Substituting needs for rights in mediation - Therapeutic or disabling?

In Part I, the author assesses mediation's trade-off between rights and nee ds, focusing on the problematic nature of need satisfaction as a benchmark for successful mediation. Part II suggests that needs, unlike rights, are f undamentally subjective and that minorities and other traditionally margina lized peoples may define their needs more minimally than their White counte rparts. It further summarizes data demonstrating that minorities experience greater satisfaction in mediation than Whites, even though they achieve ob jectively worse outcomes. Part III explores the validity of need satisfacti on as the litmus test for proper or effective mediation, noting that indivi dual need may be tainted by prejudice or colored by an improper interpretat ion of background legal norms and entitlements.