Search

Background: Exceptional circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic increase the risk for vulnerability among people living with dementia. Objective: This article discusses the well-being and rights of people living with dementia in Finland during the pandemic and analyses the legal framework covering the restrictions of their rights during that period. Methods: The empirical research comprises a survey of persons with dementia (n = 31) and their family members (n = 168). The participants completed a total of 13 survey items involving questions about their well-being during the pandemic, restrictions on freedom, access to services, information on pandemic regulations and guidelines as well as possible problems with authorities. The survey included both multiple choice and open-ended questions. Results: According to people with dementia and their family members, by spring 2021, the pandemic had reduced meaningful activities available to people living with dementia in Finland and decreased the number of meetings between them and other people. Many reported a decline in their physical and/or mental well-being or greater difficulty or delays in accessing social and health services. Over a third of respondents found that the right to meet people was restricted among people with dementia, and almost half of the respondents took the view that their freedom of movement was restricted. There were also major shortcomings in terms of information on restrictions. Conclusion: The results highlight the importance of bearing in mind the negative effects that restrictions on mobility, meeting other people and meaningful activities can have on the well-being of people living with dementia. This should be considered, for example, when reforming legislation.

This is an introduction to a collection of articles in the book Nordic mediation research. The background and history of mediation in the Nordic, or Scandinavian, countries is presented. The areas of mediation practice in the Nordic countries and Nordic mediation research are also introduced.

Problem-solving justice as a concept has often been understood in relation to the criminal justice system. The best-known application of problem-solving justice is problem-solving courts. However, in Finland and the other Nordic countries, no courts could be described as problem-solving courts. As a theoretical concept, problem-solving justice is not very well known or used in research or in legal textbooks. Indeed, the core concept of problem-solving justice is quite unfamiliar in Finnish and in Nordic legal culture. That being said, problem-solving approaches in a broader sense are currently quite important in the law and conflict resolution mechanisms of Nordic countries. In the field of conflict resolution, there are many simultaneous and alternative problem-solving methods and ways to deal with conflicts. There are also many mediation systems, and research in the field of conflict resolution is dynamic. In the Nordic countries, the problem-solving approach is included in the whole criminal and civil law systems and procedural law. The attention and desired changes in legal policy from this perspective are less attached to the structure of the court system than in common law countries, and the idea of special courts has been rejected. It is unlikely that there will be specific problem-solving courts in the future in Finland or the other Nordic countries. Instead, as a theoretical concept, problem solving justice is useful in the Nordic context when we review and evaluate the functioning of the court and conflict resolution system. It is appropriate to understand the “problem solving justice” concept more widely than it has often been understood. In its wider meaning, it is not limited to the criminal justice system or to special problem-solving courts. Instead we can use it in a broader sense to describe different conflict resolution systems and activities, the aim of which is based more on problem solving than on pure judicial decision making.

In this article, I argue that it is useful to make a distinction between theoretical models of mediation, practical systems of mediation in context, and mediation in action. Using this distinction makes it possible to examine the relationship of the model of mediation, the context in which mediation is practiced and mediator behaviour, and to analyse the field of mediation and obtain a better understanding of mediation, as such, as a result. First, I offer a brief historical overview of how mediation has developed in the Nordic countries on a theoretical, institutional and practical level. Then, I unfold and examine which theoretical models are at play, what the different areas of practice are and how mediators interpret and implement theoretical models in their practice. One main problem is that mediators in their everyday work sometimes act in a different way than they think themselves or what theory of mediation postulates. In conclusion, I point to the need for further empirical and theoretical studies, as well as the development of mediation training in Nordic countries.

In the beginning of 2006, the Act on court-connected mediation (663/2005) entered into force, as did the Act on settlement certification in court (amendment Act 664/2005). These statutes introduced court-connected mediation to Finland , modelled on the experiments carried out in Norway and Denmark. Court-connected mediation is a procedure, voluntary to the parties and managed by the judge, aiming at a situation where the parties themselves find a satisfactory resolution of their conflict.