A mediation which is not truly consensual or which produces decisions not based on information and understanding, or decisions not voluntarily made, is below standard. Mediation is not antithetical to lawyers or the legal process; it is an alternative to litigation and the adversary process. The confidentiality requirements are needed to make sure that participants have no false expectations that what is said in mediation may not be repeated in court. The participants should know that if they wish to mediate, they must trust each other not to disclose or to use in other places information divulged in the process. The rigid stance of precluding prior or future involvement either by a lawyer-mediator or a mental health mediator is needed in order to underscore the mediator's impartiality. Lawyers and mental health professionals need to collaborate further to define the ethical means of protecting impartiality in potentially conflicted or biased situations. The standard on basing decisions on sufficient information and knowledge also deals with the permissible role of lawyer-mediators who must make sure that the participants do not view their suggestions as an alternative to obtaining separate legal advice. The standard covering the duty to suspend or terminate mediation requires that mediators recognize when one or both participants need additional information or other assistance before mediation resumes. Mediators not trained in intervention and communication techniques and family and divorce dynamics may need additional training in order to meet this standard.