NCJ Number
119960
Journal
Judges' Journal Volume: 28 Issue: 3 Dated: (Summer 1989) Pages: 8-13,42-46
Date Published
1989
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This article points out that some alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms are inconsistent with the fundamental constitutional rights of due process and equal protection.
Abstract
Groups advocating alternative dispute resolution also ignore the principles of an independent judiciary and the right of judicial review. While ADR is touted as less formal and less expensive than traditional litigation, it can also lead naive or ill-informed parties to make decisions against their interests. Uninformed parties can submit their claims to non-judges who can be biased, unethical, and unqualified. The effects of ADR on medical malpractice claims, government contracting, and negotiated rulemaking are discussed. Many businesses are promoting ADR and are encouraging ADR legislation and legal training. However, while ADR is highly appropriate in some cases, it can hurt less powerful disputants by causing them to compromise their constitutional rights. 46 references.