First,
you might accept things as they are now.
Second, you might resolve the dispute with the other party with
no one else's help.
Third, you might resolve the dispute with a mediator's help,
which allows you to control the process and end it at any time
or, on the other hand, resolve the dispute in a way that you can
live with even if without a perfect resolution. Conciliation is
simply mediation by phone or similar communication device. It
is not as efficient as face to face mediation, but it is useful
when parties cannot be together.
Fourth, if you and the other party cannot work it out in mediation
- where you retain the power to make all decisions and reach agreement
or not - you could try arbitration. A neutral person hears both
sides and decides the case, like a judge except with much less
formality, delay, and expense.
Fifth, you or, more typically, your attorney, might prefer to
'test the case' by presenting it for neutral evaluation to a person
experienced in the kind of dispute involved. Neutral evaluation
is often used in injury cases, for example.
Sixth, you might go to court for traditional litigation, risking
high costs, lengthy delays, and unpredictable results, but at
least some day getting to the point where you know who won and
who lost according to the judge.
Seventh, you might use to violence. This last method has been
developed by humans into the art of war, a distinction that marks
the difference between humans and other animals. There might be
other options, too, but they do not tend be used by most people
nearly as much as those mentioned.
NEXT
QUESTION ->
