Unsupported. Nothing in the passage indicates that all parties are equally satisfied with the results of court adjudication. The reasons for supporting court adjudication are described in P2, and none of these reasons have anything to do with how satisfied parties are with the results.

Unsupported. The passage does not indicate that supporters of court adjudication see this as a weakness of family mediation. P2 shows what the supporters of court adjudication see as the weaknesses of family mediation; failure to address underlying emotional issues is not one of these weaknesses.

This is supported at the end of P2. Here, we see that the supporters of court adjudication think that a downside of family mediation is that the cases will not help with the development of legal precedent, meaning that these cases won’t help to resolve similar disputes among different families in the future.

Anti-supported. One of the benefits of court adjudication is that the court protects those who have less bargaining power, which shows that court adjudication does not assume that the parties to a dispute have relatively equal bargaining power.

Unsupported. We know that court hearings are generally open to the public; we don’t know if supporters of court adjudication think that this should be the case.