Empirical studies indicate that traditional judicial approaches to divorce proceedings do not lead to satisfactory dispute resolution. Accordingly, the judicial systems of leading countries have increasingly adopted problem-solving approaches and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, particularly family mediation. This study aims to examine how the problem-solving approach is applied in divorce cases by analyzing the experiences of leading jurisdictions and comparing them with the functioning of Iran’s legal system. The research employs a qualitative methodology. Data are collected through content analysis of judicial documents, including divorce case files, in-depth interviews with judicial actors and couples seeking divorce, and semi-participant observation of family court hearings. Findings reveal that in leading countries, family mediation operates within an institutionalized and well-structured framework. In this framework, ensuring the safety of the parties, maintaining the voluntariness of the process, providing mediators with specialized training, and effective supervision over the enforcement of agreements are regarded as fundamental principles. In Iran, the judicial system must similarly shift from a compulsory, administrative procedure toward a participatory and specialized model that genuinely addresses the underlying familial issues. Achieving this transformation requires the establishment of a comprehensive legal, educational, and supervisory framework to institutionalize mediation in divorce Litigation.