Publications
I have written in formats ranging from books to blog posts (on Just Court ADR) and from articles to studies and reports. Below are some examples.
​
I have also worked on teams that created field-wide documents such as the Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators (2005) and Guidance for Physically Safe Conflict Resolution: A Bias-Resistant Approach (2025).
Articles
An Overview of the Revised Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators
Susan M. Yates and Wayne R. Thorpe. Dispute Resolution Magazine, Winter, 2006
This article discusses the Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators as revised in 2005. The article explains how the original standards were developed and the process in which they were revised. The piece then provides a summary of 2005 Model Standards including the preamble, note on construction and each of the nine standards. The article points out and explains each of the major revisions as well as any major points of contention.
​
​Designing A System for Online Resolution of Cross-Border Custody Disputes
Janet Martinez, Colin Rule, and Susan Yates. World Arbitration and Mediation Review Vol. 12, No. 1, 2018
Resolving disputes around custody and co-parenting when the two parents are in different countries can be quite challenging. Fortunately, technology can help to bridge the gap and provide effective options for managing and resolving cross-border family disputes. In this paper, the authors introduce some of the concepts from the emerging field of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), and present a framework for Dispute System Design (DSD) to envision how such an online system could operate. The authors then provide a detailed walkthrough of a sample ODR system for building co-parenting agreements and evaluate it using the DSD framework.
Mediating Lanham Act Cases: The Role of Empirical Evaluation
Jennifer Shack and Susan M. Yates. Northern Illinois University Law Review, 2002
This article summarizes the findings of an evaluation of the Lanham Act Mediation Program in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. It then places this evaluation in the context of study design and the importance of evaluation in ensuring a high quality of justice for participants in court mediation programs.
Originally published in Northern Illinois University Law Review, Vol.22, No. 2 (Spring 2002).
​
Reimagining ADR in the Midst of Crisis: Neutrals Responding to the Foreclosure Dilemma
Susan M. Yates and Heather Scheiwe Kulp. ACResolution, 2012
The development of foreclosure dispute resolution programs presents a challenge to the ADR community. Foreclosure requires a different process than other types of mediation programs and legislatures unfamiliar with ADR have drafted statutes that describe a process very different from traditional ADR processes. The article argues that this should be seen as an opportunity for the ADR community. Instead of frustration and rejection of the foreclosure mediation process, mediators should be involved in the legislative process to assist legislators in determining the appropriate ADR processes to address the crisis.
​​
ADR Handbook for Judges
Susan M. Yates and Donna Stienstra, co-editors. American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution, 2004
This comprehensive handbook provides judges the tools they need to properly establish and manage programs, as well as cases, in particular areas of the law. Covered areas are general civil, small claims, divorce, child protection and dependency, adult guardianship, probate, victim-offender, juvenile/criminal, bankruptcy, mass claims, community mediation, and appellate.
​
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Susan M. Yates and Anne V. Swanson, co-editors. Illinois Institute for Continuing Legal Education, 2001
This two-volume handbook for lawyers and judges provides both an overview of the processes and their related issues and an in-depth discussion of ADR in specific fields. The volumes include chapters on arbitration and mediation in the fields corporate, commercial, labor, employment, family, community, government agency, medical malpractice, class action, construction and real estate, international, probate and securities law. Also included is an annotated bibliography of ADR resources.​​
Books
Here I am (center) with two outstanding members of the Board of Resolution Systems Institute, Professors Oladeji Tiamiyu (left) and Jim Alfini.
Studies and Reports
Accessing Justice Through Mediation: Pathways for Poor and Low-Income Disputants
Susan M. Yates. Resolution Systems Institute, 2007
What if ADR could change the way that disputants access justice, especially disputants who can’t afford lawyers? RSI tackled this question in our study Accessing Justice through Mediation: Pathways for Poor and Low-Income Disputants. We surveyed stakeholders and researched the legal and ADR landscape in Illinois to determine the supports and barriers to using ADR to increase access to justice. We described an array of potential program models. Then we designed a blueprint for a system whereby poor and low-income disputants could best achieve a resolution to their legal problems. The Service Delivery Models and Blueprint sections can provide insights for any jurisdiction.
​
An Evaluation of the Lanham Act Mediation Program - U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Susan M. Yates and Jennifer Shack, Resolution Systems Institute, 2000
This study looked at court records and survey data to determine: 1) the actual number of mediations being done in the Lanham Act Mediation Program and 2) attitudes of lawyers and neutrals toward the program and toward mediation in general.
​
Considering an Online Pre-Mediation Tool to Screen for Intimate Partner Violence: Findings & Blueprint
Eric Slepak-Cherney and Susan M. Yates, Resolution Systems Institute, 2019
The dynamics of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) pose a risk to the safety and self-determination of parties to a mediation. As a field, ADR practitioners have acknowledged that screening for IPV prior to mediation is critical, but do mediators have the resources and support to identify IPV and modify their sessions accordingly? In this report, RSI explores the gap between "best practices" when it comes to IPV and the reality of what mediators are actually doing, and the opportunity for technology to address these deficits. By analyzing the current landscape of screening protocols, surveying practitioners and convening a group of experts in the fields of IPV survivor advocacy and mediation, we concluded that mediators, particularly ones who are new to the field or mediate only intermittently, would benefit from a tool which provides a guided screening interview to assist them in deciding whether a mediation should proceed and which adaptations would be beneficial. To have the greatest impact, this tool would need to be available free of cost and require minimal training. This report serves as a blueprint and includes the features and next steps to develop this proposed tool.
​
Family Court Online Dispute Resolution for Thinly Resourced Parents, Courts and Communities: Impediment, Improvement or Impossible Dream?
Susan M. Yates, Resolution Systems Institute, 2022
This project investigated the study question, “How might family court online dispute resolution (ODR) serve thinly resourced parents, courts and communities?” It found that family court ODR can be an impediment to access to justice if not provided in an appropriate manner. However, if it is provided in a manner that is accessible, ethical and effective, family court ODR can improve access to justice. Doing so will require standards for family court ODR, as well as resources to support the provision and evaluation of ODR. It will also necessitate comprehensive screening conversations with all parents prior to ODR, which will enable courts to require that all parents who are not screened out attempt at least an initial stage of ODR.
While the study found that accessible, ethical, effective family ODR is possible, the question of how to provide those services to those who need it, despite limited family, court and community resources, remains unanswered. There is no clear path to determining how to sustain family court ODR services.
See also the Executive Summary of the above Family Court ODR report and an infographic summarizing the report's research questions, recommendations and findings.