October 2026⸻Bringing People and Justice Together
Identity, Credentials, Core Values and Practice Areas
Praxis Forum was created to provide fair, effective and accessible Alternative Dispute Prevention and Resolution services to underserved populations at a greater risk of experiencing health inequities, social injustice, economic poverty, or discrimination due to structural barriers that limit access to foundational resources and opportunities.
Time-Honoured Preventive and Curative Methods
Praxis Forum provides nationwide Alternative Dispute Prevention and Resolution services, with a special dedication to underserved populations. For these communities, our Neutral Third-Party Advisory Service focuses primarily on Health Equity and Social Justice.
Process, Methodology and Customization
Alternative Dispute Prevention and Resolution delivers a proven, structured framework for problem-solving and variance management. This methodology actively eliminates cost and time inefficiencies while protecting corporate assets, shareholder value, proprietary resources, and critical partnerships.
Mission, Vision and Efficiencies
In recent years, the complex, progressive and violent nature of conflicts indicates that previous attempts at preventing and controlling destructive disputes and ideological clashes have failed and are no longer sufficient to ensure peaceful and productive local and global communities. Praxis Forum is a non-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of education and research in Alternative Dispute Prevention and Resolution, with a focus on promoting non-dual, non-violent, human rights-based, non-symptomatic and therapeutic approaches directed at eliminating or reducing risks and correcting imbalances.
Early Intervention, Active Disputes, and Post-Dispute Programs
Initially established in 2016 as a federally incorporated Alternative Dispute Prevention and Resolution practice, Praxis Forum provides independent, impartial, and uncorrupted services to public and private organizations. The firm utilizes neutral third parties to manage and resolve complex, sensitive, or long-standing commercial, institutional, and operational issues. This is achieved through early intervention, active dispute resolution, and post-resolution programs.
Safeguarding the Spirit of Justice
Our practice delivers high-intervention, high-empathy Alternative Dispute Prevention and Resolution. Rather than remaining passive observers during power imbalances or organizational alignment breakdowns, we actively step in. By combining a strict commitment to systemic integrity with a deep understanding of human dynamics, we protect the collaborative environment.
An "act of God", traditionally translated from the Latin casus fortuitus, is defined as an overwhelming, inevitable event caused exclusively by natural forces without any human intervention. The definition strictly requires that the event could not have been prevented by any amount of foresight, care, or reasonable diligence. For an event to legally qualify as an act of God under common law, it must be: Exclusively Natural, Unprecedented and Unforeseeable, and Unavoidable.
The term adjustment is broadly defined as the determination of an amount due, the settlement of a claim, or the bringing of something into a proper relation or alignment.
A claim encompasses the assertion of an existing right, a demand for money or a legal remedy, and the operative facts giving rise to an enforceable right. Ultimately, it represents the legal demand used to obtain possession, enjoyment, or compensation.
In legal terminology the term coexistence is defined as "The peaceful continuation of nations, peoples, or other entities or groups within an effective political-military equilibrium." In modern corporate and intellectual property law, the term is also widely used in a "trademark coexistence agreement," which allows two different companies to use similar trademarks in the market without litigation, provided it does not cause consumer confusion.
Colonialism is defined as “the policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically.” The relationship between colonialism and the Christian religion is historically deep, highly complex, and a subject of significant academic debate. For centuries, the expansion of European empires and the spread of Christianity were deeply intertwined, a partnership often described by historians as an alliance between the Church and the Crown.
Compromise is defined as "an arrangement arrived at, either in court or out of court, for settling a dispute upon what appears to the parties to be equitable terms, having regard to the uncertainty they are in regarding the facts, or the law and the facts together". It is heavily emphasized that a compromise is an agreement born out of mutual consent where each party adjusts their difficulties by making concessions, preferring a guaranteed middle ground, or an outcome over the gamble of a trial, where the potential for victory is offset by the risk of total defeat.
Conciliation is defined as "the adjustment and settlement of a dispute in a friendly, un-antagonistic manner." It is commonly used as a method of Alternative Dispute Resolution to help parties reach an agreement before escalating to trial or arbitration.
Decolonization is primarily defined as “the withdrawal from its former colonies of a colonial power; the acquisition of political or economic independence by such colonies.” It is the process by which a colonial power divests itself of sovereignty over a colony; whether a territory, a protectorate, or a trust territory, so that the colony is granted autonomy and eventually attains independence.
The term determination carries two primary legal definitions depending on the context of the case or property in question. In a court of law, a determination is the formal decision, judgment, or decree of a court of justice. In the context of estates, property, or legal rights, a determination refers to the ending, expiration, or bringing to a close of an estate, interest in property, right, power, or authority.
Fiduciary Duty is defined as “Someone who is required to act for the benefit of another person on all matters within the scope of their relationship; one who owes the duties of good faith, loyalty, due care and disclosure.” A fiduciary duty is further defined as "a duty to act for someone else's benefit, while subordinating one's personal interests to that of the other person." It represents the highest standard of care and loyalty implied by law.
Harmonization is defined as the process of changing differences on different measurements, procedures, or schedules to make them uniform and compatible. In a broader legal and statutory context, it refers to bringing different laws or legal systems together into a harmonious state by aligning unique aspects to ensure consistency, agreement, and smooth interaction. Rather than completely erasing or replacing unique legal traditions, harmonization focuses on reconciling friction points so that separate frameworks can function cohesively without contradiction.
An inherent right is defined as "one which abides in a person and is not given from something or someone outside itself". It is a right that an entity or individual possesses purely by virtue of their existence or essential nature, rather than a privilege granted by an external authority, government, or positive law.
A fact-finder, also termed a finder of fact, fact-trier, or trier of fact, is defined as one or more persons who hear testimony and review evidence to rule on a factual issue. While the terms "fact-finder" and "neutral" are distinct concepts, the blended term neutral fact-finder is universally recognized in legal proceedings and alternative dispute resolution.
Reconciliation is defined as "the renewal of amicable relations between two persons who had been at enmity or variance; usually implying forgiveness of injuries on one or both sides." Reconciliation is viewed, in general, as a profound restorative process. It goes beyond settling a dispute to repair the underlying relationship itself. In constitutional or human rights law, it involves resolving deep historical grievances.
Rapprochement is termed as "an establishment or resumption of harmonious or friendly relations, especially between countries." In general, it is primarily a political and diplomatic term rather than a technical legal one. When used in a legal or international law context, it is defined as the re-establishment of a harmonious or friendly relationship between parties, most commonly sovereign nations, after a period of estrangement or conflict.
The term resolution has multiple distinct definitions depending on the specific legal context. In matters of legislative practice and public assemblies, a resolution is a formal expression of an opinion, intention, or decision by an official deliberative or legislative body, public assembly, town council, or board of directors. While a "resolution" is the ultimate goal or outcome of an agreement, Black's Law Dictionary defines Alternative Dispute Resolution as a formal "procedure for settling a dispute by means other than litigation.
Settlement is broadly defined as "an agreement ending a dispute or lawsuit." Historically and across distinct editions, it is further framed as an arrangement where parties with disputed matters reach a compromise to determine what is coming from one to the other, terminating a controversy in consideration of mutual concessions.
The term self-determination primarily describes a principle of international law and constitutional governance: "The fundamental right of every person to freely decide on their own political status and to pursue their own choice of economic, cultural and social development."
The term ''Superior force" is defined within the law of bailments and negligence as an uncontrollable and irresistible force, of human agency, producing results which the person in question could not avoid. Unlike an "act of God", which typically refers to overwhelming natural disasters like earthquakes or floods, a "superior force" specifically involves an irresistible interruption caused by human elements. It requires that the consequences of the force were completely unavoidable by the individual attempting to fulfill an obligation or standard of care.
Recovery is defined in its most extensive sense as "the restoration or vindication of a right existing in a person, by the formal judgment or decree of a competent court at his instance and suit, or the obtaining, by such judgment, of some right or property which has been taken or withheld from him".
Standard 1―Fairness
Disputes cause deep suffering because they threaten our fundamental biological survival instincts, social identities, and psychological security. Disputes inflict financial ruin, emotional distress, physical harm, and damaged reputations. To insulate participants from these four distinct vectors of ruin, dispute resolution must build targeted safeguards and relief mechanisms directly into the procedural timeline.
Standard 2―Conflict of Interest
Context matters in dispute resolution because it transforms a rigid, legalistic process into an effective, human-centric solution. Without context, a resolution forum treats a dispute as an isolated, mathematical problem rather than a complex human crisis. Thus, resolution services cannot operate effectively if they ignore this human suffering. When dispute resolution systems ignore suffering, they do not just fail to resolve the conflict, they become an active participant in it.
Standard 3―Loyalty
In traditional civil justice systems, primarily rooted in the common law tradition, the designation of a lawyer as an "officer of the court" establishes that a practitioner is not merely a private agent for hire, but a vital institutional component of the state's judicial machinery. This status imposes overriding public duties that constrain the bounds of private advocacy.
Standard 4―Adaptability
Injecting empathy into justice transforms rigid legal procedures into dynamic protective tools. Injecting empathy into justice dismantles the myth that procedural neutrality requires emotional detachment. When empathy is codified into the design, it transforms rigid rules, which often function as institutional weapons, into dynamic protective tools that bend to support the human being under stress.
Standard 5―Innovation
When the ultimate focus shifts from strictly following rules to actively reducing harm and restoring dignity, the entire definition of "success" in a dispute resolution process is rewritten. In a traditional system, success means a closed file, a signed order, and a cleared docket, regardless of the human wreckage left in its wake. In a dignity-first framework, success means the stabilization of human crisis and the minimization of systemic violence.
Standard 6―Objectivity
Traditional legal design uses spatial hierarchy to induce compliance through fear. Integrating the genius loci of justice into procedural design means transforming legal spaces from rigid, intimidating structures into environments focused on revealing truth, healing, community safety, and dignity. This transformation is the precise point where architectural philosophy meets human rights. When we treat the spirit of the place, not as a historical artifact, but as a living mandate for healing and dignity, we fundamentally change how justice feels, operates, and performs.
Standard 7―Restoration
Systemic trauma is inflicted when the process itself acts as an unyielding wall, punishing participants for the chaotic realities of poverty, instability, or crisis. By embedding harm reduction into the very mechanics of dispute resolution procedure, we shift the system’s primary directive from legal processing to trauma mitigation.
Standard 8―Dignity
Treating human suffering as the core variable in the dispute resolution process, completely flips the neurobiology of negotiation. When a person experiences severe trauma, financial ruin, or deep humiliation, their brain shifts into a survival state dominated by the amygdala. In this state, cognitive processing drops, the ability to assess long-term risk shrinks, and defensive posturing skyrockets.
Standard 9―Excellence
Wrapping dispute resolution in care requires us to move past a purely legalistic framework, to design a trauma-informed ecosystem. The process treats human suffering not as a distraction to be managed, but as the core variable influencing how the parties make critical decisions that will impact process outcomes. When a dispute resolution process protects physical and psychological safety, it directly unlocks the cognitive processing required for complex decision-making, thus optimizing the cognitive environment.
Peaceful Physical Interaction is the direct and immediate opposite of physical violence. It implies using physical presence or touch to comfort, heal, or remain entirely peaceful. Peaceful physical interaction acts as a powerful antidote to physical violence, replacing aggression with safety and connection.
Sexual consent and autonomy are the direct and immediate opposites of sexual violence. They involve the expression of mutual desire, explicit agreement, safety, and respect. Sexual consent and autonomy act as the ultimate counter-forces to sexual violence, transforming intimate spaces into domains of safety, equality, and mutual well-being. Where sexual violence inflicts trauma and violates human rights, enthusiastic consent and body sovereignty foster deep emotional security and physical health.
Emotional validation and empathy are the direct and immediate opposites of emotional violence. They involve recognizing, accepting, and respecting another person's internal emotional experience without judgment. Knowing that one's internal experience will be met without judgment creates an environment where individuals can be vulnerable without fear of punishment.
Psychological Safety and Empowerment are the direct and immediate opposite of psychological violence. They involve using reality affirmations: explicitly stating facts, and believing the person's lived experiences. Explicitly stating facts counters the disorienting effects of manipulation, allowing individuals to trust their own senses, memory, and judgment again.
Spiritual Liberation and Safeguarding are the direct and immediate opposite of spiritual violence and oppression. They involve honoring the individual's sacred autonomy, restoring dignity, and fostering a free connection to meaning, the creator or the divine. Spiritual freedom and expression heal the shame, guilt, and fear often instilled by oppressive systems, allowing individuals to view themselves as inherently valuable, whole and worthy.
Cultural peacebuilding is the direct and immediate opposite of cultural violence and genocide. It involves normalizing the shared humanity and equal worth of all people, where the ideals of peace, equity, and human dignity feel normal and right. A culture that deeply believes in equal worth naturally demands and sustains fair laws, unbiased institutions, and equal access to resources.
Kindness, Praise, and Reassurance are the direct and immediate opposite of verbal abuse. They involve the intentional use of language as a tool to build up, validate, and restore psychological safety. Genuine praise triggers the release of dopamine, the brain's reward chemical, which enhances motivation, accelerates learning, and helps repair cognitive pathways damaged by chronic verbal abuse and criticism.
Resource-Sharing and Financial Freedom are the direct and immediate opposite of financial abuse and economic oppression. They involve the intentional use of knowledge and free access to assets to build up a person's financial stability and long-term independence.
Attentive, Responsive Care and Nurture are the direct and immediate opposite of maltreatment and neglect. They involve deliberately, immediately, and consistently using presence to fulfill the fundamental needs for care and nurture of others. Being answered and cared for signals to an individual that they are valued, visible, and important, directly countering the profound erasure and worthlessness caused by neglect.
Unresolved conflict rarely stays contained. Left unaddressed, interpersonal friction quickly transforms into deep operational bottlenecks, polarizing entire teams, eroding morale, and causing top talent to disengage or leave. We create structured, high-intervention, strictly confidential environments where conflicting parties can step away from defensiveness and engage in constructive, empathetic dialogue. By focusing on root issues rather than surface-level symptoms, we guide individuals and leadership to move past entrenched positions, rebuild shattered professional trust, and co-create lasting, voluntary agreements that restore day-to-day collaboration.
A Neutral Investigation is an independent, confidential, and voluntary fact-finding procedure conducted by an impartial third-party expert. Its primary objective is to clarify contested factual, technical, or operational issues within a commercial relationship. Unlike an adjudicator, the investigator does not issue a binding legal ruling or allocate liability. Instead, they produce a definitive, objective factual record designed to facilitate early settlement, narrow the scope of complex claims, or serve as pre-vetted evidentiary baseline for formal arbitral proceedings