WSSFC Quality of Life/Ethics Track Session 2

Transcription

1 WSSFC Quality of Life/Ethics Track Session 2 Dealing with Difficult People, Difficult Clients (Yours and Theirs), Difficult Attorneys, and Difficult Others Part 1 Dr. Kenneth H. Waldron Monona Mediation and Counseling LLC, Monona

2 Dealing With Difficult People Presenter Ken Waldron, Ph.D. Overview Difficult Clients, yours and theirs Difficult Case Attorneys Difficult Others Three Types of Difficult Clients Divorce induced difficulties Divorce induced emotional states Divorce induced personality problems Divorce induced conduct problems Chronic conduct problems Violence Substance abuse Hedonism Problematic personalities 1

3 Problematic Personalities We rarely think about personality patterns and adjust how we deal with them; we simply consider one person nice and another a jerk and go about our business. (Bill Eddy, 2009) Management, not treatment The attorney is not responsible for treating the party but is responsible for developing and enacting strategies preventing difficult people from interfering with the settlement. (Koritzinsky, 2013) What is Personality: What are problematic personality traits? A collection of thoughts, feelings and behaviors in patterns Three selves, each with its own personality: Public Self Ideal Self Real Self A personality trait is one cluster of thoughts, feelings or behaviors Healthy Personality The 3 selves overlap greatly The person has many personality traits from which to choose The person can maneuver flexibly between personality traits The person recognizes context and displays personality traits that fit the context 2

4 Problematic Personalities: General Gaps between the 3 selves Narrow range of traits from which to choose Lack of flexibility in moving from trait to trait Difficulty recognizing context and choosing traits that fit Life long practice of coping mechanisms to manage themselves and their lives; highly skilled at maneuvering in relationships Recognizing Problematic Personalities: General Strong Emotions: able to convince people of their story ; emotions consistent with content Dependence on Others: recreate the drama with everyone in relationship to them If you look forward to or dread upcoming meetings, you probably have a problem person Recognizing Problematic Personalities: General Drama: drama is reassuring, even when painful. I drama, therefore I am A wake of destruction in their lives: they hurt people Self sabotaging: self destructive: they hurt themselves Non reflective/compromised cause and effect reasoning 3

5 Recognizing Problematic Personalities: What they all have in common Narcissism: self involved; selfish; hedonistic. Life long DT: self involved to other focused Early DTs: Supplies empathy compassion Narcissism is getting stuck on supplies Get stuck for one of three reasons: Didn t get supplies Overindulged in supplies Distortions: e.g., supplies paired with pain Recognizing Problematic Personalities: What they all have in common Pervasive Blaming: externalizing the causes of problems; errors in thinking Chronic Internal Distress: caused by cognitive distortions and emotions Inferential Thinking: Believe the thoughts; develop belief systems based on inference Compromised Cause/Effect Reasoning: Act as if how they wish things were rather than how things work Recognizing Problematic Personalities: What they all have in common Rule Breaking: mands and compliance Laws Boundaries Social convention Loose relationship with the truth Distorted Sense of Proportion: minor/trivial v. major/substantial; all or nothing thinking Unrealistic Expectations: entitlement; chronic side taking; cannot walk away, even from a win 4

6 Recognizing Problematic Personalities: What they all have in common Control through Manipulation: fear of being dominated, so control information; controlavoidant behaviors More on drama: can be positive drama sexual attraction; charm; money/success Recognizing: the take aways Strong emotions believable Elicit strong emotions in others, positive and negative Create destructive drama drama is the goal Non reflective; poor cause and effect thinking Highly self involved; entitlement; blame Break rules; avoid the control of others They have been practicing all their lives; they are good at it General Structure: Have clear and consistent, predictable rules with regard to your engagement and follow them. Avoid Accepting Invitations into Drama: Problem Personalities are adept at provoking strong emotions in others; this is an invitation do not accept. Display Courtesy, Respect and Duty: they are used to being treated as jerks. 5

7 General Never criticize or directly confront: a personality has a will to survive (Lester, 2003) Do not look for traits that are not there: empathy, compassion, guilt, shame, long term thinking, logic, cause effect reasoning, selfreflection Retain Referent Authority: be willing to go to the mat on this one; define law as different from fair General Four Stages: Bonding; Structure; Reality Testing; Consequences (Bill Eddy, 2009) Learn the clients objective and subjective goals and priorities (bonding on goals) Set conditions of engagement (structure) Shape case (reality testing) Predict outcomes (consequences) Specific Dealing with Narcissism: Focus on the meaning of steps, strategies and behaviors to the client Clarify the gap between what the client deserves and what the legal system does Listen respectfully, be empathic but bifurcate emotional issues from legal tasks stay on legal tasks with structure 6

8 Specific Pervasive Blaming and Chronic Internal Distress: Bifurcate the emotional experience from the legal process Empathize and then return to the legal task Refer to a counselor for emotional support Remind that emotions/blame/guilt/shame lead to bad deals and that good legal strategy leads to the best deals possible Create a new enemy for the blame: the system Specific Dealing with Inferential Thinking, Manipulation, Strong Emotions, Dependence: Get the facts; remind the client that the justice system is about what can be proved, not what is the truth; Consider alternatives, but do not confront Remind that making un provable claims is a losing strategy Specific Compromised cause and effect reasoning: The I m missing something question The alternatives approach Dealing with Rule Breaking: Avoid anger; focus on consequences to them Listen respectfully to the subjective goals instruct on alternatives Maintain the structure of your engagement 7

9 Specific Distorted sense of proportion Set priorities The rule of 7 2 Unrealistic expectations Educate (natural optimism; realism) Use the subjective priorities of the client as standards to measure the importance of issues Have some rehearsed responses Specific Control Through Manipulation Stick with your rules of engagement Do not get angry/frustrated do not accept the invitation to be a bit player in the drama Do not threaten, predict consequences Gently confront with reality not personal confrontations Take Aways Bond, structure, facts, consequences Do not confront clarify Do not accept invitations into drama have neutral responses Watch for and undercut inferential thinking Do not look for traits that are not there Point out consequences, especially for rule breaking Maintain referent authority 8

10 Closing Never underestimate the power of pathology Problematic personalities have enduring patterns of behavior... Well intentioned lectures and routine negative feedback about their dysfunctional daily lives have no lasting effect on their behavior But they are people too 9

11 Dealing with Difficult People Presenter Kenneth H. Waldron, Ph.D. Monona Mediation and Counseling LLC

12 1. Overview: difficult clients, yours and theirs; difficult case attorneys; difficult others a. There are three types of difficult people in a divorce case: i. Divorce induced difficulties: 1. Divorce induced emotional states: anxiety, caused by fear; depression, caused by loss; guilt, caused by a wish to undo or actual misconduct; shame, caused by social insecurity or religious belief. 2. Divorce induced conduct problems: separation engendered domestic violence (29% of all domestic violence); open conflict in front of children; affairs before or shortly after a separation; substance abuse; parental alienation syndrome. 3. Divorce induced personality problems: narcissism; errors in thinking (e.g., projecting the blame onto spouse, rationalizing misconduct, etc.) ii. People with chronic conduct problems: 1. Violence: 4 patterns of chronic domestic violence: a. Male controlling violence (26%); b. Chronic wife beating (18-20%); c. Chronic husband beating (18-20%); d. Psychotic or paranoid (male and female, 8%). 2. Substance abuse. 3. Hedonism: sexual addictions; gambling addictions; chronic irresponsibility. iii. Problematic personalities (personality disorders): We rarely think about personality patterns and adjust how we deal with them; we simply consider one person nice and another a jerk and go about our business. (Bill Eddy, 2009). 1. Difficult people have problematic personality traits; 2. The goal is management, not treatment; 3. The attorney is not responsible for treating the party but is responsible for developing and enacting strategies preventing difficult people from interfering with settlement. (Koritzinsky, 2013). b. What is personality: what are problematic personality traits? i. Personality is a collection of thoughts, feelings and behaviors in patterns; ii. We each have three selves: a public self (how we behave with others); an ideal self (what we would like to be like); a real self (who we are by ourselves including thoughts, feelings and sometimes behaviors that we do not even reveal to people to whom we are close). iii. A personality trait is one cluster of thoughts, feelings and/or behavior (e.g., how we are at parties with close friends). iv. A healthy personality: the three selves mostly overlap the person is generally their real self, with some exceptions, in public and is close to their current ideal; the person has many personality traits to choose from 2 - Waldron

13 (e.g., a funeral as opposed to an office party); the person can maneuver flexibly between personality traits (e.g., laughing at a party but shifting to sympathy at a sad story); the person recognizes context and displays personality traits that fit the context (e.g., a parent at a child s event). v. A problematic personality: has gaps between the three selves; has a narrow range of personality traits to choose from; lacks flexibility in moving from trait to trait; has difficulty recognizing context and choosing traits that fit; has life-long practice of coping mechanisms to manage themselves and their lives in the face of the problems they create; can be highly skilled at maneuvering in relationships. 2. Recognizing Problematic Personalities: General a. Strong emotions: they are able to convince people of their story; their emotions are consistent with the story; b. Dependence on others: they recreate the drama with everyone in relationship to them (including their attorney); c. Elicit strong emotions in others, sometimes negative but sometimes positive. d. If you look forward to or dread upcoming meetings, you probably have a problem person. e. Drama: drama is reassuring, reaffirming, even when painful I drama, therefore I am. f. Wake of destruction: in their lives they hurt people. g. Self-sabotaging/self-destructive they hurt themselves. h. Non-reflective: they have compromised cause and effect reasoning. 3. Recognizing Problematic Personalities: What They All Have in Common a. Narcissism: they are self-involved, selfish, and hedonistic; they are stuck in their infancy and toddlerhood when they just want what they want. b. Pervasive blaming: externalizing the causes of problems; errors in thinking; c. Chronic internal distress: caused by cognitive distortions, emotions and the failure of their coping mechanisms to improve their lives; d. Inferential thinking: they believe their thoughts; develop belief systems based on inference; e. Compromised cause and effect reasoning: they act as if things are as they wish rather than how things work (entitlement); f. Rule-breaking: laws, boundaries, social convention, honesty; g. Distorted sense of proportion: minor/trivial vs. major/substantial; all or nothing thinking; h. Unrealistic expectations: entitlement; chronic side-taking; cannot walk away, even from a win if not everything; i. Control through manipulation: fear of being dominated by others so control information and avoid compliance. j. More on drama: can be positive drama sexual attraction; charm; money/success. 4. Recognizing: the take-aways: a. They have strong emotions that make them very believable; 3 - Waldron

14 b. They elicit strong emotions in others, positive and negative; c. They create drama that is almost always destructive, both to themselves and to others; d. The drama is the goal; e. They are non-reflective and have compromised cause and effect reasoning; they have difficulty seeing themselves or situations objectively or seeing what is really causing them almost constant distress; f. They are highly self-involved, feel entitled to what they want and when they do not get what they want they blame others (including their attorney); g. They break rules and will go to great lengths to avoid being controlled by others; h. They have been practicing all of their life and are good at what they do. 5. General a. Structure: have clear and consistent predictable rules with regard to your engagement and follow them; b. Avoid accepting invitations into drama: problem personalities are adept at provoking strong emotions in others this is an invitation to be a bit player in his or her movie. Do not accept; c. Display courtesy, respect and duty: they are used to being treated as jerks; d. Never criticize or directly confront: a personality has a will to survive (Lester, 2003). A confrontation feels like a threat to survival and the personality will go to the trenches. e. Do not look for traits that are not there: empathy, compassion, guilt, shame, longterm thinking, cause-effect reasoning, and self-reflection. f. Retain referent authority: be willing to go to the mat on this one; define the law as different from fair but as a way to control chaos. Present yourself as the guide, who has your clients interests at heart and you know what you are doing. If they want a positive outcome, they must do as you say. g. The relationship: four stages bonding, structure; reality testing; consequences (Eddy, 2009): i. Learn the client s objective (what they want) and subjective goals (why they want it) and priorities (bonding on goals); ii. Set the conditions of engagement (structure); iii. Shape the case (reality testing) there is a difference between the truth and what can be proved; making unprovable claims is a losing strategy. iv. Predict outcomes (consequences); a work in progress. 6. Specific a. Dealing with narcissism: i. Focus on the meaning of steps, strategies and behaviors to the client (not others, even children); ii. Clarify the gap between what the client deserves and what the legal system does; iii. Listen respectfully, be empathic but bifurcate emotional issues from legal tasks stay on legal tasks with structure; b. Pervasive blaming and chronic internal distress: 4 - Waldron

15 i. Bifurcate the emotional experience from the legal process; ii. Empathize and then return to the legal task; iii. Defer and refer to a counselor for emotional support; iv. Remind that emotions/blame/guilt/shame lead to bad deals and that good legal strategy leads to the best deals possible; v. Create a new enemy for the blame: the system. c. Dealing with inferential thinking, manipulation, strong emotions and dependence: i. Get the facts: remind the person that the legal system is about what can be proved, not what is the truth; ii. Consider alternatives but do not confront - That might be the way to go but let s make a list of responses and estimate what will happen (i.e., predict outcomes). iii. Challenge the belief that the inferential thinking led to: He just doesn t want to pay child support. You could be right, but what would be wrong with that; people are supposed to consider the financial consequences of their decisions. Are you saying that he does not really love the children or want to be involved in their lives? iv. Remind that making un-provable claims is a losing strategy. d. More about inferential thinking: have a toolkit with responses to inferential thinking: i. Did she say that or are you guessing? ii. That s a good guess and you are probably right, but we would be foolish not to consider other explanations. iii. That could be right, but I am not sure that we can prove it. iv. That is probably right but let s check it out so that we do not make a mistake. e. Compromised cause and effect reasoning: i. The I m missing something question. Ask the person to fill in the gap between the cause and the effect e.g., I understand that she was cold and distant (he was busy) but how did that lead to you having an affair? ii. The alternatives approach. E.g., I can think of three or four other possible causes of that, why are you so sure that is the cause or Many parents do that but their children do not refuse to see them. f. Dealing with rule breaking: i. Avoid getting angry; focus on the consequences to them; ii. Listen respectfully to subjective goals and instruct on alternatives; iii. Maintain the structure of your engagement. g. Distorted sense of proportion: i. Make list of priorities: some based on the client s goals; some based on your understanding of the system. 5 - Waldron

16 ii. Instruct on the rule of 7 plus or minus 2; the court (or guardian ad litem) is only going to be able to focus on 7 plus or minus 2 points/issues you have to whittle the list to the most important ones. h. Unrealistic expectations: i. Educate on the law; ii. Define early the subjective priorities of the client; use those to measure the importance of issues as they arise; iii. Have some rehearsed responses: e.g., It is natural in an ambiguous situation to be overly optimistic, experience teaches us what to actually expect, There is always a difference between what should be and what is, Maybe with a different judge, but with this judge, this is what you can expect to get, There is a range of possible outcomes what you expect is at the high end of that range but it could turn out to be the low end. i. Control through manipulation: i. Stick with your rules of engagement; make sure those include dealbreakers; ii. Do not get angry or frustrated do not accept the invitation into the drama; iii. Do not threaten, predict; e.g., If it came out in a custody study or trial that you did that, you would probably lose the case; iv. Gently confront with reality not personal confrontations (e.g., You are talking about the way it should work, not the way it does work ) j. Take-aways on management strategies: i. Bonding, structure, facts, consequences; ii. Do not confront clarify; iii. Do not accept invitations into the drama have neutral responses; iv. Watch for and undercut inferential thinking; v. Do not look for traits that are not there; vi. Point out consequences, to the client, especially for rule breaking; vii. Maintain referent authority. 7. Closing: a. Never underestimate the power of pathology b. Problematic personalities have enduring patterns of behavior... wellintentioned lectures and routine negative feedback about their dysfunctional daily lives have no lasting effect on their behavior c. But they are people too be kind and respectful. 6 - Waldron