Structure, Skills & Less Stress: How Courts Can Provide Structure for Learning New Skills
Excerpt from The Future of Family Court: Structure, Skills and Less Stress, Chapter 3: Structure & Accountability, by Bill Eddy, LCSW ESQ Structure, Skills & Less Stress: How Courts Can Provide Structure for Learning New Skills How should high-conflict cases be handled differently by the judge? It’s important to recognize that their problem is a lack of the three conflict-reducing skills (flexible thinking, managed emotions, and moderate behaviors). For whatever reason, high-conflict parents cannot stop themselves from self-harm and from harming their children. One or both parents is truly “out of control” – they can’t control their all-or- nothing thinking, their unmanaged emotions and their extreme behavior. Abuse and alienation are two symptoms of their high-conflict personalities. More than having decisions made for them, they need to be required to learn and use these basic skills. The courts actually have the opportunity to help them get started, while still supervising them. First, courts need to provide a structure for high-conflict parents. Right from the start of a potentially high-conflict case, judges should order parenting classes or short-term counseling that teaches them to work on these three basic conflict-reducing skills. How does the judge know that it is a potentially high-conflict case? When one or both parents seek to restrict the other’s parenting time. (That is when the author’s New Ways for Families® method is designed to be ordered, as described in a later chapter of this book.) Such restrictive requests almost always trigger a “parent contest” which rapidly escalates both parents’ defensiveness – which is passed on to the child. Courts don’t need to wait for an evaluation of abuse or alienation to know that high-conflict behavior may be just around the corner. When the parent contest begins is when alienation will begin to grow, as HCP parents engage in more and more splitting to “win” the parent contest – whether the HCP parent is the initiator of the court’s involvement or defending against allegations, or both – and the child begins to absorb one or both parent’s high anxiety, stress and anger. A request for restricted parenting means something is seriously wrong in the family. This should trigger three theories of the case in the judge’s mind: the “restricted” parent is an HCP and needs restrictions because of out-of-control behavior, such as domestic violence, child abuse or substance abuse; the parent requesting restrictions is an HCP with a personality disorder or traits and is distorting the other parent’s reasonable behavior; or both parents may be HCPs with serious problems. In all of these cases, putting both parents into a parenting class along with their children can help head off a high-conflict case. We already know what skills they need. Of course, the court should concurrently make temporary orders, such as temporary protective orders, temporary child support and temporary parenting plan. By making orders for boosting their conflict-reducing skills, the court shifts the focus onto both parents to work on themselves, rather than just focusing on the accused. This helps avoid splitting, lowers HCP expectations of vindication or revenge, and sends the message that court is really not where they belong with their parenting issues. Second, courts need to follow up with accountability at all future hearings. When the parents return to court, the judge should first quiz them on what they have learned in their parenting class or counseling, before considering any motions before the court. HCP parents won’t use these skills, except by repetition and being constantly reminded by professionals. The court should make clear that it is their responsibility to be solving their parenting problems reasonably, and will only make decisions for them after all other reasonable methods have been exhausted. The court should be a very reluctant decision-maker in the area of parenting for high-conflict parents. BILL EDDY, LCSW, ESQ. is the co-founder and Chief Innovation Officer of the High Conflict Institute in San Diego, California. He pioneered the High Conflict Personality Theory (HCP) and is viewed globally as the leading expert on managing disputes involving people with high conflict personalities. He has written more than twenty books on the topic, developed methods for managing high-conflict disputes, and has taught professionals in the U.S. and more than ten countries. He is also co-host of the popular podcast, It’s All Your Fault and writes a popular blog on Psychology Today.
When Helping Hurts – How Professionals Become Negative Advocates – Or Not
©2017 by Bill Eddy, LCSW, Esq. Most professionals are helping professionals. We like to help our clients as lawyers, mediators, therapists, arbitrators, social workers, human resource professionals, financial professionals, healthcare professionals, educators, administrators and others. We want to help people accomplish their goals, using our professional skills. Often, in order to help someone in a dispute or difficult situation, part of our work is to advocate for a client in dealing with one or more other people. But when a client has a high conflict personality, there is the risk that this drive to help can go off the rails and become distorted. Inadvertently, we may help the person stay stuck in their dysfunctional behavior; and inadvertently we may hurt others who have become their “targets of blame.” When this happens, we become “negative advocates” for a high-conflict person (HCP), by advocating for their negative behavior, negative thinking and negative emotions, much like a co-dependent “enables” an alcoholic or addict. (For information about high-conflict people, see: High Conflict People in Legal Disputes or BIFF: Quick Responses to High Conflict People) When a professional becomes a negative advocate, he or she may be much more persuasive than the HCP and may make the situation much, much worse. In my experience over the past 30 years as a lawyer, mediator and therapist, most prolonged high conflict disputes involve at least one HCP and one professional who has become a negative advocate for the HCP. Helping an Individual Client Sometimes, a professional becomes outraged with the other party in a high-conflict divorce (or other dispute), who the professional has never met. The client’s stories of the other person’s bad behavior (abuse, false allegations, alienation) may be so emotionally upsetting that the professional soon tells the client: “That’s horrible! You must divorce her.” Or: “You must go to court and get restraining orders!” Or: “I will send a letter or affidavit to the court saying how bad the other party is.” All of these statements may go beyond the scope of the professional’s role. Sometimes, the client may actually be an HCP, whose perceptions are distorted and who misinterprets or generates “emotional facts” which do not exist in reality. People with high-conflict personalities or personality disorders often look good on the surface (smart, attractive, friendly, etc.), but under the surface, they are abusive, alienating and/or make frequent exaggerated or false statements. HCPs are preoccupied with blaming others and have a lot of intense emotions. This can confuse the listener, especially one who is sincerely trying to help a client. The listener can become “emotionally hooked,” totally believing what the client says and totally absorbing their fear and anger. If the professional is saying all of these advocacy statements without ever meeting the other party or having any other outside confirming information, the professional may be “enabling” a high-conflict person. In some such cases, the professional’s “zeal to help” reinforces distortions on the part of an upset client – and that client takes legal actions that eventually backfire. In some extreme cases, a professional has lost credibility and been sanctioned for vigorously promoting allegations, which were found to be false. For example, sanctions were awarded against two attorneys in one case for $3000 each, paid to the court, for becoming negative advocates (although that term was not quite used): “An inference of willingness to assist Mr. Kwong’s harassment of Ms. Gong and to abuse the court’s processes could be drawn from his counsels’ sophistry and their litigation tactics, which went beyond proper advocacy and common sense. An attorney in a civil case is not a hired gun required to carry out every direction given by the client….” In re Marriage of Gong and Kwong (2008) 163 Cal. App. 4th 510, 521. Emphasis added. Helping Clients as a Neutral Mediator, Arbitrator or Evaluator In Mediation A mediator may have a case in which one party is extremely upset and tells the mediator that the other party is hiding money. “I know she is! You have to do something about this!” This emotionally upsets the mediator, who turns angrily to the alleged guilty party and tries to persuade her: “Can you bring some proof of your income? Can you bring your accountant to the next meeting?” The problem is that the mediator is now emotionally hooked and emotionally implying that the alleged guilty party IS responsible for this problem, without any other source of information and without any skepticism toward the first party’s complaint. The mediator no longer feels impartial to the parties – the mediator feels like an advocate to the first party and feels like an adversary to the second party. In Arbitration In contrast to a mediator, an arbitrator is the one who makes the decisions. However, in making the decisions it is essential that the parties feel that they have been treated as equals in the process and received the full benefit of an objective process. Sometimes an arbitrator becomes a negative advocate for one side and suddenly becomes hostile to the other party. Then, either verbally or in writing, the message comes through clearly that the arbitrator has totally accepted and favored one party and totally disregarded and disliked the other party. When that comes through, the arbitrator has become a negative advocate for the one and treated the other like a target of blame. Then, the targeted person complains informally or formally about the arbitrator and the arbitrator’s reputation and the arbitration process is tarnished. In Evaluation Evaluators are becoming more common in legal disputes, to assist the court in understanding the depth of the case, especially in cases in which psychological or other specialized knowledge is helpful. Evaluators are supposed to be neutral, but during the process their analysis of the case often involves favoring one side or the other, which is appropriate if the information supports that conclusion. But this should remain at all times an objective process. If the evaluator becomes emotionally hooked and suddenly
New Ways Parent-Child Talk: What to say to your children during this time of transition
New Ways Parent-Child Talk: What to say to your children during this time of transition ©2017 Bill Eddy, LCSW, Esq. When parents separate, having a talk with your children that includes some or all of the following may be helpful (presented in age-appropriate terms). You can say this separately or jointly to your children. It helps if you agree on when you are going to say this to them, and what details you have agreed upon to tell them. For example: parenting schedule, how you will communicate, and how decisions will be made. 1. New ways in different houses We’re going to be organizing our family in new ways from now on. Your mother/father and I are going to be living in different houses and bringing new people into our lives. While we are separating or getting a divorce, we are not separating from you. We will both do everything we can to keep our relationships with you loving and strong. You deserve the best from both of us. 2. Positive ways with each other We’re going to try to act in positive ways with each other. We’re going to encourage you to have a strong relationship with both of us. We’re going to avoid comparing ourselves to each other, by saying one of your parents is a better person than the other. We both have made mistakes and I am working on myself to be a better person in my life. And we both have strengths that you can learn from, and I will remind you of your mothers’/father’s strengths in case you forget occasionally. 3. Avoiding extreme behaviors As we organize your family in new ways, we are going to try to avoid extreme behaviors by using moderate behaviors, because families are hurt by extreme behaviors. If your mother/father does something extreme, I am still going to try to use moderate behaviors. Because one extreme behavior does not deserve another. (Then go on to give examples of what moderate behavior is). 4. Managing our emotions I am going to try to manage my own emotions as we go through this separation or divorce. You are not responsible for the separation or divorce, and you are not responsible for my feelings. I alone am responsible for how I manage my emotions and for protecting you from my most intense emotions. This will be a hard time and I will not be perfect. 5. Emotions can be contagious I understand that emotions can be contagious, so I will try to reassure you that you do not have to have my emotions. You are a separate person and will have your own emotions about this separation or divorce. You should always feel free to talk about your feelings with me and I will respect your feelings, even when they are different from mine. The most important thing is that I will try to do my best to let you continue to be a child while I continue to be a parent. 6. Flexible thinking I am going to use flexible thinking in handling our separation or divorce. This means that you can approach me with any ideas about what you and I can do together, and about the new ways our family will be operating. But remember that your mother/father and I will be doing the decision-making. This means I will try to solve problems without getting stuck in all-or-nothing thinking where I only see one solution. There are many ways to make our lives work well together and I will be open-minded. 7. Rules in both houses There will still be rules in each of our houses, even though some of the rules will be different. We both expect you to follow the other parent’s rules when you are in the other’s house. BILL EDDY, LCSW, ESQ. is the co-founder and Chief Innovation Officer of the High Conflict Institute in San Diego, California. He pioneered the High Conflict Personality Theory (HCP) and is viewed globally as the leading expert on managing disputes involving people with high-conflict personalities. He has written more than twenty books on the topic, developed methods for managing high-conflict disputes, and has taught professionals in the U.S. and more than ten countries. He is also co-host of the popular podcast, It’s All Your Fault, and writes a popular blog on Psychology Today.