Bilateral Forgiveness Bilateral forgiveness occurs when one person forgives another in exchange for an apology or other act of contrition. There is, at least implicitly, a you apologize quid pro quo: “If and show sufficient remorse, I will forgive you.” The importance of bilateral forgiveness is readily seen when there is to be a future relationship between the parties. Indeed, it is often described as a prerequisite for reconciliation. But even if there is to be no future relationship, the benefits of bilateral forgiveness should not be overlooked. An apology offers a of moral balance—more specifically, a restoration “restoration of an equality of regard” that is potentially healing for all concerned. As the following case study illustrates, bilateral forgiveness has its place in litigation, and mediation can provide the ideal conduit for its emergence. This case involved two parties litigating an employment contract. The employer was angry at the employee for abandoning him before the contract ended, while the employee resented the ensuing lawsuit. A well-established architect hired a junior architect just out of school, who was seeking apprenticeship. They signed a two-year contract. The two architects initially got along very well, but after approximately six months the junior architect gave two weeks’ notice that he was leaving. The senior architect sued for breach of contract, claiming lost profits of over $500,000. Although both parties were very upset, they agreed to attend mediation with their attorneys. At the start of the mediation, the senior architect claimed he had lost the opportunity to build his firm and open a second office as he had hoped. The junior architect was angry about having to defend himself in an expensive lawsuit. He said he felt forced to leave after observing certain practices that he believed to be unethical. Guided by the mediator, the junior architect was able to understand and empathize with the betrayal felt by the senior architect. Eventually, the junior architect offered an apology to the senior architect, acknowledging that he have handled his departure better. The senior architect responded with his own apology. He disclosed for the first time that he had suffered a number of difficult
Bilateral Forgiveness Bilateral forgiveness occurs when one person forgives another in exchange for an apology or other act of contrition. There is, at least implicitly, a quid pro quo: “If you apologize and show sufficient remorse, I will forgive you.” The importance of bilateral forgiveness is readily seen when there is to be a future relationship between the parties. Indeed, it is often described as a prerequisite for reconciliation. But even if there is to be no future relationship, the benefits of bilateral forgiveness should not be overlooked. An apology offers a “restoration of moral balance—more specifically, a restoration of an equality of regard” that is potentially healing for all concerned. As the following case study illustrates, bilateral forgiveness has its place in litigation, and mediation can provide the ideal conduit for its emergence. This case involved two parties litigating an employment contract. The employer was angry at the employee for abandoning him before the contract ended, while the employee resented the ensuing lawsuit. A well-established architect hired a junior architect just out of school, who was seeking apprenticeship. They signed a two-year contract. The two architects initially got along very well, but after approximately six months the junior architect gave two weeks’ notice that he was leaving. The senior architect sued for breach of contract, claiming lost profits of over $500,000. Although both parties were very upset, they agreed to attend mediation with their attorneys. At the start of the mediation, the senior architect claimed he had lost the opportunity to build his firm and open a second office as he had hoped. The junior architect was angry about having to defend himself in an expensive lawsuit. He said he felt forced to leave after observing certain practices that he believed to be unethical. Guided by the mediator, the junior architect was able to understand and empathize with the betrayal felt by the senior architect. Eventually, the junior architect offered an apology to the senior architect, acknowledging that he have handled his departure better. The senior architect responded with his own apology. He disclosed for the first time that he had suffered a number of difficult
TheCaseForForgiveness1-18-13.docx