You raise good questions, Gary.
To start, I would work to lose the connection between 'trained' and
'qualified'. The are not the same thing.
Then I think it's important to understand the it IS true that 'anyone can do
this stuff'...'can', in the sense of permission even if not in that of
ability.
Finally, I believe it's of more value to the client and to the professional
and to the growth of CP to list/describe/comment on ones trainings than to
simply say 'I've been trained"
*InJoy!*
*cMr*
*Collaborative Practice Chicago*
*Divorce Without Warfare*
*carl Michael rossi, M.A. J.D., L.P.C.
Attorney, Mediator, Coach, Counselor*
*773-292-3456*
*cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx* <cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*www.CPChicago.net <http://www.cpchicago.net/>*
Executive Director, *Collaborative Practice Professionals of
Illinois*<http://cppillinois.com/>
*Apply Collaborative Practice to many types of disputes. Training available
here <http://www.slideshare.net/carlMichaelrossi/flyer-abney>.*
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Gary Direnfeld
<gary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
OK, then how does one differentiate oneself from someone who has had some
training to engage in collaborative practice, versus the practitioner who
thinks anyone can do this stuff and says, "Yeah, I do collaborative law."
In other words, how is the person seeking a collaborative approach assured
they are working with a trained or qualified professional?
Gary Direnfeld, MSW, RSW
Interaction Consultants and I Promise Program Inc.
20 Suter Crescent,
Dundas, Ontario, Canada L9H 6R5
(905) 628-4847
gary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Parenting: www.yoursocialworker.com
Teen safe driving: www.ipromiseprogram.com
Gary Direnfeld is a social worker and expert on matters of family life.
Courts in Ontario, Canada, have deemed Gary an expert on child development,
parent-child relations, marital and family therapy, custody and access
recommendations, social work and an expert for the purpose of giving a
critique on a Section 112 (social work) report.
Services include counselling, mediation, assessments, assessment critiques
and workshops. Go to his website to read his many articles and view clips of
television and radio appearances: www.yoursocialworker.com
I am not near my e-library but the concept of holding myself out to the
public as a "Certified" coll. att. or a "specialist" in Coll. Law does not
feel right. It may very well be that WA ethics rules prohibit attorneys
from
holding themself out as such.
I agree with Dave. We may be the best trained Coll. Prof and then a case
comes along and for some reason we just do not do well in it. Perhaps not a
good fit with the client.
Not to mention that even though I have been practicing Coll. law for less
years than some and more than others I still feel like a newcomer. Always
something to learn.
Last fall I attended the Collaborative Professionals of WA conference in
Gig Harbor and Woody Mosten presented for a full day, during which he talked
about on any given day a coll. prof can be different things:
I paraphrase here: An Inadequate Coll. Prof.
Competent / Average Coll. Prof.
Professional / Well above average Coll. Prof.
An Artist
While I do not think that a collaborative case requires an Artist at all
times I strive to being an Artist on occasion while practicing Coll. Law.
Hopefully it comes at a time when it is most needed for the collaborative
Team.
I hope that on most other occasions I am a professional / well above
average Coll. Prof.
I do not see that I can ever hold myself out to the public as a Specialist
as I learn something new with every case that comes through. Once I stop
learning then I hope I would have the grace and humility to know that I
am in the wrong line of work.
Kevin
Kevin R. Scudder
Law Offices of Kevin R. Scudder
9706 4th Avenue NE, Suite 320
Seattle, WA 98115-2157
(206) 524-7828 Phone
(206) 524-1302 Fax
On Sat Jan 22 9:02 , sent:
Carl Michael:as experts or specialists.
New York has a similar rule and we are not allowed to hold ourselves out
It makes me uncomfortable to think of myself as either an expert or aspecialist.
As a collaborative lawyer, I do not represent clients in court.me only the same opportunity to do the next case as everyone else. How many
Attending trainings and doing a lot of cases (hopefully well) still gives
times have you worked with collaborators that have less
experience, and they knock your socks off with mad skills? How many times
have you worked with litigators disguised by a collaborative smile?
Best,trainers
Dave Murch
Rochester, NY January 22nd, 2011
---- carl Michael rossi cpchicago@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So I'm curious, do any of you use the term 'certified' or something
similar in describing yourself to the public as a Collaborative Practice
Professional?
What other descriptions do people use in connection with "I engage in
Collaborative Practice"?
Do any practice groups out there state that they are 'certifying' their
members in Collaborative Practice? Any trainers? I know that most
s/heprovide a 'certificate of attendance', are any seeing that as a
'Certification' of the attendee?
Are there ethics or other rules in your jurisdiction regarding such a
claim?
And, of course the hard one, are there any 'actions' that have been taken
by anyone in connection with such a claim by a professional to suggest
ofmight clarify or adjust their statement?
thoughts? comments? Is this only a 'lawyer' issue?
I ask because it seems to me I'm seeing an increase in the number of
professionals who are stating that they are 'Certified' or are
'Specialists' in Collaborative Practice. [As moderator here, and as E.D.
oneour practice group, I get to look at a lot of CP websites. Indeed I saw
'news'the other day that claimed the professional was *'Certified' by the
International Academy of Collaborative Professionals*....this came as
prohibitingto me!]
Maybe it depends on the jurisdiction?
But I've even seen such claims here in Illinois where the rule
thesuch a statement is pretty clear:
* RULE 7.4: COMMUNICATION OF FIELDS OF PRACTICE AND SPECIALIZATION*
(2) the reference must state that the Supreme Court of Illinois does not
recognize certifications of specialties in the practice of law and that
ofcertificate, award or recognition is not a requirement to practice law in
Illinois.
(a) A lawyer may communicate the fact that the lawyer does or does not
practice in particular fields of law.
(b) *The Supreme Court of Illinois does not recognize certifications of
specialties in the practice of law, nor does it recognize certifications
orexpertise in any phase of the practice of law by any agency, governmental
toprivate, or by any group, organization or association.* A lawyer admitted
similarengage in patent practice before the United States Patent and Trademark
Office may use the designation "Patent Attorney" or a substantially
todesignation.
(c) Except when identifying certificates, awards or recognitions issued
orhim or her by an agency or organization, *a lawyer may not use the terms
"certified,'' "specialist,'' "expert,'' or any other, similar terms to
describe his qualifications as a lawyer or his qualifications in any
subspecialty of the law*. If such terms are used to identify any
certificates, awards or recognitions issued by any agency, governmental
theprivate, or by any group, organization or association, the reference must
meet the following requirements:
(1) the reference must be truthful and verifiable and may not be
misleading in violation of Rule 7.1;
(2) *the reference must state that the Supreme Court of Illinois does not
recognize certifications of specialties* in the practice of law and that
lawyercertificate, award or recognition is not a requirement to practice law in
Illinois.
[7.1 states:
A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the
makeor the lawyer’s services. A communication is false or misleading if it
contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact
necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially
misleading.
[1] This Rule governs all communications about a lawyer’s services,
including advertising permitted by Rule 7.2. Whatever means are used to
necessaryknown a lawyer’s services, statements about them must be truthful.
[2] Truthful statements that are misleading are also prohibited by
this Rule. A truthful statement is misleading if it omits a fact
ato make the lawyer’s communication considered as a whole not materially
misleading. A truthful statement is also misleading if there is a
substantial likelihood that it will lead a reasonable person to formulate
availablespecific conclusion about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services for which
there is no reasonable factual foundation.]
*InJoy!*
*cMr*
*Collaborative Practice Chicago*
*Divorce Without Warfare*
*carl Michael rossi, M.A. J.D., L.P.C.
Attorney, Mediator, Coach, Counselor*
*773-292-3456*
*cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx* cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*www.CPChicago.net http://www.cpchicago.net/>*
Executive Director, *Collaborative Practice Professionals of
Illinois*http://cppillinois.com/>
*Apply Collaborative Practice to many types of disputes. Training
here http://www.slideshare.net/carlMichaelrossi/flyer-abney>.*
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollabLaw/
Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollabLaw/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
To change settings via email:
CollabLaw-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CollabLaw-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CollabLaw-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
<
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
