Search results

The objective of this paper was to analyze the sociocultural and personal reasons pivotal to the openness of the conflicting parties to a dialogue in the framework of family mediation. In the quest to answer the question what factors can influence the development of the family mediation in Poland and its acceptance both by the society and the families in conflict, the author presented the results of international and Polish research on the efficacy of the family mediation process and the readiness of the parties to use the mediation in family conflicts. Two theoretical concepts characterizing the sociocultural origins of resistance to mediation were analyzed in detail, namely that of the social resistance proposed by B. Mayer and that of the moral resistance by R. Benjamin. Moreover, the paper addressed the issue of the promotion of mediation together with the unrealistic expectations as to what can be achieved through mediation, mythologization of mediation and dilemma connected with the neutrality of the mediator. Finally, an integrated systemic approach to family mediation was proposed, which could enhance the chances of acceptance of the mediation by the parties in conflict. In essence it is proposed that the promotion of mediation should be exercised on three levels: (1) general societal level (to promote the winwin solutions in family conflicts), (2) level of specific educational activities for the conflicted parties (e.g. organization of premediation consultative meetings), and (3) level of specific actions targeted at various professional groups (e.g. judges, lawyers, probation officer, employees of the family support centres, etc).

The paper analyzes the benefits of using family mediation as an alternative method of family conflict resolution and problems encountered when introducing it into the social life in modern societies. The analysis shows that the development of family mediation in Poland resembles that of other European states. In Poland, as in other European countries, family mediation was first "discovered" by the professionals dealing with family conflicts, then it was given a proper legal status and became included in the civil codes. The next phase was a protracted process of accepting the method of mediation by lawyers, conflicted parties, and other professionals who would be in the position to support the growth of family mediation. While analyzing the benefits of family mediation, a state of art type of study was done on the effectiveness of the mediation process and the clients' satisfaction indicating the short and long term advantages of family mediation. The paper proves no linear relationship between the effectiveness of the mediation procedures and the acceptance of this method in the court practice and in the society. Why people do not choose mediation despite its logical advantages over the adversarial court process? Trying to answer this question an analysis of potential sources of resistance to mediation is presented together with the relevant concepts of the moral resistance and the public resistance. These two concepts help us understand why do parties in conflict prefer adversarial court proceedings with the "winner" and "looser" over peaceful resolutions offered by mediation, enabling agreement and "keeping the face".

Patients' resistance may occur at any stage of psychotherapy or mediation process. The focus of this paper is on the resistance to use psychotherapy or family mediation. We also explore psychological grounds for the difficulties behind the decision to seek professional psychological help. The resistance in psychotherapy is one of the fundamental problems, hence a lot of research studies and practical techniques can be found regarding the determinants of resistance and strategies how to cope with it. However, in the family mediation literature the conceptualisation of resistance to enter the mediation process has rarely been investigated. In the present paper five main factors of the avoidance of counselling or psychotherapy are analysed, namely: (i) social stigma, (ii) treatment fears, (iii) fear of emotion, (iv) anticipated utility and risk, and (v) problems with self-disclosure. As far as the decision to enter family mediation is concerned the main sources of clients' resistance can be traced to negative convictions, attitudes and fears of the mediation process. The results of the author's own research on this subject show that the main components of resistance are: (1) disbelief in effectiveness of mediation, (2) attribution of negative characteristics to mediation, (3) reluctance to involvement of third party, and (4) fear of disclosure of secrets. In the final part of the paper a discussion of similarities between the factors determining the resistance to participate in psychotherapy and family mediation is presented.

The problem of adaptation to the EU countries in the Vishegrad conditions of economic stagnation of the old EU countries and citizens of the resistance groups in attempts to solve adaptive problems through internal resources are analyzed. The attention is paid to Ukraine's cooperation with the Vishegrad Group countries, including at the level of bilateral relations, and the prospect that opens the intensification of cooperation. ; The problem of adaptation to the EU countries in the Vishegrad conditions of economic stagnation of the old EU countries and citizens of the resistance groups in attempts to solve adaptive problems through internal resources are analyzed. The attention is paid to Ukraine's cooperation with the Vishegrad Group countries, including at the level of bilateral relations, and the prospect that opens the intensification of cooperation.

Publikacja recenzowana / Peer-reviewed publication ; Pojęcie obywatelskiego nieposłuszeństwa wiąże się tradycyjnie z postacią Henry`ego Davida Thorea, którego słynny esej z 1848 roku pt. Resitance to Civil Government, stał się inspiracją dla rozwoju współczesnej refleksji nad obywatelskim nieposłuszeństwem, a także źródłem nieustannych poszukiwań jego istoty. Rozważania nad nieposłuszeństwem obywatelskim prowadzili też Hannah Arendt, a także John Rawls, Joseph Ratz oraz Ronald Dworkin. Stworzone przez tych autorów definicje obywatelskiego nieposłuszeństwa zawierają pewien katalog cech składających się na to pojęcie. Najważniejszymi spośród nich są zakaz stosowania przemocy oraz gotowość poddania się karze. Na gruncie polskim problematyka ta omawiana była przez Andrzeja Rzeplińskiego, Ewę Łętowską, a ostatnio przez Artura Szutę i Michała Rocha Kaczmarczyka. W historii Polski symbolem obywatelskiego nieposłuszeństwa jest Tadeusz Rejtan. Ostatnio działania wykazujące cechy obywatelskiego nieposłuszeństwa podejmują Obywatele RP. Obywatelskie nieposłuszeństwo może być mylone z takimi pojęciami jak prawo do oporu, sprzeciw sumienia lub nieposłuszeństwo rewolucyjne. Niezależnie od wielu kontrowersji związanych z samym pojęciem, nie ma wątpliwości, że instytucja ta ma do spełnienia szereg bardzo pozytywnych ról. Pozwala na zainicjowanie niezależnej, niekontrolowanej przez władzę dyskusji. Zapewnia partycypację polityczną oraz stwarza warunki sprzyjające możliwości oddziaływania na władzę. Odgrywa też niebagatelną funkcję informacyjną. Ale przede wszystkim przyczynia się do rozwoju społeczeństwa obywatelskiego. ; Over the past few decades, civil disobedience has become one of the most widely studied subjects in jurisprudence. The name which is widely recognized and associated with the term is that of Henry David Thorea for it was his essay, published in 1849 under the title "Resistance to Civil Government" and later renamed "Essay on Civil Disobedience" that first brought this idea to the public attention. After his landmark lectures were published in 1866, the term began to appear in numerous sermons and lectures relating to civil or social oppression in its many forms. In 1866, four years after his death, the term had achieved fairly widespread usage. Among Thorea's numerous followers were Hannah Arendt, John Rawls, Joseph Ratz and Ronald Dworkin who all, in their own way and method, contributed to the catalog of features associated with the term as we know it today: the active, professed refusal to obey certain laws, demands or commands of a government, or of an occupying international power. Civil disobedience is relatively often defined as essentially and profoundly nonviolent. Actions or undertakings which strive to be labelled as such will, therefore, have to be equated with nonviolent resistance and prepared to suffer the penalties set out in the law. In Poland civil disobedience has been discussed in the works of Andrzej Rzepliński, Ewa Łętowska and, most recently, by Artur Szuta and Michał Roch Kaczmarczyk. The most symbolic depiction of the issue held dear in the sentiments of Polish patriots will be the 18th century Polish parliamentarian Tadeusz Rejtan. Today, Polish civil disobedients have chosen a variety of different methods to manifest their discontent. Civil disobedience is often mistaken for the right of resistance, conscientious objection, revolutionary disobedience. But, regardless the confusion those terms might cause, their social standing and significance remain undisputed. It gives rise to independent and spontaneous public debate, free of authoritarian intrusion or imposition. It acts as a free and independent public platform. And, last but not least, it helps to build civil society in its own right.

Events of August'91 as an expression of political disobidience in the process of shaping civil conduct, "Kultura i edukacja. Culture and Education" 2016, nr 4 (114), pp. 125-139 , 2016 Civil disobedience is the attitude which in the 20th century proved to be the only effective form of resistance to authoritarian regimes. So it was in the case of the events of August '91 when the Soviet society objected to the activities of the State Committee on the State of Emergency. It would not have been possible without the reform programme known as perestroika initiated by the last USSR leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Thanks to perestroika and the accompanying glasnost-transparency of sociopolitical life-the previously apathetic and alienated Soviet society felt responsible for their own life and for the fate of the State. By opposing the rebels through pas sive resistance, the citizens proved to the leaders of their own country, to the world, and above all, to themselves that they were aware of their rights and responsibilities. The process of sociopolitical socialization stimulated the development of civil society in the Soviet Union.

The contemporaneity has been redefined, the transition has happened. Symptoms of its end were as follows: redefinition of the concept of democracy, crisis of the classic notion of value and the failure of U.S. unilateralism. Objective determinants of the new order – arising from the crisis of sovereignty – are grounded in the separation of legitimacy and effectiveness. The constituent power is redefined as immanent tool for ordering actions. On the one hand, the biopolitical structure of reality nowadays enters the conflict with the old concept of law, on the other, it dislocates the relation between technical and political composition of the labor force. A loss of a control over a new, socialized form of living labor by the power becomes paradigmatic for the contemporaneity. Worker doesn't contact with profit but rent, he stands in the front of "collective capitalist", who is now a forger of the social work. In this situation, a constituent resistance is realized in a practice of exodus. The resistance becomes also a process of reclaiming the common. The common, which is opposed to the private, as well as to the public, becomes a dispositive of radical and democratic form of governance. ; Współczesność została zredefiniowana, przejście się dokonało. Symptomami jego końca były: przewartościowanie pojęcia demokracji, kryzys klasycznego pojęcia wartości i klęska unilateralizmu USA. Obiektywne determinanty nowego porządku tkwią w wynikającym z kryzysu suwerenności rozdzieleniu legitymizacji i skuteczności. Władza konstytuująca zostaje zredefiniowana jako immanentna dla działań porządkujących. Biopolityczna struktura rzeczywistości z jednej strony wchodzi dzisiaj w konflikt ze starym pojęciem prawa, a z drugiej zaburza relację między technicznym a politycznym składem siły roboczej. Paradygmatyczną dla współczesności staje się utrata kontroli przez władzę nad nową, uspołecznioną postacią żywej pracy. Pracownik stykając się już nie z zyskiem, a rentą, staje przed "kolektywnym kapitalistą" jako fałszerzem pracy społecznej.W tej sytuacji konstytuujący opór realizuje się w praktyce exodusu, który staje się także procesem odzyskiwania dobra wspólnego. Dobro wspólne przeciwstawiając się "temu, co własne", będącemu podstawą zarówno tego, co prywatne jak i tego, co publiczne, staje się urządzeniem radykalnego demokratycznego zarządzania.

The aim of the paper is to analyze the endeavors undertaken by the authorities of independent Lithuania to deal with the crimes committed by the Soviet Union against Lithuanian society, in particular against representatives of the anti-Soviet resistance movement, by using the notion of crime of genocide rooted in international law. The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Drelingas v. Lithuania of 12 March 2019, which approved the legality of the qualification of "ethno-national-political" genocide of "forest brethren" committed by the Soviet occupation authorities, was one of the key elements confirming the Lithuanian policy in this regard. This ruling reopens the discussion on the possibility of trying the crimes of the Soviet Union, at the same time raising certain legal and political doubts – as generally expressed by the Russian Federation.