I almost always adopt co-mediation because we work so well together. Based on feedback from participants, people often prefer that model and feel it offers a more gender-neutral balance. In practice, we have different styles, but together they complement each other really well. For example, William will be blunt when it is needed, and I will reset the conversation when it starts to get too heated. In high-conflict mediations, co-mediation is particularly useful.
4. Can mediation work where there is a power imbalance between parties, and how is this managed?
It may still work, depending on what information is relayed to us, although we do not just listen to what is being said. We also pay close attention to body language and the dynamics between the participants. In those situations, shuttle mediation may be appropriate, or supported or hybrid mediation, where each participant has a lawyer present or a third-party support person with them.
The beauty of mediation is that we can be creative in how we approach it and in the set-up we decide on. However, there are some instances where mediation will not be suitable. There is a particular set of skills and screening we use to assess suitability, not just at the initial meeting (MIAM) stage, but throughout the mediation process. Sometimes a power imbalance, or other barriers, do not show immediately and can come to light later on. What I would say is that, in my personal view, a mediator needs emotional intelligence, not just training and technical knowledge.
5. What safeguards are in place to ensure family mediation is safe and fair for everyone involved?
Setting the parameters of mediation before it begins is key. That means identifying what each participant wants and feels comfortable with. For example, whether they can be in the same room or on the same screen, whether they need third-party support through supported or hybrid mediation, whether they live together or apart, and how they each cope with difficult conversations.
Generally, from the MIAMs I will have a good idea of what form the mediation will take, but this can change as we go along.
If one person wants to be in the same room but the other does not, then shuttle mediation in separate spaces will usually be suitable. That does not mean I have sided with the person requesting separate space. Not at all. It is about evaluating how we make mediation work safely for both of them.
I have had mediations where both participants initially said they were comfortable being in the same room, but later they needed to be in separate spaces because one person was doing all the talking and the other was not. Lo and behold, once they were separated, the quieter person found their voice. So it is about making sure each participant has a say, and addressing any power imbalance where possible.
Similarly, I have had participants who initially wanted shuttle mediation, but later felt more comfortable with each other and found it more productive to be in the same room. The mediator makes the call, and we still have to make sure it is safe for everybody involved. The beauty of mediation is that we can be creative and adapt to people’s needs.
Compare that to the court experience. If one person alleges abuse and the other denies it, or if someone is vulnerable, the court may allow what we call “special measures”. That could include separate entrances and exits for survivors (though this is not always guaranteed), screen dividers in court, or allowing someone to turn off their camera if it is a video hearing.
But in my view, the survivor will still likely hear the alleged perpetrator’s voice, or sense their presence, and that can be triggering.
William and I have dealt with some really high-conflict mediations on a shuttle basis. For example, we have not only been able to place participants in separate rooms, but also test the rooms so they genuinely cannot hear each other’s voice. And of course, online mediation can ensure they do not see or hear one another at all.
6. How does Laurus handle complex or sensitive mediation cases differently?
At Laurus, we will try to accommodate people wherever we can. And yes, really, if someone needs to have a therapy dog with them, we will gladly make that happen. It may sound over the top, but there are studies showing how animals can help people feel calmer. I remember being in court in my capacity as a lawyer, and someone asked to have a therapy dog with them. The court simply could not accommodate it. In mediation, we often can, not least because Laurus allows dogs in our offices generally.
We will also allow third-party support where it is agreed by everyone, and certainly where we have identified that one or both participants need that support. That can be particularly important for a neurodivergent person, and we will do whatever we can to help. Generally, William and I will check in with each person, and before mediation starts we will ask questions to identify any potential complexities and think about how we can solve them.
We also have ways of reframing and resetting things when mediation sessions become too much, or too heated, for the participants. It is about being compassionate, understanding, and emotionally intelligent, and knowing when to pause and when to restart.
We also have ways of reframing and resetting things when mediation sessions become too much, or too heated, for the participants. It is about being compassionate, understanding, and emotionally intelligent, and knowing when to pause and when to restart.
7. What should people know about mediation safety and suitability during Mediation Week?
Fundamentally, the initial assessments (MIAMs) are there for a reason: so that we can assess whether mediation can proceed. But even if it cannot, that absolutely does not mean that going to court is the answer, or the only answer. As mediators, we can recommend other alternatives, and William and I will always discuss these with each participant. There are many options, and the court actively encourages people to consider them.
We will happily have a chat with people about those alternatives, even if it means they decide mediation is not for them. Anyone considering mediation, or looking for a way to resolve family issues, is welcome to contact us and we will talk them through the options available. People should also be assured that we would not proceed with, or recommend, mediation if we did not think it was safe. Equally, we will always consider what safety measures can be put in place to make mediation work where possible.
There are multiple principles of mediation, but fundamentally people should remember that it is voluntary, it is confidential (save for some exceptions), and it is often the most amicable option. William and I focus on the way forward and on making progress, while also balancing the need for each participant to be heard. We try to avoid an adversarial process of blame, shame, endless fighting, and point scoring.
We have had some mediations that did not work, but overall we have had more successes. That is partly due to our dynamic and our co-mediation model, and partly, of course, due to the hard work of the participants going through the process.
Speak to our Family Mediation Team
If you are separating and want to understand whether family mediation is right for you, we are here to help. Our accredited mediators will take the time to listen, explain the process clearly and assess whether mediation can take place safely and appropriately in your circumstances.
To speak with us please contact us at enquiries@lauruslaw.co.uk or call 020 3146 6300.
If you are experiencing abuse and need support
If you are experiencing domestic abuse, or you do not feel safe, support is available and you do not have to deal with this alone.
In an emergency, call 999.
If you cannot speak, you can use the Silent Solution by calling 999 and pressing 55 when prompted.
You can also contact the following UK specialist services for confidential advice and support:
- Refuge (National Domestic Abuse Helpline): 0808 2000 247 (24/7) https://www.refuge.org.uk/
- Women’s Aid https://www.womensaid.org.uk/
- Men’s Advice Line: 0808 801 0327 https://www.mensadviceline.org.uk/
- Galop (LGBT+ domestic abuse support): 0800 999 5428 https://www.galop.org.uk/
- Respect (support for people worried about their own behaviour): 0808 802 4040 https://www.respect.uk.net/
