Reading Comprehension

PT120 · S2 · P3 · Q17 Family Dispute Resolution

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Individual family members have been assisted in resolving disputes arising from divorce or separation, property division, or financial arrangements, through court-connected family mediation programs, which differ significantly from court adjudication.

Topic

Family mediation vs. court adjudication for resolving family disputes

Framework

Present Debate

Main Point

While there are valid arguments in favor of court adjudication in family disputes, family mediation, in the end, is better suited to the unique needs of family law because it promotes cooperation, efficiency, personal autonomy, and emotional healing. (Most Valuable Sentence: P3, first sentence: )

P1: Differences Between Mediation and Court Adjudication

This paragraph introduces the two main ways families can resolve disputes: traditional court litigation and family mediation. It contrasts them: courts are formal, public, and binding, while mediation is more private, informal, and the mediator simply helps the parties reach their own agreement.

P2: Arguments for Court Adjudication

Here, the supporters of court adjudication get their say. They argue that the court process upholds social values, protects people with less power, ensures legal rights, creates a public/legal record, and helps to refine the law. The paragraph lists a bunch of drawbacks of mediation compared to the court process.

P3: Arguments for and Endorsement of Family Mediation

This paragraph pivots to the author's own take: mediation is ultimately a better fit for family law issues. The author (and mediation proponents) point out mediation is more efficient, less stressful, encourages cooperation, helps people learn skills for future disagreements, and gets better compliance. Plus, real-world studies say people find mediation more rational and humane than court.

17.

According to the passage, proponents of court adjudication of family disputes would be most likely to agree with which one of the following?

Court adjudication of family disputes
Not in Support Window
"Trials are better at making all parties equally satisfied" was not one of the five advantages listed.
6% picked this
Family mediation fails to address
Not in Support Window
"Trials are better at addressing the underlying emotional issues" was not one of the five advantages listed, nor does it make much common sense to think of trials as being sensitive undertakings that flesh out the underlying emotional subtleties.
2% picked this
Correct
Settlements of disputes reached through
Why this is right
The 4th and 5th advantages sort of combine to support this notion, but the 5th one in particular. Because mediation doesn't result in a transcript of the proceedings, people can't go back to look at mediation proceedings and learn from them as they can do with the transcript of a trial. But this answer is mostly targeted at the 5th advantage: if a dispute is tried in court, then it presents an opportunity for the relevant law to be refined through the ongoing development of legal precedent. Say that in a divorce proceeding, I got to keep the family pet since I was going to have primary custody of the kids, and it was decided that the family pet was important enough to the mental health of the kids that it should be where the kids would mainly be. If that outcome were achieved through mediation, there's no paper trail. It's just something my spouse and I agreed to. If that outcome were achieved through court adjudication, then there is now a legal precedent for placing the family pet with the primary custodian of children. This precedent could "guide the resolution of similar future disputes among other parties". Another person in a similar situation could cite my case as precedent and guide the judge towards resolving the dispute in a similar manner.
Skill tested: Non-Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
75% picked this
Court adjudication presumes that the
Contradicted
This says the opposite of what the 2nd advantage was saying. Mediation tends to assume equal bargaining power; it's "based on the notion of relatively equal parties". "The court system, on the other hand ... " is not.
14% picked this
Court adjudication hearings for family
Too Strong: always
We can't find any strong language in the passage that would support the extreme claim that 100% of family law court hearings should be open to the public. All of them? Even sensitive ones dealing with abuse? Even ones that might have the potential to divulge classified information?
4% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free