Hi David!
Much as I embrace your sentiments, I do not accept your 'reframe'. You
are talking about something else entirely. You're simply talking about
aspiring to being 'nice' and 'welcoming' and 'big tent'.
Those are good things. But not enough if they become what we hide
behind rather than accept responsibility for what Stu has handed us and for
some level of safety of the clients who come to choose and trust the
Collaborative Practice process.
I do not believe that the fact that "I" or "you" might grow from the
experience of trying to do something that we're no good at [even though we
might become so with intention and growth on "our" part] is any reason to
subject clients to "us".
Those who invited you to the training saw "something" in YOU. Like it
or not, David, they "assessed" you. If they didn't, if they were just
hoping for a miraculous conversion for you, then they were just trying to
sell tickets to the training 'show'.
All I am suggesting is some set of particular 'things', 'qualities',
'traits', 'attitudes'... about a person to look at and for that suggest
"THIS *person *has potential for this work". I'm NOT talking about some
list of experiences or accomplishments. I continue to believe that any
set of "Standards", much less "Membership Requirements", do not do what we
need.
For example, there is a huge difference between "have you taken a
mediation course?" and "WHY did you take that mediation course? WHAT did
you get out of it? HOW has it changed your view of your role as an
attorney, of your relationship to your client, of your relationship with
your colleagues, even your 'adversaries' in litigation? How has it
impacted your actual practice?"
We continue to 'train' anyone and everyone with a naive egalitarian view
that "everyone should have a chance to try this". While at the same time
we wring our hands about those who've taken the training and hold
themselves out as 'Collaborative Professionals'.... who, let's just say,
aren't doing "CP work".
I just continue to think it would be better for the clients, and for
CP, if we were a bit more selective in whom we 'anoint' by giving them a 2
[or even 3] day training and then washing our hands of responsibility for
whatever harm they may do to clients and to Collaborative Practice by
declaring "well we SAAAAID that was only an introduction".
*InJoy!*
*cMr *
*Collaborative Practice Chicago*
*Divorce Without Warfare*
*carl Michael rossi, M.A. J.D., L.P.C. Attorney, Mediator, Coach, Counselor*
*773-442-2751 <773-442-2751> *
*cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx* <cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*www.CPChicago.net <http://www.cpchicago.net/>*
Executive Director, *Collaborative Practice Professionals of Illinois*
<http://cppillinois.com/>
Publisher, *The World of Collaborative Practice
<http://theworldofcollaborativepractice.com/>**: A Magazine Promoting
Collaborative Dispute Resolution for the Full Range of Possibilities.* An
international online magazine for professionals and the general public
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:22 AM, David Murch davidmurchesq@xxxxxxxxx
[CollabLaw] <CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Asking assessment questions to determine where I am comfortable working,
within my values, is useful. I turned down an opportunity for work
yesterday. Assessments of other people as collaborative or not, doesn't
feel collaborative; it feels judgmental. How I conduct myself can make
all the difference in the world. I am forever grateful that my colleagues
did not judge me from their past experiences with me. Colleagues gave me a
chance and I made mistakes. They showed me the power of example. Every
human contact is a chance for us to grow and transform conflict.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 24, 2015, at 10:25 AM, carl Michael rossi cpchicago@xxxxxxxxx
[CollabLaw] <CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Gary,
You've touched on something that I have long considered an ignored
essential to Collaborative Practice. That being the assessment of the
professionals, particularly the attorneys, for doing this kind of work.
I would love to see some kind of even informal assessment tool be
developed. Something, other than 'gut' or 'faith in mankind' that might
help us to discern which individual professionals to persistently encourage
to give CP a try and which we should actively support in continuing to do
litigation. Something to help us, as you put it, "to ascertain their
degree of litigiousness and likelihood for holding their own client
accountable to the helping process.... [or] that the lawyer may be an
intervening variable adding to the escalation of the dispute".
Since you have a head start in that you have begun to actively do just
that..... I'd like to conscript you to start us off. ;-)
So, if you wouldn't mind? What questions do you ask? What answers
move your judgement to yay or nay?
*InJoy!*
*cMr *
*Collaborative Practice Chicago*
*Divorce Without Warfare*
*carl Michael rossi, M.A. J.D., L.P.C. Attorney, Mediator, Coach,
Counselor*
*773-442-2751 <773-442-2751> *
*cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx* <cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*www.CPChicago.net <http://www.cpchicago.net/>*
Executive Director, *Collaborative Practice Professionals of Illinois*
<http://cppillinois.com/>
Publisher, *The World of Collaborative Practice
<http://theworldofcollaborativepractice.com/>**: A Magazine Promoting
Collaborative Dispute Resolution for the Full Range of Possibilities.*
An international online magazine for professionals and the general public
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Gary Direnfeld gary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[CollabLaw] <CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Many thanks for the kind replies and words of encouragement.
Like others who are trained collaboratively yet who work with many others
who
haven't been trained, I try to run my files collaboratively. As such, I
try to
get the lawyers on board with a common understanding of the problem and to
assure we are pulling in the same direction.
For about a year now I have been "assessing" the lawyers if they are
unknown to
me at the time of referral. By that I mean, before accepting a referral, I
speak with the lawyers individually to ascertain their degree of
litigiousness
and likelihood for holding their own client accountable to the helping
process.
If I come to the belief that the lawyer may be an intervening variable
adding
to the escalation of the dispute, I will decline the referral.
Fighting doesn't produce durable results. Entrenchment in positional
posturing
doesn't lend itself to successful resolution of issues. I don't want to
be a
party to a process that may exacerbate conflict in relationships and
bring harm
to children.
Best,
Gary
Gary Direnfeld, MSW, RSW
Interaction Consultants
20 Suter Crescent, Dundas, Ontario, Canada L9H 6R5
(905) 628-4847
gary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.yoursocialworker.com
www.ipromiseprogram.com
http://www.facebook.com/GaryDirenfeldSocialWorker
http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=60758978&trk=tab_pro
https://twitter.com/socialtworker
