Saying Yes to Jean-Pierre LeBlanc
Filed Under Holistic Law | Leave a Comment
Every day I make it a habit to focus on something that I am really grateful for. Today the subject of my focus is my life coach, mentor, and best friend: Jean-Pierre LeBlanc.
I met Jean-Pierre in Cabo San Lucas, Baja California on New Year’s Eve 2002. His family and my family were staying at the same resort and they accepted our invitation to attend the same New Year’s Eve celebration. Our families really hit it off that night, and we spent most of the rest of our stay in Mexico doing wonderful things together. Our families have been close ever since.
In August of 2003, Jean-Pierre invited me to attend a weekend workshop he was hosting in Vancouver, British Columbia. At the time I felt really stuck and just going through the motions as a small town business lawyer. There was not much gratitude in my life. At my wife Heidi’s urging, I said yes to Jean-Pierre’s invitation, bought a plane ticket, and flew up to Canada with my 13-year-old son, Trevor. Trevor spent the weekend with Jean-Pierre’s wife and daughter, Kate and Kiara, enjoying Vancouver. I did the workshop, suspicious and curious at the time about what I could or would learn from this process.
Well, I learned a lot! This was where I was introduced to Jean-Pierre’s concept of Gender Synergy, and I made a number of really useful observations about who I was and how I operated in this world. At the end of the workshop, I decided to say yes to another invitation from Jean-Pierre, and I hired him as my coach. We have had a coaching relationship every since.
I recently got on another airplane to fly to Vancouver for another of Jean-Pierre’s weekend workshops. I think it was my 10th. Every time I go, I learn something new and I have the feeling that I am taking my life and life skills to a higher level.
When I look back at who I was on that plane to Vancouver almost five years ago compared to who I am today, I am astounded and deeply grateful for all of the personal growth and positive change that I have experienced. I am grateful for all I have learned from Jean-Pierre as well as from the other coaches, mentors, and thought leaders I have worked with over the last five years because I said yes to Jean-Pierre’s initial invitation to fly to that first workshop in BC.
When was the last time you said yes to an invitation to try something new, to do something that might stretch you and cause you to change and grow? I suggest that you consider becoming proactive and that you seek out these opportunities for personal growth and positive change. I guarantee you will be glad you did.
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
Playing the Human Game: Part Three
Filed Under Holistic Law | Leave a Comment
Rule Number Three: Choose to believe that you are 100% responsible for your current situation, no matter what it is.
If each player is 100% responsible for the situation in which they find themselves, then they have the maximum amount of power possible to transform that situation into a better one. They are not going to wait passively for someone else to fix their life for them. With responsibility and resources comes power—the power to create and the power to destroy, the power to choose between constructive action and destructive action.
Playing the Human Game with these three rules allows a player to see that every event in the player’s past, every choice that the player made, every action that the player took was perfect. It was perfect simply because the event took place, the choice was made, and the action was taken and because everyone who participated in the process was doing the best that he or she possibly could, given the resources that they thought were available to them at the time.
I choose to believe that we all have limitless resources. We just don’t see them all the time. Now, in the current moment, the player may see resources that the player did not see in the past. Because of the player’s new awareness of resources, the player is able to choose to create new and different events, to make different choices, and to take different action.
Because the client/player has chosen to play the Human Game, the player does not waste precious energy blaming, shaming, and justifying.
The playing field is always fresh, always new, constantly updated with information from the past, but never encumbered with negative emotions from the past. The player’s energy is focused on the present moment, creating a new future unencumbered by mistakes that might have been made in the past. The client/player gets to play a truly powerful game as a full partner with his or her lawyer/coach. This is a really powerful way to address legal problems and to play the Human Game. Try it!
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
Playing the Human Game: Part Two
Filed Under Holistic Law | Leave a Comment
Rule Number Two: Choose to believe that everyone does the best they possibly can, given the resources they think are available to them.
If the past is perfect and everyone who acted in the past did the best he or she possibly could in the past, then the player does not have a reason for regrets, for anger, for guilt, or for resentment. The player has no reason to cling to any need to make other people wrong for what they did or did not do.
I encourage my clients to think of the energy that they will save as players in this game by simply giving up the need to think, feel, and do all those things. If the past is perfect and everyone has done the best they possibly could, then the player is free to believe in the perfection of everything that everyone has ever done. No matter how much of a mess the current situation is, blaming someone else for that situation just doesn’t make sense because that someone the player is blaming did the best that he or she possibly could—given the resources they thought were available to them. Why would you want to blame someone who did the best they possibly could?
For Rule Number Three, please see my next blog!
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
Playing the Human Game: Part One
Filed Under Holistic Law | Leave a Comment
My life seems to work better when I think of it as a game: the Human Game of Being. I have also discovered that my clients’ legal problems tend to get resolved more easily—with better results and less stress—when they agree to play the Human Game with me. Here is how we play.
I start out by asking them a question:
Do you believe that you can change the past?
Then I sit back and wait for a response. So far, 100% of my clients have answered this question with some variation of “No. I don’t believe that I can change the past.” That’s when I ask them if they would like to play the Human Game with me. The game has three basic rules:
Rule Number One: Choose to believe that the past is perfect.
There are lots of sayings that extol the wisdom of not being upset about the past, like “there’s no sense in crying over spilt milk,” or “that’s water over the dam,” or “that’s water under the bridge.” What I am talking about in this game is more than that.
In order for the game to be successful, the players need to choose to believe that the past is not only not worth getting upset about; they need to believe that it’s actually perfect. Here’s why: If the player believes that the past is anything less than perfect, the player will spend the player’s energy ruminating over “should have” or “could have” scenarios, detracting from the purpose of the game, which is to transform the player’s legal problems into opportunities for personal growth and positive change.
For those players who question the wisdom of such a rule, I go on to explain that if they chose to believe that the past were not perfect, they would then want to change the past so that it would be perfect. Since they have already acknowledged that they cannot do that, then their wanting to make the past perfect would be wanting to do something that they know they cannot do. That would just make them frustrated, angry, and resentful, and produce a decidedly less-than-perfect result. In other words, it would be crazy-making. It just doesn’t make sense to go down that path. It doesn’t work!
Rule Number Two: TUNE IN NEXT WEEK TO FIND OUT!
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
Choice and the Meaning of Life
Filed Under Holistic Law | Leave a Comment
Approximately 15 years ago shortly after my infant daughter, Andrea, died, I agreed to participate in a three-day workshop called the Forum, offered by Landmark Education (www.landmarkeducation.com). I took the course because I wanted to sort out the meaning of my daughter’s short life and of her death. I was grieving, depressed, and troubled, and willing to try anything to get myself unstuck.
I learned a number of expressions and distinctions during the three long days and one long evening that I attended the Forum those many years ago. One expression that sticks in my mind today is the following:
“Life is empty and meaningless, and it is empty and meaningless that it is empty and meaningless.”
At first blush this statement might seem to be a pretty depressing, if not a bit nihilistic. But I have come to love this expression as a way to access the power of belief. I now believe that this expression alone was worth the price of admission to the Forum and well worth the time and effort that I spent on the course. What I interpret this statement to mean is that life, in and of itself, has no meaning other than the meaning that I give to it. AND, therefore, I am free to choose to give my life, or anyone else’s life for that matter, whatever meaning that I want to give to it.
I find this to be an extremely liberating philosophy. I have chosen to believe, for example, that the meaning of Andrea’s life was to lead me to examine my life and its meaning at a much deeper level and at a much younger age than I would have, had I not experienced the shock, pain, and grief of her illness and death. This led me to search for, or rather, choose to construct, a meaning for my life from the beliefs that I had chosen for myself, and to choose to interpret Andrea’s death, as well as her life, as a gift to me in my life.
I currently choose to believe that the purpose for my life is to use my wisdom and compassion to help the world live in greater peace and harmony. I choose to accomplish that purpose by applying a Coach Approach to the Practice of Law, to be a Transformational Lawyer, to help my clients transform their legal problems into opportunities for personal growth and positive change, to invite other lawyers to join me as Transformational Lawyers, and to live in accordance with the beliefs and the life purpose that I have chosen for myself.
That is the meaning I have given to my life. What do you choose to believe is the meaning of yours? What meaning have you given to your life? Have you chosen a life purpose, if only for today? If so, are you thinking, living, acting, working, doing, and being in accordance with your life’s purpose? If not, why not?
If you have not yet chosen a life’s purpose, now would be a good time to choose one. Write it down. Try it on to see how well it fits. If it doesn’t fit, change it. Try on another life’s purpose, and then another, until you get a match that resonates with you and truly works for you. Then, live consciously in accordance with your chosen life’s purpose. You will be happier, healthier, and wealthier than you dreamed you could be before you chose your life’s purpose. Choose to live a life filled with passion, focus, and joy. Choose a life’s purpose! Do it now!
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
Choosing Beliefs
Filed Under Holistic Law | 1 Comment
Wikipedia defines “choice” as follows:
Choice consists of the mental process of thinking involved with the process of judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one of them for action. Some simple examples include deciding whether to get up in the morning or go back to sleep and selecting a given route to make a journey across a country. More complex examples (often decisions that affect what a person thinks or their core beliefs) include choosing a religious affiliation, such as Christianity, or deciding on a political party of choice, such as Republican or Democrat.
Wikipedia defines “belief” as:
the psychological state in which an individual is convinced of the truth of a proposition. Like the related concepts truth, knowledge, and wisdom, there is no precise definition of belief on which scholars agree…
We all have beliefs—lots of them. However, many of us have never bothered to reflect on how we managed to acquire all of these beliefs. Some of us don’t even think of them as beliefs; they are just “facts,” true statements about life, people, the world.
The truth of the matter is that we have chosen each and every belief that we hold, and just because we believe something is true today, that doesn’t mean that we will believe it is true tomorrow.
For example, when I was growing up in the 1950s and 60s, I was taught (and I chose to believe) that the Earth was the third planet from the sun in a solar system that consisted of nine planets and that the last and smallest planet in the solar system was Pluto. However, if, once again, we consult Wikipedia, we find that:
[I]n the late 20th and early 21st centuries many objects similar to Pluto were discovered in the outer solar system, most notably the scattered disc object Eris, which is 27% more massive than Pluto. As a result, on August 24, 2006 the [International Astronomical Union (“IAU”)] defined the term “planet” for the first time. This definition excluded Pluto from planethood, and reclassified it under the new category of dwarf planet along with Eris and Ceres. After the reclassification, Pluto was added to the list of minor planets and given the number 134340.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto
So, today, lots of people no longer believe that Pluto is the sun’s 9th planet because they respect the knowledge accumulated regarding this matter by the folks at the IAU and they, therefore, take the IAU pronouncement as fact. Others disagree because they were taught that Pluto was the 9th planet from the sun, they have always “known” that Pluto was the 9th planet from the sun, and it, therefore, is going to stay 9th planet from the sun! I will leave that debate to others, tipping in the direction of accepting the IAU’s current position, until it changes. Choosing whether or not to believe that Pluto is the 9th planet from the sun just doesn’t have a great impact on my life.
There are other choices, however, that do have an impact on my life. Here are two that I want to talk about today:
1. You can choose to believe that the past is perfect simply because you cannot change it.
Why would I want to do that? Let’s take a closer look.
I often ask my clients to consider the possibility that the past is perfect simply because you cannot change it.
I start by asking them if they believe that they can change the past. So far, I haven’t met a single client who has told me that he or she can do that.
Then I tell them that once I, for one, have chosen to believe that something is NOT perfect, I will want to find ways to make it more perfect. It’s human nature. I am going to want to CHANGE it.
Well, we have already agreed that we cannot change the past.
Therefore, if we choose to believe that the past is not perfect, we are CONDEMNING OURSELVES to wanting to change something that we simply CANNOT change.
That, my friends, is CRAZY MAKING!
Why would you ever want to do that to yourself? Why would you choose to drive yourself crazy chasing your tail trying to do something that you know you simply cannot do?
However, that is EXACTLY what you do when you choose to believe that the past is not perfect. And most people do.
The result is anger, frustration, guilt, resentment—any of a long list of emotions that eat away at your mind, your body, and your soul.
Why would you ever want to do that to yourself? Don’t! Instead, just choose to believe that the past is perfect simply because you cannot change it.
You don’t need any more reason than that.
2. You can choose to believe that everyone does the best they possibly can, given the resources available to them.
Why would I want to do that? Well, let’s see.
I often ask my clients to consider the possibility that everyone in their lives does the best they possibly can, given the resources available to them, and I emphasize the “given the resources available to them” part.
Just as when you choose to believe that the past is not perfect, you want to change it, if you choose to believe that someone else is NOT doing the best they possibly could, you are going to want them to do BETTER, to do their BEST. The problem with that desire is that you have no control over it.
The truth of the matter is that you can’t make anyone else do anything! It is always THEIR CHOICE how to behave, what to do, what not to do—not yours.
This is where the Serenity Prayer comes in. Asking for the serenity to accept the things you cannot change, the courage to change the things you can, and the wisdom to know the difference is much easier when you believe that everyone does the best they possibly can, given the resources available to them. You get to focus on what YOU can change, and that’s YOU, your thoughts, your beliefs, your actions.
When you choose to believe that everyone does the best they can, given the resources available to them, your focus can shift from making other people wrong for not doing what you want them to do, to looking for ways to help them to acquire the resources they will need to produce the result that you desire.
Rather than being filled with anger and resentment toward these others because you are not experiencing the outcome you anticipated or desired, you feel compassion for them because they are doing the best they can; they just need more and better resources.
Now the inquiry is “How can I help?” “How do we get them the resources they need?” rather than “Why can’t you . . .?” “Why won’t they . . .?” All of a sudden, you are in a collaborative problem-solving mode, rather than one of shame and blame, anger, and resentment. All of your energy is used constructively, moving forward toward a solution to your mutual problem, rather than wasting effort and vital energy parceling out blame.
So, if you combine the belief that the past is perfect (and therefore, any “mistakes” that you have made in the past have been transformed into “perfect” opportunities for personal growth and positive change) with the belief that everyone else is doing the best they possibly can, given the resources available to them, (and therefore, you feel compassion for them and want to help them acquire more and better resources), you then give yourself maximum power and control over your present so that all of your energy can be used and focused on crafting solutions to the problems that you are currently facing, and to take maximum advantage of the opportunities that those problems present.
You are free to choose your beliefs. Choose beliefs that serve you!
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
The Power of the Platinum Rule
Filed Under Holistic Law | 1 Comment
Everybody knows what the Golden Rule is. No, not that Golden Rule; this one:
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
Professor Harry J. Gensler teaches in the philosophy department of John Carroll University in Cleveland, Ohio. He wrote his doctoral dissertation on the Golden Rule at the University of Michigan 30 years ago. Here is his short essay on the Golden Rule taken from his web site:
The golden rule is endorsed by all the great world religions; Jesus, Hillel, and Confucius used it to summarize their ethical teachings. And for many centuries the idea has been influential among people of very diverse cultures. These facts suggest that the golden rule may be an important moral truth.
Let’s consider an example of how the rule is used. President Kennedy in 1963 appealed to the golden rule in an anti-segregation speech at the time of the first black enrollment at the University of Alabama. He asked whites to consider what it would be like to be treated as second class citizens because of skin color. Whites were to imagine themselves being black - and being told that they couldn’t vote, or go to the best public schools, or eat at most public restaurants, or sit in the front of the bus. Would whites be content to be treated that way? He was sure that they wouldn’t - and yet this is how they treated others. He said the “heart of the question is … whether we are going to treat our fellow Americans as we want to be treated.”
The golden rule is best interpreted as saying: “Treat others only in ways that you’re willing to be treated in the same exact situation.” To apply it, you’d imagine yourself in the exact place of the other person on the receiving end of the action. If you act in a given way toward another, and yet are unwilling to be treated that way in the same circumstances, then you violate the rule.
To apply the golden rule adequately, we need knowledge and imagination. We need to know what effect our actions have on the lives of others. And we need to be able to imagine ourselves, vividly and accurately, in the other person’s place on the receiving end of the action. With knowledge, imagination, and the golden rule, we can progress far in our moral thinking.
The golden rule is best seen as a consistency principle. It doesn’t replace regular moral norms. It isn’t an infallible guide on which actions are right or wrong; it doesn’t give all the answers. It only prescribes consistency - that we not have our actions (toward another) be out of harmony with our desires (toward a reversed situation action). It tests our moral coherence. If we violate the golden rule, then we’re violating the spirit of fairness and concern that lie at the heart of morality.
The golden rule, with roots in a wide range of world cultures, is well suited to be a standard to which different cultures could appeal in resolving conflicts. As the world becomes more and more a single interacting global community, the need for such a common standard is becoming more urgent.
http://www.jcu.edu/philosophy/gensler/goldrule.htm
I started this blog entry by saying that everybody knows what the Golden Rule is; I also think that most everybody thinks that they believe in the Golden Rule, but they don’t. Most people, if you push them, will admit that what they really believe is in doing onto others as others do onto them, not as they would have others do onto them.
So, if someone yells at you, you yell back at them. If someone is angry with you, you are angry right back at them. If someone is downright mean to you, you don’t exactly treat them with kindness. I guess you could call that the Tit for Tat Rule. So, most people don’t really believe in the Golden Rule, but they think they do. The beauty of this is that if you treat someone else the way you would like to be treated, chances are, because they most probably believe in the Tit for Tat Rule, they will treat you the way you want to be treated because that’s the way you treated them. Tit for tat.
(There are situations where the Golden Rule will not get you the treatment that you seek; that happens when you are dealing with sociopaths, but most experts believe that sociopaths don’t make up more than 4% of the population. The solution when faced with sociopaths is to walk in the opposite direction as quickly and quietly as you can!)
So, what is missing from the Golden Rule? Empathy! Most people are not like you. Depending on the personality type system that you use, your chances are anywhere from 3 out of 4 to 8 out of 9 that the person you are dealing with has a personality type that is different from yours, and that does not take into account the obvious differences that gender represents!
I am a great fan of the Enneagram as a guide to different personality types. In contrast with Myers Briggs Personality Type and the DISC Assessment, that place personalities in one of 4 quadrants, the Enneagram describes 9 distinct personality types around a circle.
I am an Enneagram 5. My wife is an Enneagram 3. My son is an Enneagram 7, and my daughter is an Enneagram 4. That is useful information to me.
Having studied the Enneagram, I now know that treating my wife the way that I would like to be treated will not produce the desired effect that I used to assume I would be producing, because my wife has a totally different personality type from mine. I’m an Enneagram 5 and she’s an Enneagram 3! That makes a really important difference in how we view the world and each other.
There are things that are important to me that are not important to my wife, and there are things that are important to her that are not important to me! The better I get at discerning what those differences are the better I become at doing unto my wife as she would have me do unto her instead of doing unto her as I would have someone else do unto me. She’s happier, and I’m happier. It’s a win-win relationship.
This is what I call the Platinum Rule:
Do unto others as they would have you do unto them.
Once you understand that other people do not necessarily share your personality profile or your personality type and you understand that different does not mean better or worse (it just means different), you will be on the road to discovering an incredible tool that will help you relate to others, treat others, work with others with a success that you never had before.
Following the Platinum Rule means that you take the time to get to know the other person, to find out what’s important to them (and what is not). You then take into account those differences when you deal with that person. You treat them differently because of those differences. Then you will be in the position to apply the Platinum Rule and do unto them as they would have you do unto them.
For many people, it will be the first time that they have felt heard. Others will not know what is different about how you treat them, but somehow you seem to understand them and respect them and that’s important. Often, once people are treated in accordance with the Platinum Rule, they look for opportunities to reciprocate. The result can be synergistic relationships where each individual is contributing what they do best to the best of their ability for the common good of all. The results from these kinds of relationships can be phenomenal!
Think more about empathy. Ask people what they want. Listen to their answers. Give up the need for other people to behave just like you, think just like you, be just like you. Embrace the diversity that humanity has to offer. Customize your relationships based upon the personality types of the people you deal with.
Practice the Platinum Rule and you will be astonished at the results in your life!
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
The Power of Clear Communication
Filed Under Holistic Law | Leave a Comment
I like to tell my clients there are 4 ways to communicate:
• You can be PASSIVE,
• You can be PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE,
• You can be AGGRESSIVE, or
• You can be ASSERTIVE.
In my opinion, ONLY ONE WAY WORKS!
Wikipedia defines passive as “the opposite of active.”
We have all met passive people. Initially, they seem quite pleasant, as they agree with practically everything you say. They seem to just go with the flow. However, they also seem to avoid taking responsibility at all cost. They never seem to initiate any action. You never seem to know how they stand on any issue. Nobody wants to hire a passive lawyer. People want someone to represent them who will actively take charge of the situation and lead them to a solution to their legal problems, allowing the client to (sometimes passively) follow the lawyer’s lead.
At first, a lawyer might want to seek out passive clients so they don’t interfere with how the lawyer handles their cases. However, a major problem with passive behavior is that it typically leads to passive-aggressive behavior.
This is what Wikipedia has to say about passive-aggressive behavior:
Passive-aggressive behavior refers to passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to following authoritative instructions in interpersonal or occupational situations. It can manifest itself as resentment, stubbornness, procrastination, sullenness, or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is assumed, often explicitly, to be responsible. It is a defensive mechanism and, more often than not, only partly conscious. . .
The term “passive-aggressive” was first used by the U.S. military during World War II, when military psychiatrists noted the behavior of soldiers who displayed passive resistance and reluctant compliance to orders.
Passive-aggressive behavior can drive you crazy, whether you are dealing with clients or opposing counsel. On the outside a passive-aggressive person appears passive and compliant, but on the inside they seethe with anger and resentment and look for ways, either consciously or unconsciously, to cause harm or pain to those around them, including you. When asked if anything is wrong, the answer is always “no.” You have to engage in a guessing game to determine what their perceived problem is and how they want you to address it. Because they are passive, they never perceive the problem as something that they are responsible for or that they can or should fix. It is always someone else’s responsibility, someone else’s fault. Passive-aggressive people don’t see it as their responsibility to tell you what the problem is or how to fix it, but they will put a lot of energy into blaming you for not seeing the problem and fixing it for them. You can put a huge amount of effort into this guessing game, as the passive-aggressive individual continues to sabotage your efforts to achieve your goals (or even what you believe to be their goals). The result is confusion, wasted energy and frustration.
Wikipedia has this to say about aggression:
In psychology and other social and behavioral sciences, aggression refers to behavior that is intended to cause harm or pain. Aggression can be either physical or verbal, and behavior is classified as aggression even if it does not actually succeed in causing harm or pain. Behavior that accidentally causes harm or pain is not aggression. Property damage and other destructive behavior may also fall under the definition of aggression. Aggression is not the same thing as assertiveness.
Lots of clients come into a law office looking for “aggressive representation” and lots of lawyers are more than happy to give them what they ask for without discussing with them the true cost of that kind of behavior. Typically, lawyers do not engage in behavior intended to cause physical harm or pain, but many lawyers seem to specialize in inflicting verbal harm and pain.
The verbally abusive lawyer is a stereotype in our society. The typical result of this behavior is for the lawyers on the other side to engage in similar tactics, looking for opportunities to inflict harm and pain on the opposing lawyers who initiated this behavior and to inflict harm and pain their clients. The process continues back and forth like a game of tennis.
The problem with this approach is that the parties typically came to their lawyers in the beginning to resolve a legal dispute and this underlying legal dispute is often set aside as the lawyers and their clients focus on new and different ways to cause each other more harm or more pain.
The lawyers think they are happy because they are being paid to do what they do. In reality, the lawyers’ lives are filled with stress and anxiety and a lack of true satisfaction. Over time, the clients increasingly begin to notice the stress and the financial pain that they are experiencing as they pay their lawyers to engage in this expensive tit-for-tat process. The short-term satisfaction that they might have received in seeing harm and pain inflicted on their adversary begins to pale next to the pain that they experience themselves going through the process and paying for the privilege. The vast majority of clients soon tire of the aggression and wish they could find another way to end their dispute.
On the other hand, this is what Wikipedia has to say about assertiveness:
Assertive style of behavior is to express your own feelings in an honest and respectful way that does not insult people and to stand up for your rights while you know what you say is not the only valid truth. Being assertive is to one’s benefit most of the time but it does not mean that one always gets what he/she wants. The result of being assertive is that 1) you feel good about yourself 2) other people know how to deal with you and there is nothing vague about dealing with you.
My experience in the practice of law has been that being assertive, rather than passive, passive-aggressive, or aggressive, produces a far superior end result for my clients at a far lower cost to them, both emotionally and financially. It also results in a much more pleasant process for me. To me, being assertive means to be clear about my expectations from others and about what I am willing to do and what I am not willing to do for others. It also means that I am clear about the boundaries of behavior I am prepared to tolerate from others, while continuing the relationship I have with them. It works with clients, and it works with opposing counsel.
I like to tell my clients that there are 6 billion people on this planet, and I don’t have time to deal with all of them. I like to spend time with people who really like me and appreciate me for who I am and what I do. It also helps if they are excited about life and they stimulate me and challenge me with new ideas on how to make this planet a better place to live. I choose to deal with people who are pleasant, responsible, responsive, and honest. If someone doesn’t fit that description, then I quickly and quietly ease them out of my life. They become part of the 6 billion people I don’t have time to deal with. That, in my opinion, is being assertive, and it works for me. What works for you?
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
What is Holistic Law?
Filed Under Holistic Law | Leave a Comment
Posted with permission from the International Alliance of Holistic Lawyers (IAHL):
Holistic law is hard to define. It often seems more a process than a particular method of practicing law. However, there seem to be some common threads among holistic lawyers, which may lead to a practical definition of holistic law. IAHL weaves these threads together and finds that many of its members are committed to “PEACELAW” as defined below:
Promote peaceful advocacy and holistic legal principles.
Encourage compassion, reconciliation, forgiveness, and healing.
Advocate the need for a humane legal process.
Contribute to peace building at all levels.
Enjoy the practice of law.
Listen intentionally and deeply in order to gain complete understanding.
Acknowledge the opportunity in conflict.
Wholly honor and respect the dignity and integrity of each individual.
For more information, visit www.iahl.org.
Transformational Lawyer
Filed Under Holistic Law | Leave a Comment
I like to think of myself as a “transformational lawyer”, one who teaches his clients to transform their legal problems into opportunities for personal growth and positive change. I do that by inviting them to take 100% responsibility for their lives (to use a Jack Canfield expression).
I ask my clients to choose to believe that the legal situation that they find themselves in is the result of choices they have made in the past, and that when they made those choices they were doing the best they possibly could, given the resources available to them at the time. I also ask my clients to believe that everyone else who has been involved in their lives and in their legal problems has also done the best they possibly could, given the resources available to them.
Now, they are all free to make new choices that may better serve all of them to achieve their respective goals, and to offer others in their lives resources that may have not been available to them before. This way the parties to a legal problem can achieve their goals in a way that is compatible with the other parties’ achieving their goals.
From this perspective, it has been my experience that conflict can be resolved in a synergistic fashion and peace can often be made effortlessly, contributing to the welfare of all involved. Everyone benefits. I call what I do a coach approach to the practice of law, but I don’t think that the name is so important.
Today I call myself both a “peacemaking attorney” and a “transformational lawyer”. Crafting synergistic solutions to legal problems sounds to me like a great way to make peace. What do you think?
Philip J. Daunt, Esq.
keep looking »