Abstract: The contentious and costly nature of the adversarial process for resolving child custody disputes has prompted scholars, practitioners, and policy makers to advocate for the development and implementation of less divisive forms of dispute resolution, notably, mediation. Mediation has been championed for its potential to resolve disputes with less acrimony among disputants, reduced economic costs, increased satisfaction with outcomes, and fewer adverse consequences for family members. Despite the increasing popularity, arguments have cautioned against the use of mandated mediation when intimate partner abuse (IPA) is alleged. This research documents a mediation screening process and models mediators’ decision-making process as instantiated, naturally, in one jurisdiction.