Pronoia Mediation

Transitioning from Blog Posts to Articles

2010-07-05T13:04:00.003-06:00

Three years ago I started this blog with the intention of meaningfully considering important issues in mediation, particularly those affecting the professional mediator. While posts became fewer in number as each year passed, I believe the words that were written here contributed new thoughts and critiques to the field of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution).

The reality, however, is that I could not sustain the quality of introspection and writing that I wanted to achieve. To do so in blog format became too great a challenge since blogs require frequent contributions and my style and interest in writing on various mediation topics did not coincide with that format.

It is therefore time now to shift things from the forum of a blog to one of written articles for the Noah Mediation Website. I will be re-posting the majority of articles from this blog on the Noah Mediation Website in additional to contributing new articles, particularly for potential clients. While I sustain a insatiable interest in the professional aspects of mediation, I also have seen a tremendous need on the part of clients to learn more about mediation from a non-mediator participant perspective.

So while Pronoia Mediation will soon cease to exist, I will continue to contribute thought-provoking articles about mediation. Please consider one of the following ways in which to continue reading articles written by me:

1. If you are on Facebook you can become a "fan" of Noah Mediation Services and receive articles on your FB homepage as they are posted. Here is the link: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Oak-Park-IL/Noah-Mediation-Services/39987777530

2. If you would like articles emailed directly to you, please send an email to "toread@noahmediation.com" and ask to subscribe and you will be put on the email list.

3. Check Noah Mediation Services website at www.noahmediation.com directly for updated articles.

For those of you who have followed Pronoia Mediation, I thank you for your interest and support.
Laura L. Noah

Response to "A More Perfect Union" which ran in the New York Times Magazine

2009-12-20T09:18:00.009-06:00

Married (Happily) With Issues or A More Perfect Union, was published in the New York Times Magazine on December 1, 2009. Here is my response.

As a mediator experienced working with families in the midst of crisis and relationship dissolution, I have long encouraged the use of mediation in a more preventative way. Unfortunately, for the many reasons Weil outlined, particularly the fear that “[it] carries not only the threat of learning things about yourself that you might prefer not to know but also the hazard of saying things to your spouse that are better left unsaid” (p.42) most people wait until the point of crisis to get help; a point at which they have already said many hurtful things to one another which cause irreparable damage to the relationship. Mediation as a preventative measure may be a more manageable option for some couples than therapy, since facilitative mediation has at its foundation a practical, problem-solving approach. Weil states about her marriage to Dan: “we never discussed, or considered discussing, why we were getting married or what a good marriage would mean” (p.38). This is true for most couples. Couples with different, un-communicated expectations regarding marriage, children, careers, retirement and many other important issues in the course of a life together, will inevitably build resentment toward one another over time. Thinking that love is the great equalizer, although idealistic, is unrealistic. Love does not ensure that we want the same things or expect the same things from our partners. Therapy delves into emotions while mediation deals with life’s practicalities. Both processes are important to creating a more perfect union, but depending on the couple, one process might create “the capacity to allow spouses to keep growing, to afford them the strength and bravery required to face the world” (p. 52) better than the other.

Youth Sports & Adult Violence: What will it take for communities to use the field of conflict resolution as a preventative resource?

2009-10-19T14:13:00.008-06:00

One adult physically beat another adult at a youth football practice in Wilmington, Massachusetts this past weekend. There’s commentary in the papers regarding what might have actually happened leading to the fight and who actually threw the first punch. I don’t care about what happened. I care that it did happen. And it’s happened before. Fortunately, this time no one died. Others have died: Michael Costin, for example, in 2002. If we’re waiting to dissect the particulars of how or why these incidents occur, then we’re already too late, and frankly, it’ll happen again. It will keep happening, in fact.

Simply put, when individuals and institutions don’t have the skills and training in conflict de-escalation then conflict often escalates. When healthy conflict resolution isn’t part of a given culture then conflict often escalates.

Here’s what I suggest we do to prevent violent incidents from occurring in our communities in relation to youth sports (and as a mediator by profession, I’m stepping outside my role a bit by actually making suggestions).

The individual or individuals who are administrating the youth program attend a basic conflict resolution or mediation course as soon as possible to be able to identify and address conflict before it escalates and to be able to work toward developing conflict resolution mechanisms for their youth sports programs.
A mandatory conflict resolution training program be developed and administered for all youth coaches.
A mandatory conflict resolution training program be developed and administered for all youth referees.
An optional (yet strongly encouraged) conflict resolution training program be developed and administered for parents of youth involved in sports.
Develop a process for coaches, players, parents and/or referees to file grievances about coaches, players, parents and/or referees and have those grievances addressed. This could include a mediation program. (I have developed mediation programs that cost virtually nothing and are run by volunteers, so it is possible to do this on the cheap with enough local support and investment.).
Parents sign a “conflict resolution” agreement in order for their children to participate in a given sport. This would commit parents to a culture of healthy conflict resolution and it would make parents accountable to one another, to the young people, and to the youth sports program at large.
At the start of each season, someone trained in conflict resolution (and this could be a coach and/or administrator and/or parent) spend a few minutes at practice with each team discussing and role-playing healthy conflict resolution skills.
If team conflict is affecting a team’s performance, bring in someone trained in multi-party dispute resolution that has experience with sports teams to mediate (or have a framework where the coach could mediate if he/she has been trained in mediation).

In sports, I realize credentials are important so here are mine: I’ve been coaching sports (primarily soccer and some basketball) on and off since I was a teenager. I’ve coached various youth teams and I’ve coached division three college women’s soccer. I started playing soccer when I was in kindergarten and was on many winning teams, including our high school soccer team that were state semi-finalists my senior year. I was the captain of both my soccer and basketball teams my senior year in high school. I played soccer at Kenyon College for four years and received various awards during that time including team MVP my sophomore and senior years and the First Team All Conference NCAC All Star team my senior year. I focused my Master of Arts degree final project in dispute resolution on conflicts in sports.

It’s too easy to excuse violence connected to youth sports as isolated “freak” incidents that could never happen here. There is research that collects data regarding such incidents and breaks it down. Yet it’s too easy to take that information and use it to dismiss the possibility that it could ever happen in our community. It can, and it has, and there are things that can be done to prevent it from occurring.

For more information: http://www.noahmediation.com/Conflict_in_Sports.html.

The Young and the Restless: Did Mediation Work for Billy and Chloe?

2009-09-03T09:03:00.005-06:00

Billy and Chloe are a young married couple on The Young and the Restless who have a child and who are going through a divorce. They decide to try mediation. The mediator, a Ms. Dalton, dresses in a power suit and works out of an impressive office furnished in thick, dark wood. Episodes which aired on August 26 and 27, 2009 reveal mediation as a positive option for Billy and Chloe who wish to divorce amicably. Toward the end, however, just as they've reached a full agreement and are set to sign the final paperwork, everything appears to fall apart. Through a series of frowns and pensive stares, all signs indicate that their efforts in mediation may be foiled by strong emotions and doubts about whether or not they're doing the right thing by splitting up.

A family member who watches the show told me about the role mediation was playing in Billy and Chloe's divorce and I immediately screened the relevant episodes online. They're quick; snapshots clipped between ever more powerful drama. You don't see much of the mediator who mostly appears in the background and says virtually nothing. Yet the very fact that mediation is playing a role in a daytime T.V. divorce, if even briefly, indicates an important turning point for the field of mediation. If daytime soaps are sending conflictual couples to mediation, then perhaps more and more couples will self-select mediation rather than have it forced upon them by a judge; mediation as a mutual choice being the most effective.

I could pick apart the ways in which The Young and the Restless got it wrong (mediation doesn't look like that!) but instead I choose to focus on what the show did right. Mediation is a viable option for couples, and if it can work for Billy and Chloe -- they ultimately signed the mediated agreement -- then that illustrates how well it can work for regular folks too.

Photo borrowed from www.soapoperadigest.com.

Free Mediation Informational Session

2009-09-03T08:41:00.004-06:00

Attend a free mediation informational session on Thursday, September 17, 2009 at the Oak Park Public Library. The presentation will focus on common disputes experienced within families. Topics include separation, divorce, custody & visitation for married, divorced, never-married and LGBT couples. This session is for people experiencing family conflict who want to better understand mediation as an option for resolving their dispute/s.

September 17, 2009
Oak Park Public Library, Main Branch
834 Lake Street
Oak Park, IL
2nd Floor, Small Meeting Room
6:00-7:30PM

Learn about the mediation process.
Understand when mediation is required in Illinois.
Understand the difference between a private mediator and a court mediator and the options you may have with each.
Learn how to find, screen and select a private mediator.
Learn some basic tools to prepare to negotiate common disputes in mediation.
Q & A.

Noah Mediation Services DOES NOT provide legal services. No legal advice will be given. This presentation will focus on general topics and not on specific disputes of individual attendees.

This session is for people experiencing family conflict who want to better understand mediation as an option for resolving their dispute/s. While attorneys, therapists, mediators and other professionals are welcome to attend, the primary focus of the presentation will be geared toward those currently experiencing conflict and those wishing to prevent future conflict within their family.

The presentation may vary depending on the number of attendees. While drop-ins will not be turned away, please help out by registering for the free informational session in advance. Send email to: info@noahmediation.com.

Soldiers and Suicide: can mediation help?

2009-08-02T06:32:00.011-06:00

Soldiers have been returning from war physically unharmed for decades, only to die by their own hand weeks, months or even years after coming home. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have perpetuated this no differently. Military specialists try to understand why this happens and then offer some, often unsatisfactory, explanation to grieving families. Mental health professionals look to sometimes undiagnosed (or ignored) preexisting mental health conditions in suicidal soldiers as having provided a warning system. Others look to war trauma, particularly Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or PTSD, as the cause. Yet all of this looks at suicide after the fact, not before it happens.

In today's New York Times, a cover article by Erica Goode ("After combat, Victims of an Inner War") focuses on a particular group of soldiers from the 141st, who suffered four suicides upon returning home from Iraq. The unit experienced the death of two friends and colleagues just two weeks before they were to go home which some claim to have precipitated the suicides of the other four. The article also mentions that there had been impending divorce and/or claims of domestic disputes involving all four of the soldiers who committed suicide. In fact, at least one soldier -- who was in the midst of stressful divorce proceeding with a different woman with whom he had a child -- shot himself in the presence of his girlfriend in their home.

All of this leads to the question: can mediation help?

Mediation has long been a process used most frequently during the point at which conflict has already escalated. Yet there are those, myself included, who have advocated for the use of mediation in a more preventative way. In fact, like couple's therapy, mediation has the potential to avert irreconcilable breakdowns in relationships. The key shift that needs to occur, particularly with such a high stress population as soldiers returning home from war, is educating parties about the positive uses of mediation before things escalate.

One of the most frequent refrains involving the epidemic of suicidal soldiers is that most soldiers, by nature, don't seek help. In general, they tend to be more private and individualistic, thus relying on their own internal resources to get through stress and trauma. Preventative, facilitative mediation, then, might be the perfect process for this demographic. A focus on practical discussions and solutions with a key emphasis on self-determination could allow soldiers and their significant others a space in which to negotiate things before one leaves for war; or better yet, before one leaves for basic training. The military could make mediation mandatory for all soldiers, not just for those with husbands or wives. Such a process could be equally beneficial between the 18-year-old soldier and his or her parents as between the soldier-wife and her spouse. Married couples could negotiate means and frequency of contact between them and/or between a soldier and his or her children; something that would equally benefit soldiers who are separated or divorced from relationships involving children. The 18-year-old soldier and her parents could create a plan whereas the parents keep in contact with her friends, so as to ensure ongoing connection and support within her community.

There are countless possibilities of what could be discussed and addressed, plans that could be put in place in advance of combat, so soldiers could experience enduring connection to loved ones and so that those connections would have the greatest chance of sustainability upon a soldier's return. Mediation could take place via telephone, video conferencing or online chat during a soldier's tour of duty, to include negotiations regarding the school a child will attend that fall, for example, or when and how to celebrate a significant birthday, holiday or anniversary. Follow-up mediation could be required as part of re-entry after combat.

I suggest these steps not in place of therapy, but ideally in conjunction with therapy and/or for those soldiers who are distrustful of, or too proud for, therapy as a process. Culturally speaking, Americans have a tendency to wait until things have escalated before creating steps toward positive intervention. Mediation is just one of many measures that could be taken from a preventative standpoint for the well being of our soldiers and their families.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

The United States' Ugly Divorce ... and the remarriage to follow

2008-10-29T14:02:00.025-06:00

I haven't written in a while; since May to be exact. There's been stuff. Personal. Professional. Malaise has set in. A funk. I'd been blaming it on that "stuff," but now I have a more layered theory. You see, I'm not the only one with it. I'm not the only one who is distracted, maybe a little less energetic than usual, maybe a bit mopey, perhaps even pessimistic. Nope. There's a collective energy in the United States and it's down in the dumps.

I believe it has to do at least in part with our country's marriage to W. After 8 long years of marriage, now we're in the midst of a messy separation. Our housing is getting pulled out from under us. Our money is disappearing. Just when we thought it couldn't possibly get any uglier, our boss lays us off.

The thing is, though -- and what truly concerns me most -- is that we're already looking to a new spouse/partner/lover/significant other to save us; to make it all better. Regardless of our political preference, both candidates have been elevated to savior-like status relative to fixing the current state of funk in the United States. For many voters, there's that belief that once a new president is in place (i.e.: the divorce has been finalized), the malaise will be lifted, order restored, and money will be back in our pockets. I think this hope is particularly true in regard to those of us who are voting for Obama. In fact, many are outright afraid of the potential state of things to come if he is not elected.

Yet what if he is elected? The remarriage will be quick, instantaneous in fact, as the divorce from W. in January is finalized and Obama is sworn in just moments later. Remember, this has been an ugly, ugly separation. We've lost money, housing, and our pride, not to mention important friendships or friendly relations with other countries. I think many of us believe that the new marriage will make it all better. Yet it doesn't work that way. Any professional in the field of divorce knows that people are bound to repeat old patterns in new relationships, particularly if they re-marry quickly on the heels of a fresh -- and ugly -- divorce.

So we need to do ourselves and the new president a favor. We need to dig deep and consider what WE may have contributed to the current state of things in this country. Okay, yeah, sure W. certainly messed up a whole heck of a lot but didn't we make individual choices along the way? Any marriage is based on dynamics and patterns of interaction. Everyone brings baggage into that. How can we prevent that baggage from carrying over into the new presidency? If we don't consider this, we're bound to repeat at least some of the same mistakes we made in our last marriage. We did make choices. We can't pretend we didn't.

So let's remain hopeful about the positive ways in which a new president could lift this country, yet let's also take control of our own destiny. Yeah, there's "stuff" happening. It's hard to fight the funk right now. But neither Obama, nor McCain, could ever do it alone. We all want to feel better, but first we need to take a close look at the individual choices we've made that got us here. Then we need to put on our dancing shoes, our funky (rather than funk) music, with a smile and a nod for every single neighbor, family member, friend, and stranger who crosses our path because sometimes doing happy is the only way to make it be.

Digital Image Content © 2008 Alexander Yakovlev | Dreamstime.com.
All Rights Reserved

screening The Sari Soldiers in the classroom

2008-05-16T16:46:00.006-06:00

We had an interesting classroom discussion following the screening of The Sari Soldiers on Monday. You can read my previous post about the documentary here.

I'm going to attempt to discuss the classroom experience without giving away too much about the film. As I mentioned in my previous post, this is a film that really needs to be seen and I don't want to ruin that experience for anyone. At the same time, in the interest of exposing other teachers and conflict resolution professionals to this documentary, I think it's important to describe the ways in which the students interacted with it and how it informed other aspects of the course.

Immediately upon the conclusion of the film the students appeared as though they might burst from their seats with eagerness to express their thoughts about it. To put that into context, this was a group of graduate students from whom I had to pull words over and over again the first few weeks. Energy and enthusiasm increased over the course of the term, but this degree of engagement was on a whole other level all together. They had been moved by the film both as individuals and as a conflict resolution class and they were responding to it from a point of intersection between the two. The class discussion was more branched than linear, but I'll do my best to describe it.

One student said that "I kept waiting for the good guy to emerge ..." and later he explained that "people could see each perspective and decide for themselves." Essentially, to this student, the filmmaker had presented all sides equally. Others wholeheartedly agreed.

There were questions about what has since happened to the women who were featured in the movie. There were questions about the current state of Nepal, the country in which the documentary is filmed.

The students talked about the strong women who were highlighted in the movie, and wondered about the role of women in Nepal. One student referenced the readings we've been doing in the Handbook of Conflict Resolution edited by Deutsch and Coleman and explained: "it was interesting reading about different models of conflict resolution and particularly how the narrative model is about telling stories because that is what happens in this documentary. Even if it wasn’t part of the culture for women to have the strong role these women had, their stories have now been told and those stories are now part of the culture."

Many, if not all of the students agreed that the more violent scenes were filmed and edited with "tact" and "respect" for the people involved and to the conflict in general. A number of students were concerned that it might be hard to obtain justice for all the families whose loved ones were "disappeared."

Finally, they inquired as to when they might see the documentary become available to rent or buy. Many wanted to watch it again and to show it to friends, spouses, classmates and numerous others. They laughed when I explained that I had "negotiated" for an early copy of the documentary given that we had spent a good deal of class time developing their negotiating knowledge. I responded with well, you gotta use the skills you have.

This movie made real previous class discussions about negotiation, power, gender roles & conflict, justice, moral exclusion, caste and class based discrimination, revenge, forgiveness, human rights, oppression, intractable conflict and various other essential concepts for understanding conflict and conflict resolution.

This movie is important to the field of conflict resolution, but more importantly, perhaps, is that it's just a darn good film with relevancy across numerous contexts.

The Sari Soldiers: A documentary that every conflict resolution professional and student of conflict resolution needs to see

2008-05-06T19:18:00.008-06:00

According to the Butter Lamp Films, LLC website: “Filmed over three years during the most historic and pivotal time in Nepal’s modern history, The Sari Soldiers is an extraordinary story of six women’s courageous efforts to shape Nepal’s future in the midst of an escalating civil war against Maoist insurgents, and the King’s crackdown on civil liberties.” The website goes on to describe it in further detail, illustrating the complexities of the stories that were captured in this film. Yet there are ways in which writing about it cannot do this documentary justice. This is truly a film that needs to be seen – I’ve already seen it twice.

The first time I watched this documentary it was at an intimate screening that I attended with a filmmaker friend who is friends with the director and co-producer of The Sari Soldiers. I knew nothing about the film, had no expectations going into it, and just kept thinking while I was watching it this is huge for the field of conflict resolution. Unlike most documentaries -- particularly ones made by American directors -- I could find no hidden or outspoken agenda in this film. There were six interwoven stories seen through the eyes of six strong and unique women, all told with equal parts empathy. Combined, these stories revealed what conflict resolution professionals have known for years: there can be multiple truths to any conflict. My first viewing took place last fall and since then I have worked to bring this documentary into my graduate studies course in conflict resolution. With permission of the filmmaker and distributor, I will be showing this movie to my students in class next week.

The course I teach is essentially a survey of conflict resolution theory and application, yet I have pushed them toward learning some of the more complex concepts within the field. We began with some foundational learning and conflict resolution basics (win/win, integrative vs. distributive) but in recent weeks have moved on to discussions about culture and bias in conflict resolution, intractable conflict, and next week, international and religious conflict resolution. I believe that over the previous seven, pretty intense weeks, we have created a safe but challenging learning environment where each student has something valuable to contribute. I have warned them that The Sari Soldiers is intense and at times graphic but I am confident that together we can handle anything that comes up for them during and after the in-class screening.

I would not show this movie to every group of conflict resolution students in every possible context, yet I truly believe that every student of conflict resolution must see it. Therein lies a contradiction of sorts, but like with this documentary, seemingly opposite realities can be simultaneously true. Perhaps a documentary filmmaker and a conflict resolution professor or professional are not that different. Both must develop relationships and earn trust of participants, and both must know when to get out of their way. A project is oftentimes most successful when we create a space in which participants can safely speak for themselves. That is the gift that this documentary gives to the field of conflict resolution and it is something I hope to extend throughout the rest of this course.

The Sari Soldiers will be having its North American Premiere at the Human Rights Watch International Film Festival in New York City in June, and is going to be the "Center Piece" Film for the festival. Go to www.hrw.org/iff/2008/ny for more information. The Sari Soldiers will soon be released on DVD through Women Make Movies.

I will post a follow-up after the in-class screening.

remembering a friend and colleague

2008-04-11T07:02:00.004-06:00

Most mediators probably didn't know Sherri Bilinski. She had been mediating for less than 4 years. We had started mediating custody and visitation cases for the courts in Chicago within weeks of one another in the spring of '04. While I had been mediating for some time, Sherri had been a therapist previously and mediation was new to her. You wouldn't have known it, though. After going through an outside 40-hour training and some internal training, Sherri got the process deep down in her bones. More importantly, she was damn good at it.

At the age of 53, Sherri died in her sleep of natural causes either late on Friday, March 28th or in the early morning hours of the 29th. She had been having escalating health issues, but nothing that appeared life threatening. While I had been worrying about her for some time, her death still came as a major shock. Perhaps most difficult was that I received the news from a friend at my old workplace, Sherri's employer, 1 hour before I was to attend a wake for my closest childhood friend's father. There's just nothing that can prepare you for that.

In addition to being a wonderful therapist, mediator, and friend, Sherri was also an artist, although she hadn't painted for some time. She had recently been able to read again as her pain finally lessened enough for her to concentrate on written words. I had given her the book Kite Runner two years ago and she called me sometime in February to tell me that she had finally read it and to exclaim over what a gift it had been -- both the act of reading and the brilliance of the book itself.

Sherri's home and office were decked in shades of purple with lavender in its various forms throughout. She had hoped to be able to dance again one day. She went out for a drink after work with a few of us one time, something that took a lot out of her. It was nice to see the sparkle it brought her, though, despite the effort it took. I think of her when I am cooking, because there were many evenings when we'd talk on the phone while I was making dinner ("What is Miss Laura cooking tonight?" she'd ask. She never did get a taste of my homemade bread). I miss her when I smell lavender. When I hear someone laugh, I realize I will never again hear hers. Her sense of humor was vast and it sustained us both through some shared, and some individual, personal and professional challenges. There were days when we talked on the phone for hours.

I didn't get to say goodbye to Sherri -- we had exchanged voicemail virtually every day the week leading up to her death -- but I had spent a day with her a few weeks earlier helping her get to and from a medical appointment. Her strength that day, and every day that I knew her, was subtle, beautiful, and human. She felt things deeply and spoke with honesty. She showed kindness and respect to others but could also be like "a lioness protecting her cubs" as she sometimes put it, when someone did her, or someone she loved, wrong.

There's no way to fill the space left by Sherri's death. Many of us lost a great friend. The field of Conflict Resolution lost a terrific mediator. I feel like I should close with something funny, but that was always Sherri's role. Instead, I'll close my eyes, smell some lavender, and think brilliant purple thoughts in her honor.

"Man up": What's Gender Got to Do With It?

2008-02-27T07:47:00.010-06:00

I've been hearing people say "man up" for about a year now. Well, not "people" exactly as in lots of them, but more like twenty or thirty-something men and women. It reminded me of the phrase "be a man" that I often heard as a kid, so I became curious and did some "research" via Google.

According to Urban Dictionary, an online site where anyone can post a slang word or phrase along with its definition and then have it approved or disapproved by users (with potentially competing definitions) the following are the top 4 definitions for "man up":

1)Don't be a pussy, brave it, be daring.
Example:
"Hey man, finish this bowl."
"No dude, I'm baked as it is."
"Come on pussy, man up."

2)to fulfill your responsibilities as a man, despite your insecurities and constant ability to place yourself in embarrassing and un-manly scenarios.
Example:
Paul forcefully imposed the bet on everyone, yet he was the first to fail miserably on the very challenge he had conjured up.
Paul must now man up and meet his own challenge.

3)A reminder, usually to a man, to maintain or resume his assigned place within patriarchy. A reminder to a man never to show uncertainty, express feelings or emotion, display lack of skill, give any indication of empathy, give voice to pain or suffering, or otherwise act like a human being rather than an automaton.
Example:
Sergeant: Kill those people, Private.
Private: But they're all unarmed civilians - mostly women, old people, and children!
Sergeant: MAN UP, Private!
Private: Yes sir! *opens fire*

4)Be strong
Take control, take control of a (the) situation, be strong, rise to the moment

I found these definitions pretty interesting and consistent with the context in which I had been hearing them. Yet I was still curious about the origins of the phrase. I dug a little deeper and found additional information about "man up", even a book with the phrase in the title. The book: Man Up: Nobody is Coming to Save Us by Steve Perry is described on Amazon as: "...a hard hitting, introspective look into what the Black community must do to save itself. Finally, a voice speaks to the complex relationship between personal and community responsibility." I also found "Man UP Sweepstakes" offered by Mike and Mike on ESPN and an article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette entitled "It's time to 'man up' from Friday, February 08, 2008. The article reads in part:

I had a conversation with Lee Davis a few nights ago. Lee, 35, is an outreach coordinator with Community Empowerment Association. He works with about two dozen young people and their families to try to keep the youth on track. After last week's horrific violence, I wanted to get some perspective from someone has a nonstop close-up view of what's happening with our youth. It was just a conversation; I wasn't interviewing him for a story. But when I asked him where the fathers are in these kids' lives, his answer went straight into my heart, with no need to take notes: "The men are hiding," he said ... I've received at least three copies of an email from CEA head Rashad Byrdsong that reads in part: "Now, more than ever, we need Black men to 'Man Up', 'Take Your Place' and begin to address this issue of black on black violence in our community. There needs to be a collective strategy and purpose on how best to engage black youth and men who continue to perpetuate genocide against one another.

Instead of answering all of my questions, however, this research has only led to more questions. For example, when I've heard the phrase "man up" used by white twenty-somethings it has sounded more like the "be a man," of my childhood and somewhat like the definitions provided on Urban Dictionary. The book and the post in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, however, seem to use the phrase as a rallying point for black men, a different context and usage. Perhaps that is where the phrase has its origins, within the black community, as it seems is so often the case with "slang" that becomes mainstream. Maybe readers could clarify this.

Keeping all of the definitions in mind, I began to think about the ways in which any of this relates to mediation. Undoubtedly, gender plays a big role in court-related disputes, particularly custody and visitation disputes. While many argue that the court system has caught up with the times and judges are no longer biased against men, others will argue equally hard that judges always favor women. There are "father's rights" attorneys who share this very perspective that women are always favored. Such attorneys offer fathers something that they argue will not be an inherent part of the process but instead is something for which an attorney must fight on behalf of a client. As a mediator, I'm going to choose to stay neutral on this part of the discussion. I bring it up, however, because it fits into a larger conversation about gender and its relationship to mediation.

The increasing popularity of the phrase "man up" raises some questions of which mediators should be aware. There seems to be a blurry line between "man up" as a plea for one --usually a man -- to take ownership or responsibility for his actions or the actions of his community, versus the expectation of a man to be without feelings of fear or self-doubt (anger is okay) and/or to preserve his position at all costs.

What expectations or bias will the female disputant have within the context of the mediation process and how do we balance that during the course of the mediation? That is, what if the mother keeps throwing things out there like: "I carried this baby for 9 months and you didn't" or "A child needs to be with his mom." How do we as mediators create the space for other perceptions without appearing biased toward one party or the other? What if a father believes that if he doesn't fight for exactly 50% of the time with his child then he is not being man enough? Do we as mediators need to address gender perceptions that enter the room not just by remaining neutral ourselves, but also by somehow contextualizing the clients' experiences and assumptions? If so, how do we do that without appearing as though we are taking sides? How do we do it without actually taking sides?

Given that mediators ourselves are human, and that we don't live in a vacuum, we need to understand the foundation for our own perceptions so that we may be aware of where we sit in this continuum of expectation regarding male behavior. We need to understand this in order to better understand our clients. Do we expect men to "brave it" and "be daring" at all times? Do we believe men should always be "strong" and "in control?" Whether we are conscious of it or not, the way in which we were raised and the relationships we have with both men and women, inform our perceptions and expectations. If a man cries during a mediation session, will a female mediator have to respond differently than would a male mediator in order to keep from appearing biased? How might that inform the experience for both parties?

The main idea that resonates for me in considering the phrase "man up" is that more than anything it is a reminder. It reminds me that I grew up at a time when boys -- not just men -- were told to "be a man" and perhaps that was positive at times and perhaps at times it was harmful. It's a reminder that things haven't changed a whole lot. Also, probably most importantly, it reminds me that whatever exists out in the world always enters the mediation room in some form or other. Understanding "man up" seems essential to fully comprehending, challenging, and balancing expectations of men, particularly when it comes to parenting disputes.

"Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved".

Ignoring Expectations and Limitations in Relationships: The Sleeping Bear Dunes Metaphor

2008-01-08T14:52:00.003-06:00

Sleeping Bear Dunes in Michigan is a pretty amazing destination. I haven't been there in a while, but I got to thinking about it again. I found myself walking down a long flight of steps to the lake during yesterday's particularly balmy January weather. After about an hour of observing the water, clouds, and sand crashing and whistling against one another, with a storm just on the horizon, I finally made the trek back up those stairs to the street. Going down had been easy. It's going up that made me sweat. This reminded me of Sleeping Bear Dunes.

When I went with my partner to Sleeping Bear Dunes over 3 years ago we drove and then hiked a short way on a relatively flat trail to find ourselves at the top of a dune with a magnificent view of the lake. I can't recall the exact trail* or the location, but it was stunning and we were up rather high. We didn't notice it at first but after some time had passed and the sky had begun to darken, we walked further across the top of the dune and could see it in its entirety from another angle. It was then that we realized people had climbed down the steep dune to the lake, and many were now struggling to get back up. People were at various stages of climbing, some sitting in exhaustion very close to the top, some kicking with all their might at the bottom, slowing their pace as their struggle upward made almost no progress. We were a distance away from them, comfortably standing at the top of the dune, the light slowly fading, and it appeared as though there were people of all ages and physical conditions attempting to climb back up. No one at this point was climbing down.

We stood there for a long time, fascinated. What would happen if they didn't get to the top before the sun completely disappeared? There was only one way out unaided, and that was to climb back up the dune. The only other way out, I overheard someone saying, was to be rescued by boat, something that would cost the stranded hiker or hikers a significant amount of money.

I thought about the joy they must have felt running, rolling and sliding down that dune to the lake. How wonderful and freeing. How very much like falling in love. And like falling in love, once the falling part was over suddenly, it all just got harder. They couldn't stay at that fallen place. It was not a destination point. Yet I would bet that none of them thought that the hike back to the top would be that challenging or considered how long it might take to get back up (hours for most folks, I was told). Few, if any, had probably trained for it. Most probably expected that it wouldn't be that hard. They merely fell, and enjoyed the quick fall, until they stopped, looked back, and discovered there was a mountain suddenly between them and living. They had to climb up that dune or pay the price for a rescue.

Often when meeting with clients in mediation it becomes immediately clear that they met, fell in love, got married or moved in together, all very quickly, and were surprised to find themselves in my office, discussing the dissolution of the relationship. I often ask clients if they ever discussed the expectations they had for their lives together both as an individual and as part of a couple prior to making a commitment to be together forever. The answer is always no. It just happened, they tell me. They fell in love. They decided to be together. They thought they were on the same page about things. They weren't. Assumptions were made. Then they dug their feet further and further into the sand, neither of them making any progress upward.

Of course the relationship didn't work, I tell them. Even the kindest, most thoughtful, smartest people in the world cannot be successful in anything involving another person without first being honest about one's own limitations, the limitations of the other person, and the expectations both individuals have of each other. At the very least, even if a couple fails to communicate honestly about this at the beginning of their relationship, it has to happen somewhere along the way and adjustments have to be made accordingly. It's fun to slide down a sand dune, but if your calves aren't strong enough to get you back to the top, what do you really think is going to happen?

Falling is easy. It's also quick. It's in the climbing that we struggle and grow (or we pay lots of money to a mediator, attorney, or other professional to get us out of this sandy mess, to whisk us away in a boated rescue).

*The trail I'm referring to should not be confused with the "Dune Climb." In that climb the parking lot is situated at the bottom of the dune so the hike up is first and coming down returns one to one's car. The hike I'm describing was the opposite of that where the cars/parking were at the top of the dune with a trail along the top. For those who decided to go down the dune, there was no way to get back to your car (or to civilization) except to climb back up to the top.

Britney Mania: Let's Stop Pretending It's About the Kids

2008-01-04T18:37:00.000-06:00

I've never paid much attention to Britney Spears. It's been virtually impossible not to know about her recent deterioration, however, upon which the media so gleefully reports. The questions and statements are made: "What's led to Britney's strange behavior?" "Will she lose custody of her kids?"

Mostly I've ignored the hype. To me, she's a kid in trouble struggling with raising kids of her own. To the media, she's gossip, a way to make a buck or two, or more simply put: "entertainment." Today things have been taken to a whole other level and I just can't ignore it anymore because, well, kids are seriously being harmed. Since turning on the news at 5PM I've seen reporting that has been virtually non-stop Britney. Sorry, Barack, but your Iowa caucus success has just been bumped.

If you don't know why there's been so much focus on Britney today, then just turn on the TV or Google her name. You'll get more than enough information as to what happened last night, something to which I do not want to contribute.

What I will contribute is this: stop the Britney madness people ("people" meaning "the media" and all those consuming what is being spewed)! At the very least please understand the seriously negative impact this sort of press is having on our children ("our" meaning children being raised in the United States). Britney may be in emotional trouble. She may have a substance abuse problem. To me it is a chicken and egg question. Is the media merely reporting on her problem, or is the media contributing to it?

I strongly believe that children benefit from having a relationship with both of their parents with the exception of those parents who have physically, sexually, and/or emotionally harmed them. "Emotional abuse" is one of those challenging and subjective concepts parents use when they're angry at each other and they're slinging dirt in both directions. I believe it also actually exists at times but I'm not going to get into that right now. At any rate, in my admittedly limited observations, I have seen no indication that Britney has been abusive to her children in any of the aforementioned ways. Yet her ex, Federline, and his attorneys recently filed to keep Britney from having ANY contact with her children.

Yes, she has made stupid decisions. It appears as though she may need professional help of some kind. Yet threaten to take children away from almost any parent (male or female) and watch the sparks fly. What's going on with her strange behavior? Need that question seriously be asked?

Federline might be a better parent. So be it. I don't know. It's not for me to decide. Yet better or worse, aren't both parents important? I do know this: the kids are losing, over and over again. When will parents get it? It's destructive conflict that destroys all of us in the end.

A custody battle is ugly. A custody battle being broadcast daily across every possible media outlet inflicts irreparable harm not only upon Britney's children, but upon every child over whom parents are fighting in court. Just stop! There are alternatives. Please just stop it already!

Add a "t" to "mediation" to get "meditation"

2007-11-29T12:57:00.001-06:00

I don't think it's merely coincidence, semantics, or alliteration that has people frequently confusing meditation with mediation. On more than one occasion upon learning the nature of my business, individuals have asked me if I offer yoga. Now that would be interesting. I stop myself from imagining clients stretched out on yoga mats doing downward facing dog pose in my office pontificating on why they would be the better residential parent for the children. On the other hand, perhaps that is worth imagining:

The client takes a deep breath ... "because they've always been with me ..." stretches further ... "because I understand them and am better equipped to care for their needs ..." sigh ... " and because ..." a release of air so as to remove the weight of the world from his or her shoulders ... "what was I saying?"

Creative visualizations and alphabet soup aside, I do believe there are some important and fundamental similarities between mediation and meditation particularly from the standpoint of being the mediator. Both meditation and mediation require one to be fully present while also remaining somewhat removed and not emotionally invested in an outcome. A mediator must be conscious and observant of her thoughts and emotions without acting upon them, as one must do while meditating. Meditators and mediators must exist on a higher level of consciousness without judgment of oneself or others, at least for the duration of their practice or session. Given all of that, it seems that meditating and mediating would be complementary practices. So why, I have recently begun to wonder, did I stop meditating upon becoming a full-time mediator?

Both my practice of mediation and meditation evolved gradually, over a lifetime. Meditation probably began with a childhood anxiety-related belly ache being eased by soft breaths of relaxation blown toward my abdomen by my mother. She was less subtle at times, leaving meditation tapes on my desk or books about stretching on my bed. Eventually all the relaxation, creative visualization, stretching, and yoga I learned evolved into an unstructured but relatively successful practice of meditation.

I began mediating early too. My parents owned a Jeep Cherokee before car seats, seat belts, and booster seats were proven to save lives. My mom and the mothers of my two best friends, Brad and Jeff, would alternate driving the three of us to and from preschool. When my mom picked us up at the end of the (undoubtedly) long (3 hour?) school day, we'd race into the Jeep to the "way back" and clamor for a seat on the "bumps." While on the exterior of the Jeep these bumps were the rear wheels, on the interior they created perfect chairs for two of us. The last one in had to sit on my dad's metal toolbox, a most undesirable position.

On the fateful day about which I write, Brad and I landed "the bumps" and a very unhappy Jeff got stuck with the toolbox. Jeff immediately grabbed Brad and attempted to pull him off his bump seat. This was against the rules. Whoever got there first got the seat. That's how it had always worked. For whatever reason, Jeff wasn't having it that day. The boys struggled and I yelled at them to stop, jumped off my seat, and pulled them apart. Disgusted, I told Jeff to take my bump and Brad to return to his. I was also secretly proud of myself. I had gotten them to stop beating on each other.

Then as now, truth and justice have always been important to me and I believe this drove my quest to become a mediator. Justice is elusive and slippery, but through my role as a mediator I get to participate in a process that allows for an unfolding of what those in conflict come to define for themselves as fair, good, and right. Like justice, inner peace is larger than our individual selves; it is something with no clear beginning or end. Yet we all know it when we feel it, if only for a fleeting moment.

So why did I stop meditating about 3 1/2 years ago, right around the time I began mediating custody and visitation disputes full-time? I can't say for certain. Perhaps it's because "neutrality hurts my psyche" as I blogged about previously. In having to create a neutral space for others, perhaps it has become more difficult to create the same space for myself via meditation. Or maybe I'm just afraid of what I'll hear when I'm silent, like our clients are so often afraid of the truths of which the other party might speak. Once we hear something and know it, aren't we then required to act upon this knowledge? An empty space with no judgment is scary because when we have no reason to defend ourselves we become vulnerable.

All I know for certain is that I miss it. It's time to break out those relaxation tapes (now where did I store the Boom box?) and evolve my practice of meditation once more.

Calendars: how else would we remember that another year has passed?

2007-11-15T17:06:00.001-06:00

It's November and calendars are making their yearly appearance in abundance. There's the small flip calendar I keep on my desk with its handy reminder to reorder. When I walk into Borders or Barnes & Noble or any bookstore chain, plastic wrapped calendars of kittens climbing trees or Bart Simpson flipping Homer the bird remind me that 2008 is almost here. Then there's the over-sized calendar I keep to use with clients. It's large so parents can see it without having to sit too close together when deciding who will spend what holiday where.

Calendars make me think of 3 important things: 1) holidays 2) unfinished business 3) new beginnings. Halloween gets a good amount of airtime in stores and on the television. Thanksgiving definitely tops Halloween. Christmas takes the cake. New Years? It does pretty well for itself. Holidays make me think of family, festivities and food. When it comes to mediating with clients, however, holidays elicit thoughts of change, pain and loss. For most of my clients, this is THE FIRST. It's the first Thanksgiving, Christmas, etc., without everyone together. It is often the first time they have to spend a holiday without their child. Holidays are complicated because, regardless of how well you get along with your family, how much you all love and appreciate each other, how many years have passed since so and so disappointed/betrayed/hurt/ignored so and so, family stuff runs deeper than words even as we take the good with the bad. For newly separated or divorced families, life is raw and holidays are the open wound.

There also seems to be an amazing amount of pressure to finish things by December 31st. It's in November and December that we begin reflecting on our year. What did I say I would accomplish this year? What exactly did I accomplish? For those who feel they've done pretty well in fulfilling personal goals, November and December allow for that extra push: it's all gravy, so to speak. For those of us who haven't even come close to accomplishing what we had hoped for the year, November and December become a haunting nag.

The good news is that January is right around the corner -- 3) new beginnings -- allowing us every opportunity to further screw-up or improve upon that which we will believe matters in January but no longer does by December. The truth is, none of us have that much control over how our year will turn out. Goals are great. Sometimes, however, realizing which goals to let go is even better.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Trick or Treat: What might we be missing when we put on our mediator "mask?"

2007-10-31T09:52:00.002-06:00

I grew up in the suburbs of Massachusetts where virtually all our neighbors participated in Halloween. We didn't live in one of the favored subdivisions where houses were close together and kids ruled, a perfect Halloween combination. Instead, we had to walk a significant distance between homes. In other words, we had to earn our candy.

We knew most of our neighbors but there were a couple of houses that turned over frequently or were rentals. We approached one such house on a Halloween night and rang the doorbell. My older sister or a friend accompanied me (I can't remember who). No one came to the door. We rang the bell again. "I hear them," I said. "Me too." There were lights on in the home. We knew they were there. Eventually a guy answered the door, saw us and said, "Oh." A woman stood behind him. They were probably in their twenties but to me they were adults and that's all that really mattered. We were kids. They were adults. We dressed up and yelled "trick or treat" and they gave us candy. It was a contract of sorts and we had already fulfilled our part. The man said he'd be right back and closed the door.

We stood there, waiting. Eventually, my sister or friend, whoever was with me, got bored and said we should go. "No," I replied, "he said he'd be right back." We stood and waited. It was a long walk to the next house. After a few more appeals for us to leave by my companion, I finally relented. I don't remember which direction we went next, what costumes we were wearing, my favorite candy that year, all the various homes we went to or the kind offerings from the people inside them, or even who was with me that night. I just remember those unfulfilled promises from that one stop among many that evening.

I like to think that as an adult I have learned to look at things more broadly, to see the gray as much as the black and white. I still have expectations of others as well as personal hopes and desires, but I can also now recognize those same things in other people.

Yet I also feel that it is my job as a mediator to be constantly challenging myself, to question what I know or think that I know. I wonder: what might I be missing when I put on my mediator "mask?" Sure, I'm always a mediator. It's inherent to who I am at this point in my life. Yet there's also a formal aspect to the profession that I can't deny. There are clients, written contracts, payments made. So, what expectations do parties have of me prior to even contacting me? Once they do contact me, have I fulfilled those expectations and/or provided them with sufficient information to accurately know what to expect? What are my expectations of them and have I made those expectations clear? Do we agree on everything, and if not, did we successfully negotiate changes regarding our expectations of one another?

I was disappointed that Halloween evening many years ago when the occupants of that house failed to fullfill my expectations of them. Perhaps I was even angry. The memory of that night has remained with me into adulthood. In fact, I still recall it every Halloween. It is a healthy reminder to be cautious about, and to refrain as much as possible from, placing unspoken expectations onto others. A child's belief that the world revolves around her is expected, understood, and forgiven due to age, but the same behavior in adults is ugly.

Parties in conflict have a tendency to regress; to see their perspective, assumptions, and expectations as the truth or as the only reality. It is our job as mediators to allow and create space for all perspectives and to keep our own assumptions in check.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

A TV Mediator?

2007-10-29T17:03:00.001-06:00

A few weeks ago, I went to see my dentist who mentioned a show in which one of the characters is a mediator. He told me the name of the show which I promptly forgot. Last week I was scanning On Demand when I came across "Carpoolers." ABC describes it as follows:

"Four guys who carpool to work every day come to savor their commute as the only safe time to commiserate about jobs, families - and secrets. Even though 'what happens in the carpool stays in the carpool,' they'll go beyond the boundaries of this fast-moving commuter confessional to get involved in each other's lives and develop friendships."

It sounded familiar so I decided to watch an episode. I quickly discovered that one of the "four guys" was a mediator, and, as it turns out, another was a dentist.

After watching the first episode I came to a few conclusions: 1) The show is relatively funny at times 2) I hope no one mediates like him (he had a child in the room when parents were yelling at each other, he allowed interruptions by outside parties, etc.) 3) The one family of color on the show is stereotypically portrayed with a house full of 7 out-of control-children and a presumably lazy African-American wife (we only ever see her legs) who watches TV all day while her husband carpools to the office (he's not the mediator or the dentist and it's not clear what he does for his profession).

While I was excited to discover that mediation had "evolved" to a legitimate enough profession to be portrayed on TV, I was disappointed with the product. Come on: mediators aren't like that! I guess I can finally truly empathize with doctors, lawyers, detectives and criminal investigators. Yet what does it mean that the only mediator currently portrayed on TV airs on a sitcom rather than a television drama. Are we not ER/Law & Order/CSI worthy? Is our profession not to be taken seriously? Generally speaking, mediators love drama and have a lousy sense of humor.

Is this character misplaced or apropos?

photo borrowed from abc.com

To Niche or Not to Niche ...

2007-10-14T11:28:00.001-06:00

Much of the literature on marketing a mediation practice strongly suggests finding a niche and sticking with it. If you have experience with families, focus on divorce mediation. If you have experience with insurance claims, stick with mediating insurance claims. This makes a lot of sense from a marketing standpoint. People are going to want to hire a mediator who has accumulated experience in a particular specialty area related to their conflict, right? That's what we're told at least.

Here's my problem with that advice; it may (and I suggest does) lead to stagnation within individual mediators and therefore within the field itself. Yes, it's important both ethically and professionally that a mediator have appropriate skills and experience mediating particular issues in particular kinds of cases. What about mediators who have experience, education, skills and training within a variety of mediation settings? The advice is still the same: if you want your mediation practice to be successful, you must specialize.

That, in my opinion, has more to do with the way in which mediators are choosing to market their practice than about potential loss in quality of service. Mediators have been led to believe that non-mediators are too clueless about mediation to be capable of successfully and independently choosing the professional with the style/approach/skills most appropriate for their conflict. We make it easy for them by starting our independent businesses, practices or consulting engagements by "choosing" and marketing an area of specialty that a) exists in a context in which we are familiar i.e. comfortable, but not necessarily one we favor b) has the largest pool of potential clients to which we can successfully sell our services. It's as if mediators feel we need to grab what we can, as if there were a finite number of conflicts in the world.

As mediators, we may save money in marketing costs and business development by targeting a particular audience or context for our services, but what do we lose? More importantly, what do our clients lose when we specialize?

I have recently added the title of Professor to my list of various employment roles. Through teaching I am re-learning everything that I was taught years ago. Through the eyes of my students, I see the vast array of possibilities within the conflict resolution field that the actual work of trying to make a living off my profession had begun to hammer out of me.

In class this week we were discussing what might qualify a mediator to work with them if they were parties in mediation. Many of the students said that they would not only look for an experienced mediator, but would seek one with experience particular to the contextual area in which their conflict was taking place (employment, family, etc). One student raised his hand and said that he would want the opposite. He would want a mediator with a variety of mediation experiences because it would only be through those experiences that the mediator would have developed a breadth of skills (I'm using my words to summarize his statement).

The mediation field is young enough that how we frame it now will determine how clients come to understand it later. If we tell clients that good mediators specialize, then that is what they will expect. If, on the other hand, we think back to how *most* of us learned how to mediate within a variety of contexts and settings, we may remember that cross-contextual mediation pushed us and challenged us to become good at what we did. Specialization and niche marketing encourages mediators to remain within their comfort zone which, I would hazard to say, may lead to mediator shortcuts and an absence of creativity in the application of techniques.

Specialization usually equates with expertise. If someone is a specialist in a particular area than they know how best to provide services in that area. In my opinion, that is not entirely true with mediation. While, as I stated, mediators must absolutely have experience, education, training, etc., within the context and/or setting in which they are mediating, a presumed "expertise" may also prevent mediators from challenging themselves. One way in which to ensure professional growth in such a dynamic field as mediation is for mediators to push themselves beyond what feels comfortable, automatic, and/or rote. Yes, every case is different regardless of whether or not the context or setting stays the same. Yet mediator "style" rarely shifts, changes, or expands within a particular setting, and this is a hazard within the field.

If we have a problem with our foot, we go to a podiatrist. If we have cancer, we don't just want a cancer doctor, but a doctor who specializes in the particular type of cancer with which we've been afflicted. We choose these specialists because the variability in most professions is more finite. The goal in most fields is to limit, categorize, and narrow in order to apply previous learning to current solutions. In mediation, the variability is infinite from moment to moment, person to person, and the goal is often to expand possible options and relevant solutions. If you are doing the same kinds of cases over and over again, it is difficult to not narrow and categorize and therefore apply blanket solutions to every situation that may appear similar. In mediation, expanding rather than narrowing is what most often leads to successful resolution. I would argue that being open-minded going into a mediation, a necessary state of mind for success, is a function of the variety and breadth of experiences we have as mediators. As mediators, our role is to ensure that we are always creating space. We limit and shrink as a matter of mediator strategy, not as a matter of course.

Mediating in a variety of contexts and settings reminds us that there is always more to know, ways to be better, new strategies to employ. That is what is essential to building a successful mediation practice. If you're a mediator who is willing to push and challenge yourself in constant learning, able to recognize your strengths and weaknesses, and willing to seek out the knowledge that you don't have, the clients will find you.

I'd love to hear what other mediators think about this.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

One Divorce Reality

2007-09-28T11:53:00.000-06:00

MTV's Life of Ryan stars 17-year-old professional skateboarder, Ryan Sheckler. Ryan is handsome and sweet and good at his sport, which makes the show interesting to teen viewers. He is also a child of a recent divorce, which has made the show interesting for me. In fact, I would go so far as to say that this series is a "must see" for anyone working with families around divorce.

When the audience is first introduced to Ryan, his two younger brothers (age 15 and 8), his mom, and his Dad, we quickly learn that his parents have been divorced for less than a year. The children reside primarily with their mother but spend time with their dad also. They must navigate birthdays and holidays including Christmas with this new family configuration. A portion of each episode focuses on the important role Ryan's Dad has played in his life (through childhood videos and Ryan's voice-over narrative). Everyone is struggling with "moving on." The show explores the implication that has for both parents around dating, and subsequent consequences for the kids.

It is hard not to recognize the ways in which the kids, particularly Ryan, the oldest, are often put in the position of caring emotionally for one or both parents. Ryan struggles to be a "normal" kid, not just within the context of being a professional skateboarder and the resulting pressures that surround him, but also because he a huge heart. Ryan wants to fill the hole that the divorce has left within the family: to be a support to his mom, a father figure to his younger brothers, and perhaps most intensely, to make his dad proud.

The Life of Ryan is one slice of one family at one particular point in time. Hardly has a reality TV snapshot ever been more poignant or real.

*Photo borrowed from MTV.com

sometimes you step in it

2007-09-12T11:35:00.001-06:00

At a 4-year-old’s birthday party this weekend, I came upon an accident immediately after it had happened. One child chose a high-traffic staircase to the backyard as his resting place. The bottom stair upon which he was sitting became his seat and table both, his colorfully frosted piece of chocolate birthday cake snug beside him. Another child, blinded by her own gi-normous piece of cake, flew down the stairs. Her foot went in, the boy yelled: "she stepped in my cake!", and the adults rallied with paper towels and a new slice. All was good in the universe once more.

Monday, I started teaching that graduate course about which I blogged. I arrived early so I could get a key to the building where my mailbox was located, pick up some papers, and prepare for the evening ahead. I also had to get my faculty photo ID from Human Resources. As I stepped off the elevator and into the hall, I noticed that my foot was sticking to the floor. There was a bathroom right next to the elevator, so I slipped inside. Once in a stall, I lifted the offending shoe and was not surprised to see a big hunk of gum stuck to the bottom. The situation was remedied with some toilet paper and patient scraping off of the dirty-minted item. Moments later I had my photo taken.

In September 2001, I began working as a Peer Mediation Coordinator at a middle-school in Dorchester, Massachusetts. It was my first week, and while I had a good amount of experience working with youth and mediating, I was nervous. The morning of my second or third day, I was sitting in my office when I noticed an unpleasant yet familiar odor. I told myself it couldn't possibly be. Then I checked. Yes, on the bottom of my shoe a relatively fresh layer of dog shit was caked inside the crevice. I hop/walked down the hall as quickly as possible putting my weight on the other shoe, and entered the dirtiest, seldom occupied faculty/staff bathroom I could find. I took off the shoe, put it in the sink, and let soap and water work its magic. I left the bathroom, relieved to have averted a potential disaster: kids would not have been afraid to vocalize the stink. Less than a week later, the Twin Towers came crashing down; a plane flew into the Pentagon, and another plane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. My anxiety about making a good impression in a new work setting seemed minuscule, even irrelevant, in comparison.

Three shoes. Three messes.

We don't know what our clients have stepped in, literally or figuratively, before they walk through the door. We don't know the impact that their footsteps may have had on others along the way. We merely know what they choose to tell us. We also know that, try as we might to do everything perfectly, we may find that the shit we stepped in before the mediation still enters the room, despite our best attempts at hiding it, cleaning it off, or fixing it. We don't know what events might happen later that day or the next day or the following week that could impact the parties' perspectives or our own. We do our best. We dodge what we can. Yet there will always be those days when we just can't keep from stepping in it.

Digital image content © 2007-2008 Laura L. Noah. All Rights Reserved.

What's in a Role?

2007-09-06T17:49:00.002-06:00

Over the past 3 years, I've had many roles. County employee. Business owner. Writer. Athlete. Partner. Aunt. Mediator. Daughter. Friend. The list goes on ... Over the next 3 years I will add many more.

When I work with divorcing clients, I think about all the roles they're leaving behind and all the new roles they'll be donning. Really, at any given moment, we're just a snapshot of who we are within an ever changing environment. Sometimes it's easy to shift between roles. Other times it's challenging, even exhausting. Also, particularly within a family context, it's often difficult to move out of a role or increase expression from within a new role because this can be met with resistance. Most organizations resist change. Most family "organizations" resist change even more.

When a family is going through divorce, it's almost like all of the pieces get thrown up in the air and the individual family members have to grab the ones they want, or dodge the ones they don't want. Sometimes one of the pieces lands flat on someone's head, regardless of interest. If one person has never paid bills, suddenly he or she must learn about finances. If one person has never cleaned a toilet, he or she may be dismayed to find him or herself leaning over the bowl. Often, one person will argue: "But he/she never had an interest in the kids before, now he/she is trying to be Mom/Dad of the year." Other times mediators might hear: "I tried to get him/her to work for years and now that we're divorcing, he/she finally makes an effort to find employment."

Yes, divorce changes things. Thinking about all this makes me want to become more conscious of the different roles I have chosen as well as the different roles I've inherited, been given, fell into, etc. I believe that one of the biggest mistakes we can make in our relationships is to become complacent regarding our role/s within them. While possibly uncomfortable and difficult, trying out new roles can also be invigorating and Challenging (with a capital "C").

I hope for my divorcing clients that at some point during or after the divorce process, they will embrace and even seek opportunities for new roles that the divorce creates. For the rest of us, myself included, I hope that we don't have to wait for such a life-changing event to evaluate and re-create the roles we want to play in our own lives.

Stop: considerations regarding what happens when I (we?) slow down

2007-09-06T16:42:00.001-06:00

Busy. Busy. More busy. I'm not the only one. So here's what happened when I slowed down a few times over the past couple of months:

1) I thoroughly enjoyed the feeling of homemade pizza dough (with an assist from my bread machine purchased for a mere $2.50 at a thrift shop this spring) between my fingers. It smelled delicious and tasted even better covered with feta, parm, sun-dried tomatoes, kalamata olives, and a mix of spices.

2) I found myself grinning for 2 straight minutes as I sat on a bench in Millennium Park watching a mix-matched group of cheerleaders with silver pom poms, black skirts, and pop music. These were not your Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders. There were men and women and they were fabulous.

3) Enjoyed an afternoon at the spa. Not a fancy $200/hour one but a down to earth, women owned, women attended, relaxation environment. I actually got to appreciate muscles I hadn't felt in months as they loosened and screamed out in agony: "I exist!".

So how do we, as mediators, encourage self-care in our clients when we're not always so good at it ourselves? If your clients are anything like mine, particularly when it comes to divorce or other family related conflicts, they're in desperate need of self-care. I use the word "self-care" to make it clear that I am in no way implying that we as mediators need to provide this for our clients. Yet we do have a responsibility to check in with them and to offer resources and ideas as to how they can take care of their needs during such a stressful time.

In my experience, one of the most important things is to remind clients that their needs do matter. You may think I'm crazy in even stating this since clients are so good at expressing what they want from the other party. That's not what I'm talking about. I mean that it's important to take some time and help clients slow down enough to consider how well they are sleeping, how often their heart is racing, what makes their blood boil over, etc. Spending some individual time with clients in helping them figure out their needs, and how they may access getting them filled, can go a long way in assisting them in resolving their conflict with the other party.

So that brings me back to my initial consideration. How well do we understand and satisfy (or even just scratch the surface of) our own "self-care" needs? In other words, what did you do on your summer vacation?

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Teaching Conflict Resolution

2007-09-06T15:54:00.001-06:00

Three weeks ago I agreed to teach a graduate level course in conflict resolution at a college west of Chicago. My life hasn't been the same since. Actually, the course doesn't start until September 10 but there's been no end to the preparation required. Mostly I've been having fun which is a fortunate consequence for me when involved with anything conflict resolution related. When I say "fun" I don't mean in the classic sense. I mean that it challenges me and keeps life interesting.

I haven't wanted to carbon copy previous syllabi (as good as they look) because I have different strengths and interests than previous instructors. Also, I want the students to feel enthusiastic about conflict resolution each week we meet, particularly when the term concludes, and that only has a chance of happening if I'm confident and interested in the material. At the very least, I don't want to create the kind of angst that Geoff Sharp referenced on July 26 described by blogger eliesheva in better than misery. At the time that I responded to eliesheva's post, I had no idea I'd be teaching two months later.

So what responsibility does a professor of conflict resolution have to his or her students? Is that responsibility any different than that of professors teaching other courses? These are questions I've been asking myself a lot lately, thanks in part to eliesheva's honest posts. I hope before, during, and after the term I'm able to answer them to the satisfaction of myself and my students.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Magic

2007-08-02T10:44:00.001-06:00

For my birthday this year I decided upon a week's vacation in Massachusetts with extended family. I woke up on the morning of the grand day with my niece and nephew's heads hanging over mine with excitement. They had both made me birthday gifts. My 5 and 5/12 year-old nephew (a budding math aficionado) handed me a bracelet he'd made out of a pipe cleaner. My 3-year-old niece gave me a magic wand she'd made out of a colored Popsicle stick, a pipe cleaner, and a sparkling red star. Better gifts I could not ask for. The last Harry Potter book was on its way to bookstores, and after living in tight quarters with extended family for a few days, we could all use some jewels and a little magic.

When parents are disputing over custody and visitation, I often talk individually to the children when they are between the ages of 4-17. The conversation is confidential unless the kids have information that they want me to share with their parents or unless there are indications that they are in danger. I usually ask them: "If you had a magic wand, what three things would you wish for?" Most kids wish that their parents would get back together or stop fighting or both. Some children wish for lots of money so they could take care of their families, or that a beloved relative or pet would come back to life; or that a sad family member would feel happy again.

Upon returning home, I immediately brought the magic wand my niece had made me to my office. Now the kids with whom I talk won't have to pretend to have a magic wand. Unfortunately, their wishes will still be make-believe. Unlike Harry Potter's wand, no sparks will fly when they wave it, no Patronus (an animal or protector created by the "Patronus Charm" spell) will escape from the tip and save them.

The older I get, the less I seem to wish. The realities of life catch up with me on a daily basis, and the dreams I had when I was in my teens and twenties seem harder and harder to fulfill. Perhaps that's why so many adults love the Harry Potter series. Perhaps that's why there's something so magical about being around kids. Some wishes and dreams do come true, after all, and where would any of us be without hope?

Second Lives & Potential Consequences for Clients

2007-07-09T12:31:00.001-06:00

I would guess by now most people have heard of 'Second Life', the '3-D virtual world' where participants create, manage, and often live vicariously through their 'avatars'. Second Life has been around since 2003 and it's far from the first--or last--of its kind. Real dollars are exchanged daily, mostly between people interested in upgrading their avatar's status with those who have the time and/or the know-how to offer such goodies as better clothing, better homes, or access to online currency (The New York Times Magazine, June 17, 2007). There are even virtual worlds for teens and youth.

Not surprisingly, perhaps, virtual communities are not immune to conflict. Colin Rule, Director of Online Dispute Resolution for E-bay and a blogger has been hugely influential in bringing dispute resolution to the online community. This April, blogger Geoff Sharp highlighted another blogger, Alison's, experience of mediating in Second Life as part of an ADR class she was taking.

In my opinion, the online activity and chatter about such activity is, for the most part, wonderful. There's so much information online, lots of things to see and do, and a whole virtual life out there waiting to be explored; a way in which to experience new things, if indirectly, through one's avatar or other online presence. It's even better that committed ADR professionals are taking an interest in extending their services to the online community, given the inevitability of conflict.

The concept second life could easily describe more than just the online community of that name, however. What about the husband and father of 4 who logs onto his favorite pornographic website late at night, every night? Or the wife and mother who "innocently" chats online with a gentleman from across the country? Or the twenty-something who bets her rent money on a game of blackjack? Or quite simply, the man or woman who just loves surfing the net.

Like anything, online activity, when excessive, can complicate one's life. In the worst cases, it can even become life-threatening, literally or figuratively. What seems to be a common thread to all of this is that online interests often start with a desire to escape from one's "real" life. Online use becomes a problem when it comes to interfere with daily functioning or when someone becomes dependent on it to positively alter his or her mood. When does the person behind a virtual existence cease being alive?

The grass is always greener... It is far from a new concept. Yet there's a way in which the easy accessibility of the Internet, the connections it brings, and the vast selection of virtual worlds online, all contribute to a misconception that we can have it all. If used only to fulfill simple fantasies -- for example, someone physically uncoordinated in real life creates a skateboarding superstar online -- then great. Truth be told, however, people are using the Internet to try and fulfill much, much more. That other life is no longer something abstract, a question of which fork we took in the road when, and what might have been if we turned the other way. It is now possible to try out virtually anything through the options and anonymity the Internet provides. For many people, what starts as a curiosity, a question, perhaps even longing, can become an obsession. As more and more investment is made in one's virtual self, the abstract life becomes increasingly important. The result? Real-life problems, challenges, fears and pain are avoided, but only for so long. Relationships, real or virtual, need time, energy, and committed parties to flourish; otherwise, they will end.

I have not heard a lot of discussion within the mediation community regarding the impact of excessive Internet use on our clients. I'm talking specifically about cases where one person's online habits lead one or both parties to seek a divorce. It usually goes like this: half of the couple falls in love with someone they've met online through a chat room or virtual world. The new relationship, which started "innocently" in "virtual" space, gets acted upon in real life. Next step: divorce. There are the gambling and pornography addictions too, of course, because doing it online makes everything so easy and anonymous at first.

The couples and families who come to us in mediation with issues related to their "second lives" are often in a great deal of pain. There are currently 7,928,443 "residents" of Second Life (according to their website) and millions more in other online communities. We have a responsibility as Alternative Dispute Resolution professionals to understand the prevalence of the virtual world and the potential consequences that turn some real people living in pretend worlds into clients.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Neighbors: Are We Still Connected to the People Next Door?

2007-07-06T07:59:00.001-06:00

A week ago, we arrived home at 12:30AM and walked through the garage into the backyard where our downstairs neighbors were throwing a party. It was late, we were tired, and they were all relatively young. Yet I smiled and said hello and smiled again as one of the hosts introduced himself (he had apparently moved in recently with the other neighbor whom we had met a couple years ago) and offered us a beer. He swore up and down that he had knocked on our door to warn us about the party and to invite us to join them. Obviously we had been out at the time and he seemed on edge regarding our potential reaction. "It's cool," I said, "no worries." He smiled; relaxed. The party continued as we went upstairs to our place to sleep as best we could, our bedroom window right above the racket.

Growing up, we lived in a small house in the suburbs on a busy street a short distance from our school. I knew the elderly lady to our left quite well. She'd always have cookies ready for my visits. The couple next to her had a teenage daughter I idealized, as did the neighbors across the street with their house full of teens. Further to the right there were two girls our age that lived in the house on the corner. We were surrounded by people I adored.

I was heart-broken when we moved when I was 6 or 7. Yet it didn't take my parents long to meet all the families in our new neighborhood and for us to meet the kids. Soon I was riding my bike up and down the street with them, playing in the stream in the backyard, or shooting hoops with them in our sloping driveway. The neighbors appreciated it when the snow came and my dad who had a side-business plowing driveways, plowed theirs for free. And I will never forget the day the elderly neighbor across the street came yelling and crying into our driveway looking for my father. Her house had been broken-into and he was the first person to whom she naturally turned.

My parents taught me not only to respect my neighbors, but to also reach out to them. You never knew when you'd need a cup of sugar or one more egg for the cookie batter. They'd watch your house while you were gone, and you'd feed their cat when they went on vacation. My parents, having since moved from our childhood home, tell me stories about their current neighbors when I visit and often describe the ways in which they support one another.

I've found it difficult to connect with my neighbors in quite the same way. Perhaps it's the difference between the city and the suburbs or perhaps it's because, while I have managed to become rooted in one place or another, there's a constant coming and going of those surrounding me. We smile, wave, make small talk, but I'd be hesitant to ask any of them for an egg if I needed one, and we always hire a cat sitter when we go out of town.

This seems indicative of the many ways in which community disputes, particularly neighbor disputes, seem to be impacting so many people currently. As housing costs go up and people cram into smaller living spaces, tensions rise. Does anyone drop off a pie with a smile for the new neighbor anymore? If they did, how would it be greeted? With surprise? Distrust? Confusion? Or would it be welcomed with a cup of coffee and conversation? Regardless of how many people have moved into the condo next door over the past 5 years, doesn't it still make sense to reach out to each and every new person who arrives? After all, we share the same streetlights, mail-carrier, and air quality.

If we did reach out more to our neighbors, if we truly tried to connect with them, would it prevent arguments over the dimensions of a fence, the barking of a dog, the tree branches banging against the roof? Would we be more willing to say "I'm sorry"? Would we actually consider having that beer if offered despite the late hour, loud music, and age of present company?

Response to the Question of Mediator Burn Out

2007-06-30T13:51:00.002-06:00

Geoff Sharp asked an important question in his blog mediator blah ... blah ... "How do you know when you're conflict weary?" I posted a comment on his site but given my tendency to over-write I abbreviated it there while promising to post it in its entirety here. This is my response to his post:

Geoff,
I’m glad you raised this issue, risky or not. Mediator burn out is something we just don’t seem to discuss as a field. Yet it’s a very real, very important one for all professionals working in conflict resolution. Mediators may benefit from resources other professionals have provided around “compassion fatigue” and “secondary trauma.” These are terms most often associated with the care-taking professions such as the medical field or social work but the concepts are not lost on dispute resolution professionals. Most importantly, however, we as mediators need to be honest about the impact that the work we do has on us both physically and emotionally. Perhaps it is because of the pressure to maintain neutrality that keeps us from admitting and expressing some of the negative consequences of our work. Or perhaps it’s because we’re all martyrs in some way or another that makes admitting our own weaknesses difficult. What mediator hasn’t heard a stranger, upon learning of our chosen profession, exclaim over how brave and patient and strong we must be to do the work that we do? It takes all of those things, including an ability to absorb people’s most negative emotions and release them back into the universe in a non-destructive way, to be a successful mediator. Yet some of that negativity will inevitably stay with us no matter how good or strong or understanding or patient or experienced we are. Even the best mediators in the world need help and support. As a profession, we need to have more honest conversations about the impact that our work has on us, and develop resources, tools, and coping mechanisms to better address the accumulation of emotional baggage unique to our field before we lose too many more good people to burn out.

Geoff asked: “How do you know when you’re conflict weary?” I think if a mediator is asking him or herself that question, then he or she already knows the answer. Perhaps the next question is: what do I need to take care of myself? Are there people both within and outside of my profession whom I trust will help me through this? Can I take care of myself while I’m continuing to do the work, do I need to take a short break from the work to take care of myself, or should I consider a long, perhaps permanent break?

I think, regardless of how much any of us love what we do, it’s okay – and essential – that as mediators we recognize when we’re tired and burnt out, that we create the space to support one another around it, and that we stop pretending we’re impervious to pain.

Compassion Fatigue Self-Test from Ace
http://www.valueoptions.com/providers/Education_Center/Training_Workshops/Handouts/032106/032106_Compassion_Fatigue_Test_from_ACE.pdf

Turning Off the Computer: The Necessity of Boundaries for the Self-Employed Mediator & Applying What We Learn to Mediation

2007-06-22T09:19:00.001-06:00

Technology is wonderful. We can access email from virtually anywhere. We can speak to clients, friends & family members from the comfort of our living room or from the soccer field. One of my favorite blogs to read is Mediator Tech by Dr. Tammi Lenski because I love learning about new technology that will improve my productivity. Yet there's a downside to being this accessible and I know many others have written about it.

As a self-employed mediator, boundaries have taken on a whole new meaning for me and it's something with which I struggle on a daily basis. When I started my business I made some important decisions. I obtained a separate work phone that is NOT wireless rather than using my existing cell phone or purchasing one for work. I set-up separate email accounts for work and for personal communications, reminding everyone as much as possible which one to use when. I rent an office space outside of my home but also have an office at home whose door I can shut (both with me in it and to keep me out of it). I created a structure to my week so I can insert clients into an existing schedule and so as to remain thoughtful of the number and length of meetings I attend.

Yet call forwarding allows me to direct my office calls to any phone I want, including my personal cell phone. I have High-Speed Internet access at home (a must for me) and can check my work email even when I'm sitting on my couch watching TV. I love my office that's outside of my home, but when I don't have any clients scheduled for the day, it's so nice to sleep a little later, go to the gym, or do some work out on the deck. Then I find myself working late into the night to make up for it. Often times, meetings and clients can't or won't bend to my self-imposed self-employment business structure, so I adjust a little here and a little there to accommodate them.

Don't get me wrong. I love being self-employed. However, it's also more true than not that those of us who are self-employed are always working (or can be, should be, need to be ... yikes!). I think individuals who aren't self-employed have this fantasy that those of us who are self-employed spend all of our time kicking-back at the beach or attempting to write the Great American Novel between client appointments. I could choose to spend my time that way, sure, but the reality is that unless you have lots of money at your disposal, the pressure to be working is a constant, particularly in the early stages of owning a business. Boundaries are an endless struggle.

The reality of this struggle for the self-employed mediator working with divorcing couples is that it provides an excellent opportunity for greater insight into our clients' own struggles with boundaries. Whether physically separated or emotionally separated or both, divorcing couples are still so intimately connected to one another that the first step in mediation often must include assisting them in creating boundaries. Divorcing couples living in the same home can benefit from discussions regarding how to manage their shared physical space, how to create emotional space, and if children are involved, helping them create a "schedule" that ensures their child/ren spend time with both parents. Mediators can help couples who are physically separated consider the consequences of daily phone calls or the emotional impact of dinner "dates" at the other's home. All divorcing individuals could benefit from learning what about the other person's life is still relevant to their own -- and therefore what information they have a "right" to know -- and what is not.

For those of us who worked full-time for someone else prior to starting our own business, it takes a conscious effort to create boundaries between our work and personal life. For individuals used to being part of a couple, the boundaries necessary for creating an independent existence are equally, if not more, challenging to develop and assert. When boundaries blur it can make embracing any one identity that much harder -- self-employed mediator or wife, husband or ex-husband, parents or co-parent.

Probably the most important thing for me to remember is that it just takes time and that I must be gentle on myself through this process. Divorcing couples could stand to be reminded of this as well.

What suggestions, observations or tips do other self-employed individuals have to share?

thinking ourselves out of conflict

2007-06-18T12:52:00.003-06:00

In the most recent issue of ACResolution Magazine (Spring 2007) from the Association for Conflict Resolution, Eileen Barker wrote an article titled: "What Would Gandhi Do?" At first I was skeptical. Gandhi is used to invoke all sorts of things and I wasn't sure where Barker was going with this. She started the article by asking: "If I could seek guidance from any wise person, past or present, who would it be?" After explaining that she chose Gandhi she writes: "What lessons can mediators and others in the field of conflict resolution learn from his extraordinary life?" Barker then continues by giving a brief history of Gandhi's life and the lessons that can be learned from it. I was still skeptical, but by about half-way through the article, she had begun to pique my curiosity.

On the second page, Barker states:

"As conflict resolution professionals, treating each person with respect and consideration is fundamental to our creed. Can we go a step farther, and work to eliminate negative thoughts, beliefs and judgments? What about the difficult person, the one who seems to be blocking resolution? What about the person who is threatening, deceptive, unreasonable or petty? Gandhi teaches that there can be no exclusions; we must learn to practice nonviolence--in our words, thoughts and actions--with each and every other human being."

After reading this paragraph, I immediately considered my recent attempts at toning down my onslaught of comments directed at fellow drivers. There's just something about being on the road, behind the wheel, that gets me talking up a storm, and usually not in the manner of complimenting others. While mostly internal and rarely, if ever, expressed to the provoking driver, my thoughts and gestures are nevertheless fiery.

I'm pretty good at empathizing with mediation clients regardless of their behavior, comments, or past actions. With them I have a particular context for their acting out and I can step outside myself enough to know it's not about me. Experiencing the lunacy and/or aggression of Chicago-area drivers (I've lived in Boston too and Chicago is worse), on the other hand, just feels personal. As a mediator, this has created some serious cognitive dissonance for me even before reading Barker's article. What Barker writes merely drives the point home (pun intended) .

As practitioners of conflict resolution, I agree with Barker (via Gandhi's life example) that we as mediators need to rise to a higher standard. It is hypocritical of us to set "ground rules" for sessions and to remind our clients to be respectful in their use of language with one another, only to turn around and tailgate, groan, moon, launch a middle finger, or swear at others whether figuratively or literally. For me, *bad* drivers have been previously excluded from receiving my empathy and peaceful thoughts.

Going forward, I will try to expand my mediator empathy to include not only all drivers, but also the odd person who cuts me in line, the security woman who makes me throw out my favorite hair gel for being .0000008 ounces over the maximum, and even the customer service representative who asks me to repeat the problem 20 times, then directs me to the company's online FAQ's for my answer.

Honk if you agree to do the same!

*Bad driver* as defined by me is, of course, relative and that's the point. When we collectively lose our ability to empathize, we all become "bad drivers" to somebody else.

Negotiating: you just don't know unless you ask

2007-06-12T15:03:00.001-06:00

Last weekend was the Printers Row Book Fair. Being relatively new to Chicago, this was the first year I was actually able to attend. All I can say is wow! If you like books, this is the place to be in June. There are readings by various authors and rows and rows of booksellers with some pretty amazing deals. While perusing the books, I came across a pretty comprehensive one on negotiation that I had been previously interested in purchasing. It was half off the original price but still a hefty amount of money.

I walked away.

Then, I kept thinking about it. It was a book on negotiation, after all. I reminded myself that it wouldn't hurt to ask the seller if he'd be willing to come down on the price. So I went back to the table, picked up the book and asked him. He inquired as to my interest in the book. When I told him I was a mediator he slashed the price in half again, offering it to me for 75% off the original price. Not only that, he then handed me another book for free, gave me his business card, and asked me if I'd provide him with feedback on both books.

I'm a fairly decent negotiator (mediation is much more my thing, however) but I'm not sure I would have asked for a price reduction if the book itself didn't so inspire me. The very title of the book had me thinking from the moment I first noticed it, glanced through it, and wanted it. As I stood by the seller's tent the first time, I wondered: am I showing too much enthusiasm for the book? How many others have shown an interest in it? What impact might it have on the seller that it's late in the day and that no one else is looking at his books right now?

After having walked a block up the street, I kept thinking. Do I really want to buy this book at it's current price? At what price would it be more desirable to me? What would be the harm in asking him to lower the cost? Would he see the irony in it given the book's title and therefore appreciate my negotiating or would that only make him more rigid?

I was very focused on the price tag as being the only area for negotiation but it turned out he had something that was more important to him than cost: who I was in relation to the book and my willingness and interest in providing him with a peer review. By returning to the table ready to "negotiate" I provided us both with the space to create a win/win in its purest form.

This experience made me wonder: do I really need to wait until I'm negotiating over a negotiation book to negotiate? Clearly that question's been answered.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

How 'Lost' Illuminates the Future

2007-05-24T13:46:00.000-06:00

I'm a huge fan of the television series, 'Lost,' so it seemed inevitable that I'd write about it at some point. Given the fantastic season finale last night, that time is now; and it really does relate to mediation. Honest.

Last night's episode of 'Lost' concluded season 3 (spoiler alert). All previous episodes were either set in the present day of the island inhabitants, or in the past of one or more of these characters. Last night changed all that. For the first time in the series, two of the main characters were shown living in the future and they were off the island. I suppose more astute viewers may have predicted this possibility, but it was definitely not something I saw coming. I never thought they'd get off that island. More importantly, though, I never thought we'd get a glimpse into the future lives of these complex characters. Unless it's a sci-fi series, most shows are either set in the present day or in the past. Having the characters in 'Lost' inhabit all three-- past, present and future--was shocking, exciting, intense, and perhaps even a bit disturbing.

When I meet with clients in mediation, particularly those going through a divorce, they often focus their discussion on the past. That's why they're paying me; to help them move through past conflict in a way that creates a relatively conflict-free future. Yet there are times when it's virtually impossible to get people to move off the topic of previous betrayals and transgressions. Often, even once they do take the conversation in a different direction for a while, they always end up backwards in time somehow.

That's why 'Lost' was so brilliant last night. It provided the viewers a glimpse into the future of these beloved characters, a wonderful opportunity that we could only experience as voyeurs. I wish there were some way to give my clients a glimpse into the future. 'Lost' creatively and dramatically crammed all sorts of life lessons into one 2-hour episode: be careful what you wish for, don't rush the present moment, you create your own fate.

If only we could all see the big picture of our own lives: past, present, and future. I wonder how that would affect our present-day decisions.

Photo borrowed from www.lostsites.net/

'Life's Short. Get a Divorce:' the Chicago Billboard Controversy

2007-05-09T21:55:00.001-06:00

First of all, I live in Chicago but initially heard about this on boston.com (The Boston Globe online). Granted, that's my home page (you can take the girl out of Boston but you can't take Boston ... ) but still, it's a little weird to hear about national news happening in Chicago from a Boston newspaper. Secondly, the fact that this is getting so much press (at least outside of Chicago) is only helping the firm that put the billboard up in the first place, not hurting it. I realize I'm contributing to that but admittedly the whole thing is difficult to ignore.

Based on articles I read, apparently an all female law firm had an ad placed on a billboard that states: 'Life's short. Get a Divorce,' displaying a female torso with cleavage and a male torso with a six-pack. According to all the reports, the ad has helped generate business for the firm. Many divorce attorneys are upset because it makes them look bad, others are apparently jealous they didn't think of it first.

As a mediator who has worked with many divorcing clients, I've come to realize that they are as diverse a group as our nation itself. If this billboard helps an adult considering or going through divorce, who am I to put it down?

What no one is talking about, however, is the impact that this billboard may have had on the children, teens, and twenty-something who may have viewed it during the week in which it was displayed. What of the kids whose parents are on the verge of divorcing, are going through a divorce, or have already divorced? So many kids with whom I have met already know too much about parental affairs or mom and dad sleeping in separate beds. This billboard merely re-states for our nation's youth that love - falling in and out - is all about sex.

Why is no one talking about that?

Mediator Observations & the Importance of Self-determination

2007-04-26T08:45:00.001-06:00

Driving back from the lake last week, my partner and I were stopped at a light when we observed 2 boys walking down the street who looked about 12 or 13 years old. The boys appeared to be walking away from the lake where they had presumably been playing basketball, the ball nestled beneath one boy's arm. We noticed how they had their arms around each other, one over the shoulder, the other around the waist very much like two pals who had just enjoyed each other's company a great deal and weren't afraid to show it. There was nothing sexual about it; just two buddies, happy, walking home together on a nice night.

As they crossed to the other side of the street, 2 girls about the same age as the boys approached the corner. All of them -- the 2 boys, the 2 girls -- suddenly seemed to notice one another.

Very quickly, the boy with his arm around the other's shoulder shifted his grasp, putting his friend in a headlock. They wrestled. As the boys and girls finally crossed paths, the boys abruptly let go of one another, no contact between them, as they grinned at the passing girls.

There was both beauty and sadness in this moment for me. It was wonderful to see the boys' innocent appreciation of one another. Their posturing for the girls had a certain level of playfulness and humor to it. The sadness was in the boys' obvious need to change the ways in which they expressed themselves relative to who could observe them. It's doubtful the boys could have known we were watching them, but even if they had, most likely they would not have changed their behavior for us. Seeing female peers -- and likely male peers would have invoked the same reaction -- elicited the response of playful aggression between the boys followed by a quick distancing.

For me, this highlighted the impact external forces and observers can have on relationships and the natural expression of feelings. External forces such as the media, community, the culture in which we're raised, religion, employment, class, politics, etc can all impact our intimate relationships and how we express ourselves within those relationships. Yet it is an outside individuals ability to influence a relationship that I find fascinating in the context of mediation.

In mediation, I often give parties an opportunity to vent(if it's non-abusive and within reason) to allow myself time to observe the dynamics that exist between them. Yet I wonder to what extent I am getting a true picture of their relationship. Regardless of my neutrality, I'm not a clean slate. I bring a particular presence to mediation that can't but influence and alter client interactions. That's the point of mediation, after all, that with some skill, patience, and perhaps luck I will alter some of the negative interactions and assist the clients in reaching positive outcomes.

Yet it seems important to remember that at the end of the day I'm merely an observer of a particular relationship at a particular place and time. Every relationship is in a constant state of flux and as a mediator I can never truly grasp one of which I am not a part. My presence can create a new relationship that includes myself and the individuals in conflict but I will forever remain on the outside when it comes to their particular nuances. Given that, it only further emphasizes the importance of self-determination in mediation. The parties, not the mediator, have all the information in which to make the best decisions.

Those 2 boys alone know what they mean to one another.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Connection and Disconnecting through Mediation

2007-04-08T15:00:00.001-06:00

While I was walking down a city street the other day someone walking from the opposite direction bumped arms with me, or perhaps I bumped my arm with her. As I hopped on the crowded El and squeezed myself into the last available seat next to a young man with a lot of leg, I couldn't help but be pressed up against him, and he against me, for the duration of the ride. In neither of those situations did I feel any desire to connect with these individuals, yet circumstances made physical contact impossible to avoid. Eventually our moment of connection reached an equilibrium and space existed between us once again.

These two occurrences and reading Dr. Tammy Lenski's link to Dave Oleson's article Break All Social Taboos for Better Relationships, made me consider that while making connections with others is absolutely wonderful most of the time, it is also quite possible for it to be too much of a good thing. That is, there are just some times when emotional and/or physical distance is preferred, or when severing existing connections with an individual, group or organization is best.

As a mediator, my role is to bring people together peacefully and assist them in cutting their connections in ways that cause the least amount of destruction possible. Donald T. Sposneck offered this relevant observation (Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Fall-Winter 2004) :

The dynamics of mediation are inherently in opposition to the goals of the couple and thus create a dilemma: mediators are trying to get the divorcing couples to work together and cooperate, while the couples are trying to get apart emotionally – actively manifesting the very absence of cooperation that broke them apart in the first place.

This becomes even trickier when mediating a parenting agreement since a co-parenting relationship is one that should not, and really cannot, be severed. A percentage of separating parents are able to put aside their differences and continue to unite in raising their kids. For some, the desire to be disconnected from a former spouse or partner greatly outweighs any willingness or ability to remain connected in parenthood. For still others, the only possible connection with a former spouse or partner is a negative one fraught with conflict.

I suppose the challenge for all of us is in knowing when it is worthwhile and even necessary to invest in initiating, creating, and repairing new and existing connections with others versus the necessity of distancing and disconnecting when relationships become problematic, unproductive, or conflictual.

Supervised Visitation

2007-04-08T11:26:00.001-06:00

There was an interesting article in today's New York Times: In Custody Fights, A Hurdle for the Poor by Leslie Kaufman. The article describes the obstacles parents face when they've been ordered to have supervised visitation with their children. The author discusses the ways in which this is particularly challenging for parents with less financial means given that most supervised visitation centers charge fees for their services.

Having worked within the court system for a period of time, I can understand and appreciate the need for supervised visitation in some cases. I also get that this can be a difficult process for both parents and children. Unfortunately, there just aren't enough existing supervised visitation centers, and friends and family members are rarely equipped to serve in this capacity.

Hopefully Kaufman's article will bring greater awareness to this issue, perhaps resulting in the allocation of funds to provide more options for safe and consistent visitation between parents and children.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Mediation Small Talk: Continuing the Conversation

2007-04-03T11:28:00.001-06:00

A friend of mine whom I know is extremely busy called me recently and proceeded to ask me questions about myself that made it seem as though she had all the time in the world. Within a minute or two she got to the reason for her phone call but by that point I felt appreciated, understood and heard. It was wonderful.

Later I started thinking about this more in depth. Did I have this same ability to focus so completely on another person? I realized the answer to my question was both yes and no. I then remembered a discussion about "small talk" circling through the ADR and business blogs a few months back. There was this post on Settle It Now by Victoria Pynchon and this post by New York Center's Blog Spot responding to Victoria's post. I found this post on Mediator blah ... blah by Geoff Sharp talking about the necessity of mediator small talk with a reference to this post by David Maister regarding his own struggles to learn subjects about which to chat.

So I considered a few things:

Yes, I have the ability to focus on another person when ...
... I'm mediating
... A friend or family member is in need
... I'm at a professional event
... I find the person and/or the subject about which they are talking fascinating

No, I don't have this ability or I have it to a much lesser extent when ...
... I'm on the telephone
... I'm focused on completing a task within a specific time-frame
... I've had a bad day, am over-tired, am hungry
... When I find the person or subject about which they are speaking boring

Yet I've recently realized that, while it's definitely necessary and valuable for me to be successful at focusing intensely on individuals during mediation, it's no less important or even necessary for me to do this at nearly every moment in my life for the sake of my mediation practice. A potential referral -- a potential client -- is always around the next corner of every conversation.

David Maister raised the challenge of how one prepares oneself to engage in small talk for all occasions without appearing "fake" given that it's impossible to be interested in, and to know about, all subjects of conversation. Various people posted great responses ... learn about the subjects that interest you, ask the person questions about the subject they're discussing, etc.

There are two other methods that I've realized might be helpful: intense bursts of time, and what I'll call "you questions." I know I get overwhelmed with the thought of long telephone conversations that might keep me from accomplishing other tasks. Therefore, I tend to ask people directly and virtually immediately for what it is I need. While this may get me my answer quickly, I fail to accomplish what my friend was able to do so well in the brief minute or two she spent intensely focused on me. I miss the opportunity to make the other person feel appreciated, understood and heard. In other words, I miss the opportunity to allow them to feel a connection with me. Such a powerful connection has more to do with presence-emotional, spiritual, physical-than the length of time talking. With the current fast-pace of our lives, its absolutely wonderful to feel someone being truly present even if it's just for a minute or two.

I would also add to David Maister's musings by suggesting that people really want to talk about their lives, first and foremost, over any other subject such as sports or books or movies. I'm of the opinion that we turn to those things because they feel safe. That's not to say we can't genuinely connect about such subjects, or that they don't make great avoidance tools, but I would go so far as to say that connecting on those things allows us to feel safer connecting on deeper things. Asking people "you questions" about their health, their families, their passions etc. creates a connection more quickly, perhaps even more honestly.

Some may argue that such dialogue isn't appropriate for a cocktail party or a professional event or with the person who answers the phone at an agency you're calling or when you bump into an acquaintance on the street, yet aren't those the conversations we're most likely to remember in a day, a week, a month ... even a year? What conversation is the other person likely to remember? The one where they commiserated over the loss of the local team's football game? The discussion about the most recent movie starring Leonard DiCaprio? Or the story they told about their five year-old son sticking up for his little sister on the playground? Their mother falling in love with a slightly older gentleman at the nursing home where she lives? Their teenager sneaking out at night to visit his girlfriend?

I'm still trying to figure this all out. One thing I do know: I can certainly take a minute or two to inquire into the lives of the people with whom I interact. I'm a mediator. I'm empathetic by nature. It shouldn't be that difficult. Right?

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Street-side

2007-03-20T18:13:00.001-06:00

At a sporting event. In the doctor's office. On the way to your therapist appointment. Outside your child's school. On the bus. At the gym. There are so many places where a mediator could run into former -- or, gasp -- current clients.

This seemed particularly true when I worked for a large court system where mediation was a mandatory part of the visitation and custody dispute legal process and where I mediated an average of 130 cases per year. I've yet to see the ramifications of mediating in a "small town" but I'm sure it will be interesting.

So what do other mediators do about this? I've never heard any consistent answer to how mediators address the issue of bumping into clients outside the mediation room. Some mediators -- the ones blessed with a good enough memory to recognize the client in the first place, perhaps even recall his or her name -- have told me that they wait and see if the client acknowledges them first before acknowledging the client. Others have told me that they say hello and quickly continue on their way. Still others have told me of being regaled with post-mediation stories and even complaints about the other party with whom they had mediated. I've even heard stories of unexpected hugs, tears, and laughter as a client recalls his or her mediation experience and how it had impacted his or her life.

I've heard therapists discuss this more than mediators and therefore wonder if it is more straightforward for them. Since I'm not a therapist, I can only guess. Given that the therapy process, and even attending therapy itself, is confidential, I would imagine that it's perfectly okay, and perhaps even expected, for a therapist to wait for a client to acknowledge them before greeting the client. Yet while the process of mediation itself is confidential, the fact that people are in mediation is often not confidential, given the number of cases that are referred through the very public court system. If, as a mediator, you pretend not to notice the client, you may be minimally perceived as unfriendly, or even worse, as biased toward the other party with whom they mediated. If you acknowledge the client, you risk breaking some contextual confidentiality and perhaps risk appearing biased in the other direction (especially if it's a current client). There's even some possibility that the client whom you ran into could misrepresent this encounter to the other party, thus complicating the timing and method of your disclosure.

Also, given that therapy is often longer-term than most mediation, the therapist is more likely to recall the specific client, his or her name, perhaps even the issues that were being addressed in therapy. Mediation can be as short as a one-time occurrence for an hour or two, depending on the nature of the conflict. For someone with a not-so-good memory, like myself, this makes recalling specifics extremely difficult. Therefore, acknowledging that I recognize a client means potentially being put through the laborious task of trying to recall the specific details of their case while simultaneously being updated as to what happened post-mediation thus risking my neutrality for any future mediation sessions.

There have been times when I've invested so much in a particular mediation, felt a unique connection with the clients, and/or experienced curiosity as to what happened next that I thought I would welcome the opportunity to receive some information as to how everyone was doing. Yet the experience of running into clients street-side is a complicated one for a mediator (and probably for therapists, doctors, and others working with the public as well), and no matter how curious I may be after the clients walk out my door, I can't help but appreciate the finality that comes with the end of a mediation.

I wonder, though, if such finality is ever really possible, especially when you're mediating within a smaller community. I chose to set up private practice just outside the city because I wanted to have a larger impact on my surroundings, to feel more connected to the community. Yet thinking about the impact of a street-side encounter on the mediation process in general, and on me personally, I can't help but imagine the possibility of bumping into clients every time I walk out my office door.

There are definitely worse things, to imagine, though, like never having clients to see ... ever. I guess I'll have to make my peace with the street-side encounter because the alternative is far less pleasant.

Mediation Blogs Listings

2007-03-17T13:15:00.000-06:00

Thanks to having just joined Diane Levin's Online Guide to Mediation feed I learned this morning about The World Directory of Alternative Dispute Resolution Blogs which is a project she started. It looks like a pretty comprehensive listing of blogs written by bloggers throughout the world covering various alternative dispute resolution topics.

To be listed, you must have a blog with at least 7 posts (this is number 7 for me!), be discussing some form of ADR in your blog, and ideally mention the blog on your site (it's commercial-free and isn't everything by word of mouth more fun anyway?) . The "guidelines for submission" are a bit more detailed than that but those are the basics.

So I plan on submitting my blog to be listed but first I have to come up with a 75 word description of it. Wordy as I have a tendency to get at times, that's just not an easy task for a mediation blog titled: Pronoia Mediation. The title, in and of itself, escapes definition, which was the point of my choosing it.

I'll think of something.

The Mediation Clock

2007-03-16T18:49:00.001-06:00

Three of the people with whom I am closest all share the habit of calling me from their car on their way somewhere. Their choice of dialing my number en route creates an inherent structure to these calls. Quite simply, the conversation lasts for as long as it takes the caller to arrive at his or her destination. Unless the caller is driving to or from another state, these calls are typically 5-10 minutes in duration. As the recipient of such calls, this particular structure has its pluses and minuses for me.

On the plus side, I enjoy knowing how long a conversation is likely to last so I can decide how involved I want to get with my sharing. If I'm in the middle of something, it means taking just a short break before I can return to whatever I was doing before I received the call. In terms of verbal communication, I tend to keep things close to my vest. If I know someone is about to arrive somewhere, it's an easy excuse not to get into something too deep. If I do mention something serious, the structure of the car-call puts parameters on their level of questioning. I have to be careful with this one, however, so as not to compel the caller to drive in circles in the parking garage or to sit in his or her car, thus extending the length of the conversation, forcing me to over-share, and therefore making me lose all of the receiver benefits of the car-call quick escape. When I tell them it's okay--turn off the engine, go inside the gym/office/restaurant/friend's house--I truly mean it. In those moments when I want to share but really, kind of, don’t, I like that they've arrived at their destination.

A minus of such structured calls is that I feel like the pace and length of the conversation is completely out of my hands. That can be frustrating. Sometimes a discussion is just starting to get interesting when, finally at his or her destination, the caller informs me of his or her arrival, thus ending the conversation what, to me, feels prematurely.

So what does any of this have to do with mediation?

Scheduling and time: the mediator's, the clients'. Time is just never easy.

Of course we have to give mediation sessions structure by limiting their length. The mediators need it, as do the clients. Scheduled mediations can create a greater sense of urgency, often resulting in clients moving from their positions in the final ten minutes of a session. Not only that, for both financial and business planning purposes, we have to know when the mediation is supposed to end. Yet I can't help but recognize some negative consequences to scheduling a mediation session to end at a specific time.

I used to go to this amazing massage therapist who believed that a massage should end when the body was ready for it to end, not after some pre-determined time. I think this can be true with mediation as well. Aren't there times when the conflict, not some set schedule, should end the mediation session? Can't we as mediators feel in our experience and education, in our bodies even, that if we only had another hour ... I'm sure that there are mediators and mediations that allow for this that go with the flow, ending the mediation when it's over. Certainly I've heard of negotiations, particularly labor negotiations that work like that. I've heard this less so about mediation, but I have to imagine it exists. Yet if you're a mediator with your own business, with multiple clients, wearing multiple hats on any given day, is that really possible to do on any regular basis?

Perhaps it's all about the exception: the important break-through in communication that makes circling in the parking garage, putting aside a task for another day, or skipping lunch between mediation clients all very worth it.

Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

To read ... about mediation. To blog ... about mediation.

2007-03-16T10:43:00.000-06:00

It's been 16 days since I blogged or read blogs and I'm realizing how it's a fast-paced blogging world where your thoughts lose relevancy if you're not paying attention. Guess that's the point of blogging. I knew this, I felt this, I experienced this, yet it didn't really sink in until 16 days had lapsed and I returned to the blogging world.

16 days ago I had some brilliant ideas about which to write that would have contributed to the whole "starting your own practice/business" discussion being had by the top mediation bloggers. Now my thoughts of 16 days ago seem irrelevant, stale, outdated. I waited too long. Sure, I could still go there on my blog, make statements, create links to other people's 16 day old blogs, but who cares at this point? I kind of don't anymore.

So I learned a couple of things: 1) I need to blog immediately when an idea occurs to me, even if it's just stating it in a sentence or two. Blogging is supposed to be in "real-time" after all 2) I need to find a better way to keep up with the mediation bloggers whose writing interests me.

As a solution to this problem, I created a new email account. The provider of my domain/web space allows me 1200 email accounts with my current subscription. Seeing as I'm the sole proprietor of my business, I don't think I have to worry about running out of emails. I had 3 previous accounts: one that is posted on my website and therefore gets loads of spam, one for all my 3rd party business transactions, and one with my actual name in it that's on my business card. So now I've created a fourth email account. It's "toread" @ my domain (sorry spammers) with which I have subscribed to my favorite mediation blogs.

So far I've subscribed to:
1) Online Guide to Mediation by Diane Levin.
2) Mediator Blah ... Blah... by Geoff Sharp

I'll probably subscribe to more later but these are the two to which I find myself continually drawn. I don't want to get too overwhelmed with reading material. After all, I do have a practice/business (see post by Dina Beach Lynch) to run.

Oh, and I learned one other important thing: what may seem brilliant in one moment can become suddenly quite dull in the next. Real time or not, I'm thankful for that "edit" button.

neutrality hurts my psyche

2007-02-28T12:16:00.000-06:00

My non-mediator friends often ask me to help them by intervening in a spontaneous conflict they may be having with a partner or another friend. The request is usually part teasing about my "mediator ready" approach to all situations, even when I'm in social settings, and some wishful thinking on their part since, as non-mediator's, they, like most people, are mystified and avoidant of conflict and really wouldn't mind having someone else tell them how to navigate through it. I usually respond to these requests by claiming I'm "off duty" but in actuality I'm still thinking and interacting like a mediator.

It's true that I often approach all aspects of my life from a mediator's perspective. Just as friends tease me about mediating the conflicts between them, they also empathize with my partner for having married a mediator. "It's just impossible to ever win an argument with her," she often states. That's because, even when arguing with my wife, I try to find a "win/win" solution to the problem and/or increase our understanding of each other's perspectives. Fisher would be proud. My wife's often frustrated as much as she is appreciative (After all, don't we all want to win, to be right sometimes? I can empathize with her as well, but I can't change the fact that I'm a mediator).

Yet just as I'm always a mediator even when I'm not mediating, I'm also still a deeply flawed and emotional human being when I am mediating. I think I'm fairly decent at maintaining the perception of neutrality when mediating. That is, the parties I've mediated have rarely accused me of taking sides. As mediators we all know that the reality of whether we've taken someone's side is less important than the parties' experience and perception of our neutrality. In other words, as long as they don't experience us as being bias in some way, then, for all practical purposes, we've done our job. The internal struggle, the one the parties hopefully never witness, is something else all together. The reality for me as a mediator is that neutrality hurts.

There are just some cases and clients that will push a mediator's buttons whether intentionally (they're trying to pull you into their conflict dynamic) or unintentionally (they remind you of your best friend from the second grade with whom you had a falling out because you preferred playing Monopoly over Boggle). Sometimes, it's just painful to sit there and experience whatever sensations the party or parties are causing in your psyche. Just as I can't bury the mediator in me during "normal" social and life interactions, I also can't bury the injured child, teen, and/or adult that is intricately connected to my existence even when I am mediating. Instead, I must allow myself to experience it in a strictly internal way; merely observing the sensations and feelings that interacting with the party or parties is causing but never actually expressing them.

The end result of this, both in my personal and professional life?

It's difficult to express raw emotion.

Anger? Sadness? Frustration? Fear? I'm great at identifying these emotions in myself and observing them. But I can no longer express them in any truly raw way (or maybe I had trouble with that anyway and becoming a mediator was just a natural progression in that direction) even when it's absolutely appropriate to do so. Perhaps that's all good because isn't win/win/win/win/win ...the goal? If everyone wins, then no one loses. Nothing regretful is said. No walls need repairing; no dishes are broken. We move through the conflict and get to the other side.

Yet it hurts: 24/7 neutrality. It hurts in some inexpressible way.

Pain

2007-02-15T11:09:00.001-06:00

As mediators, we all seem pretty decent at recognizing our clients' emotional pain in mediation, whether expressed or buried. It seems an essential part of the job, regardless of whether our previous training is as a therapist, an attorney, an accountant, etc. When I worked for the courts, I taught a class for parents about the impact of conflict on kids and at some point during the class we always discussed Kubler-Ross' 5 stages of grief: denial, bargaining, anger, depression, acceptance. The class was developed before my employ so my co-facilitators and I merely followed the outline we were given (there were opportunities to participate in making changes in the class, but that's another whole post) and most of my co-facilitators preferred leading other sections so I often volunteered to facilitate that one.

We taught three different cross sections of clients: pre-decree, post-decree, and never married parents and adapted the class accordingly. The pre-decree clients seemed to most benefit from this section of the class, as the end of the marriage was a particularly significant loss for them. The post-decree parents, typically very angry at the other parent, the system, and therefore at us, resisted this discussion initially. However, the majority seemed to come around to it eventually as they considered the ways in which they or the other parent were feeling and expressing anger as the predominant emotion in their lives. The majority of never-married parents looked at us like we were crazy when we talked about feelings, but once we put it in the context of their kids (have your children expressed any of these emotions?) most seemed better able to hear it and possibly even apply some of it to themselves or to the other parent. I realize I'm generalizing here, but after nearly 3 years of teaching the class with a pretty consistent experience of it each time, I feel these observations aren't too skewed.

In thinking about emotions and emotional pain, the ways in which we try to be aware of it in mediation, the energy and resources that go into better understanding the emotional impact of conflict for clients, the expression of emotional pain during the process of mediation, I began to consider a different kind of pain that I've rarely, if ever, heard discussed in the context of mediation: physical pain. As someone who has suffered from somewhat but not entirely predictable chronic pain for approximately 11 years resulting in the loss of more minutes, days, weeks than I wish to count, I can't help but wonder how physical pain -- mine or my client's -- impacts mediation.

As a sufferer of chronic pain, I've learned to adapt. I ignore it to the best of my ability when possible, or I check out from the world until it has passed. Thankfully, the somewhat predictable occurrence of this pain for me, as well as my previous athletic trained ability to "push through it," has meant infrequent cancellations of clients. I love mediation to such a great extent and can become so focused on the process that mediating itself seems to release a sort of pain killer into my system until the session has been completed. That's when I really pay for it, however, after the session or sessions have ended or even later, when I'm no longer at the office; when my time is meant to be my own again, meant for me and my family. So I often lose that time to pain, but it's mostly worth it to me because of how much I love mediating. Usually, no matter how much I may want to push through it, the pain is so severe from 1-3 days per month that I find myself at home waiting for it to be over ... until the next time.

Just last night, I realized that between each of these bouts of chronic pain--the kind that keeps me at home--I actually almost forget how bad it feels. Not only that, but each time I experience these waves of chronic pain it seems as though I actually go through a variation of those stages of grief I mentioned previously. I definitely try to ignore the pain for a while (denial), until it becomes unavoidable. I tell myself if I eat the right thing or drink the right kind of tea, the pain won't be so bad or it will go away more quickly (bargaining). I start talking about how unfair it is, how much I hate it, how it sucks (anger). Then I sleep for a while and cry (depression). Until I get to a point where I feel prepared to ride it out and/or it ends (acceptance).

Given that, I can't help but wonder what chronic pain could teach us about emotions in mediation and vice versa. When someone is in chronic emotional pain, we may call that depression. What do you call it when someone is in chronic physical pain? What if someone's unexpressed physical pain is the true cause of their anger or depression in mediation, but it is manifesting through the conflict with the other party? How many of our clients, just like us mediators (because I know for a fact I'm not alone in this experience) silently suffer from chronic pain? What, if any, impact does a client's physical pain have on their experience of, and dare I say, the potential outcome, of mediation? What, if any, impact does a mediator's physical pain have on the mediation process?

I'm breaking my silence on this issue. If others are talking about it already, maybe I'm just missing the discussion. Fill me in. Please. Or tell me your thoughts and experiences on the subject.

Seriously?

2007-02-12T19:57:00.000-06:00

With all this business development stuff, I'm trying hard not to take myself too seriously. Yet if I don't take me seriously, who will? It seems a tricky balance. There are times in mediation when I work hard at lightening the mood in the room, other times when it seems to come naturally, and still other times when it just doesn't happen. Period. There's nothing worse than when my attempt to break the tension in mediation results in confounding all parties. Or maybe there is something ... It's definitely worse when only one person laughs or smiles at something I say. Neutrality and the perception of it, anyone? Sometimes I forget that as mediators we're human too, and we're going to make human mistakes, no matter how well trained, experienced and educated.

So I'm opening my blog for all to see, removing my fear (or ignoring it) that I will a) piss off Rob B. for using the word "pronoia" for my blog title which he apparently did not "coin" but about which he did write a book recently b) piss off my family members and friends and ex-co-workers because they'll end up in my blog somewhere, sometime, somehow c) make serious grammatical and spelling errors d) run out of things to write e) stay up at night thinking of things about which to write and never run out of ideas and spend all my time on my blog instead of on my business development f) other.

Creation in Mediation

2007-02-11T20:28:00.000-06:00

When I'm mediating, I search for space. Space to insert an observation. Space in which to disappear for a second, a minute, 10 minutes, sometimes even 15 or 20, to listen and watch and learn. When I go in too quickly, assume I know what the hell the problem is, then I miss that indescribably important moment when the people, the conflict, have the potential to shift. If I wait too long, then I can fall into the trap of asserting my own agenda rather than allowing the parties to take the mediation where they need to go.

Rob Brezsny, author of Pronoia is the Antidote for Paranoia, describes the word "Pronoia" as "how the whole world is conspiring to shower you with blessings." I've always thought of conflict like that: a strange and disturbingly incredible gift most of us want to throw back or run from. Conflict isn't good exactly. I don't believe that. But it's not bad either. More than anything, conflict seems to me like an opportunity, and mediators the agents of this bizarre but creative potential.