The Legal Effect of Non-Litigation Mediation in Cross-National Family Conflicts

Against the backdrop of social transformation and increasingly diversified family structures, family disputes have become frequent, and traditional litigation mechanisms have gradually exposed the limitations of mediation functions due to their high costs and low efficiency. The research originated from the problems of vague legal binding force of mediation agreement and insufficient implementation mechanism. The sample selection focuses on urban grassroots judicial offices and community mediation organizations, as they play a key role in resolving family conflicts and have broad representativeness. However, existing research mostly focuses on mediation procedures and institutional construction, with little empirical evaluation from the perspective of legal effectiveness. Through case analysis, questionnaire surveys, and interviews, combined with 90 mediation agreement samples and 20 judicial confirmation cases, analyze their legal enforcement and compliance rates. Research has found that mediation agreements that have been confirmed by the judiciary have strong effectiveness, but those that have not been confirmed are prone to becoming mere formalities and affecting the effectiveness of social governance. In theory, it has deepened the understanding of the legal attributes of mediation, and in practice, it provides a basis for institutional improvement for grassroots governance. However, due to the limited sample area and single mediation type, the research results still have limitations. In the future, research on cross regional comparisons and platform based mediation mechanisms should be expanded to build a more flexible family dispute resolution system.