Re: [CollabLaw] transforamatve conflsit (was Bush';e marruiage paln)

From: ECSEsquire@xxxxxxx
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:23:25 EST

In a message dated 1/28/04 1:13:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jkimwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

Part of our approach is from the perspective of honoring the conflict as an
opportunity for transformation. Too often, conflict is seen as something
wrong with the relationship or the other person's fault. It brings up
discomfort and emotions and we blame the other for how we feel in reaction
to them. Actually conflict is a natural part of life. If we see it as an
opportunity to grow and learn, if we embrace it, it provides us with many
gifts. Also, conflict does not live over there, it can't be the other
person's fault. The conflict lives in the shared space between the people.
My reaction to the conflict is mine. If I am responsible for the conflict on
my side and the other is responsible for the conflict on his, the
finger-pointing stops. We become allies in resolving it as a problem-solving
challenge.

I have known this for so long that for many years I wanted to get away from
divorce. I hated seeing al these people living the illusions that I knew could
be healed. (All that kept me in is knowing that no matter how sad it was that
so many people in our society need these skill, terrible harm was being done
by the court system.)

I still believe all this is true -- that pain and conflict are transformative
if we have the courage to see them that way. And I am heartened to see these
views (LONG held by such as Jungian types) gaining ground in the mainstream.
Until we reach the next levee of conciseness as a society, though, I don t
think we in the divorce "business" will be put out of work. Nor do I think
anyone
has ever gotten rich or famous by telling people they cant have a quick fix
-- what they will need to do is long hard work. (Dag nab it!!--also also David
Schnarch's "Passionate Marriage".)

But healing is healing so I do it whenever I can -- usually not, at least
overtly--for money.
And I for one think this is right ON topic!

E. Carroll Straus
Collaborative Lawyer
CA Bar Number 110028

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [CollabLaw] transforamatve conflsit (was Bush';e marruiage paln)

Other related posts: