The master of the rolls’ call for mediation to become part of every lawyer’s training (see [2010] Gazette, 13 May, 3) is a much welcome endorsement by a member of the senior judicial establishment of the need for a fundamental rebuild of every lawyer’s toolkit.

A toolkit which, if used to its full potential, could result in a significant reduction in the need for judges; certainly in many family law scenarios.

I don’t understand, though, why Lord Neuberger felt the need to caution against overstating the virtues of mediation. Give me a world in which mediation’s virtues are overstated any day over a world in which the virtues of adversarial solutions are overstated – the world we currently inhabit.

If mediation is not appropriate or does not succeed, court solutions can ultimately be sought. When court fails (as it tends to, for at least one party) the parties have nowhere else to go.

A zeal for explaining dispute resolution options – DIY, mediation, collaboration, round-tabling and traditional – can only be positive and healthy, but if it smacks of fanaticism, then I’m a fanatic.

Stephen G Anderson, Solicitor, mediator and collaborative practitioner, Birketts, Ipswich