Conflict resolution is an important aspect of life that must be used to mediate the situation and find ways that will help people determine the correct path of action. It is a preventative measure and is often used in a stressful and possibly, violent situation. The case of Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman is an example of the time where the application of the conflict resolution theory would be very acceptable and needed.
Trayvon Martin was shot by George Zimmerman and both sides of the story have credible facts. From one point it is possible to see the emotions that Trayvon Martin was going through when he felt that he was being followed. George Zimmerman was a person designated to keep the streets safe, so when he happened to be in a stressful situation, he felt it was his responsibility to act (Trayvon Martin Case (George Zimmerman), 2013). Conflict resolution theory offers several possible avenues that could have been taken.
The first stage would focus on a mediating conversation that would establish the atmosphere and the situation. In this case, both men could have controlled their anger, stress and fear in order to talk to each other in a calm and reasonable manner. Then, they would each state their reasons and discover what they have to say about the situation.
Trayvon Martin would explain that the reason he is shouting is because he is upset with something or is concerned why he is being followed by the watchman. George Zimmerman would give his reasons as to why he thought the situation was suspicious and what must be done to alleviate the stress, as he was older and more experienced (Jones, 2013).
The next stage would deal with the emotions and positions of authority that each person had in this instance. Because they were both very excited, physically and emotionally, it is easy to see why the situation spun out of control very quickly.
When one person is being provoked and the other tries to defend or vice versa, people lose all communication and understanding in the process, as everyone must take a defensive or offensive stance. This is very true of every person because when someone is blaming the other, the person is forced to explain themselves, and if it is done in an aggressive manner, they will be feeling angry and the need to push back and respond in an elevated tone (Jones, 2013).
In the final stages of the conflict resolution both parties would sum up the major points, identify the necessary moments that are key to resolving the conflict and find ways to deal with the situation. The end stage will implement the resolution to life and people will try to act out how they would behave in a proper manner.
It is unfortunate that in this case there was no chance to talk through and find different ways of dealing with the situation. The fact that two men had a chance to talk but no one did and the conflict led to shooting and fighting on the ground, shows that the conflict was managed aggressively. It has been speculated that evidence given was controversial and unclear, so this played a part in the case as well (Ford, 2013).
Overall, it is much better to prevent and resolve conflicts than deal with the consequences. Very often, there is much misunderstanding and it would be easy to avoid with communication and respect to others.
References
Ford, D. (2013). George Zimmerman trial underway as jury selection process begins. Web.
Jones, T. (2013). Conflict Coaching. Web.
Trayvon Martin Case (George Zimmerman). Web.