ABSTRACT
The institutionalization of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a recognized component of the legal system raises a number of questions about the regulation and professionalism of both the process and the dispute resolvers—the very sorts of questions many of the people who began the movement were anxious to avoid. Although a few federal courts have issued some ethical standards for mediators through court rules or ADR program procedures, none has established comprehensive standards of practice for those who mediate under the courts' auspices. Many mediators would go further, asking whether anyone is missing whose participation is necessary either to reaching a complete agreement or to having the agreement fully implemented. A somewhat different—but also troubling—development has taken place in Connecticut, where the state legislature authorized sitting judges to moonlight for a private, nonprofit mediation service called Sta-Fed ADR, Inc.
