sometimes holidays are painful

We just celebrated Mother's Day.  Father's Day is coming next month.

For many families, these days are a time of joyous celebration for the entire family.

And yet for others, they are not.

When parents are no longer together, either as a result of divorce or separation or simply a break up, in a heterosexual relationship, Mother's Day is given to Mom and Father's Day is given to Dad.  Although done with all good intentions, this can cut off paternal grandmother from celebrating Mother's Day with grandchildren and maternal grandfather from celebrating Father's Day with grandchildren.  And then there is the messy question of what, if anything, to do about step-parents.  All of this can lead to feelings of loss on a day meant for celebration.

And then there are the deeper feelings of grief. Perhaps someone desperately wanted a child, but was never able to have one, and will never be a Mom or a Dad.  Perhaps a parent did have a child, but gave the child up for adoption or the parent's parental rights were terminated or the child died.  A child may have cut off contact with a parent.

A parent may be recently deceased, and it is the child, or adult child, who is grieving.  Perhaps the parent cut off contact with the child.

Take a look around you.  Is there anyone who needs a little extra attention?

Collaborative Law added to the practice

I spent Friday and Saturday being trained in Collaborative Law.

Collaborative Law is a non-court method of resolving disputes privately with the help of trained professionals.

Collaborative Law professionals work together as a team with the participants to resolve the dispute.  In a typical dispute between two participants, four professionals would be on the team with the participants.  Each participant would have a lawyer to help the participant determine and advocate for the participant's needs.  A mental health professional would serve as a conflict coach, facilitating the team meetings and providing individual coaching to participants as needed.  A financial professional would assist in gathering and analyzing the financial information.

The end result is reached collaboratively by the team.

If you are struggling with a difficult conflict and would prefer not to go to court, Collaborative Law may be the right fit for you.

principles can be quite expensive

When I am mediating small claims cases, it can be the cases for the smallest amounts of money that are the hardest to settle.  Why?  Because inevitably those cases are about much more than money.  They are about principles.  

It costs $72 to file a small claims suit in NH.  Most people will not pay $72 to sue someone for $50-$100.  However, those that do are often truly invested to go the long haul. 

It can be that the Plaintiff has every reason to be angry at the Defendant.  It can be that the Defendant is a truly despicable human being, or at least did a truly despicable thing.  However, for most people, when they do a cost-benefit analysis of the cost (financial, emotional, and time) versus the value (financial and emotional) of suing for $50-$100, they find that the cost far outweighs the potential value. 

Similarly, when a Defendant is sued for that amount, that Defendant also has a choice.  In paying someone, you save yourself time and the emotional expense of litigation.  However, you do pay financially and you may feel that you are paying emotionally, if you feel that you have been unjustly sued.  In going to trial, you spend time, the emotional expense of litigation, and you may or may not have to financially pay less. You may still feel that you are paying emotionally, if you lose. 

When you evaluate the true cost of litigation -- time, emotional, and financial -- you find that principles can be quite expensive.

study says children's exposure to violence harms their DNA

http://mobile.latimes.com/p.p?m=b&a=rp&id=2014207&postId=2014207&postUserId=7&sessionToken=&catId=5240&curAbsIndex=2&resultsUrl=DID%3D6%26DFCL%3D1000%26DSB%3Drank%2523desc%26DBFQ%3DuserId%253A7%26DL.w%3D%26DL.d%3D10%26DQ%3DsectionId%253A5240%26DPS%3D0%26DPL%3D3

how do your beliefs influence how you hear, interpret, and respond?

One clear and temperate day, a Brahman, or priest, was walking happily down a dusty road when he heard the most terrible weeping coming from under a large tree.  The Brahman knew that it was his job to help even the most pitiful, so he ran over to the tree to find a tiger in a cage.  "Help me, help me," cried the tiger.  "They are going to make a rug out of me.  Please release me from this cage."

"Well," thought the Brahman, "It is my purpose to help even the most pitiful, but this is a tiger.  He might eat me."

"Please, oh please, help me," sobbed the tiger.

"If I let you go," said the Brahman, "do you promise not to eat me?"

"I won't eat you.  Please hurry and let me out," replied the tiger.

So the Brahman opened the cage and the tiger leapt out, right on top of the Brahman!

"Thank you," said the tiger.  "Now prepare to be eaten."

"Is there no gratitude, did you not promise to spare me?" asked the Brahman....

[The tiger allowed the Brahman to go and ask others if the tiger should be allowed to eat the Brahman.]

The Brahman looked down in despair and spoke to the road beneath him.  "You have heard my story.  Doeth thou think the tiger should eat me?"  The road quickly replied, "Holy man, I have listened to your story and ask you to remember that I am useful to all.  Nevertheless, people trample on me and drop their garbage upon my back.  Return to the tiger and be eaten."....

[A jackal, confused, asked why the Brahman, a vegitarian, wanted to eat the tiger.  The Brahman could not make the jackal understand that it was the tiger who wanted to eat him.  The jackal commanded the Brahman to take him to the tiger, and the Brahman did.]

"Very confusing, very confusing, I just don't understand," [the jackal said to the tiger.]  "You are going to let this man eat you?"

"No, you silly creature," the tiger gruffly answered.  "I am going to eat the man," and he explained the situation and how it was his destiny to eat the Brahman.

"I just don't understand why you would let a man eat you.  How did the man get into the cage?  Very strange, very strange," said the jackal.

"I AM GOING TO EAT HIM," roared the tiger.  "I was in the cage, you idiot, like this!"

As the tiger leapt back into the cage, the jackal shut the door saying, "Don't let the tiger out again."  And he ran away.

In the future, the Brahman was a wiser man.  He continued to serve the poor and help even the most pitiful.  But he had learned.  If nothing else, he had learned that even tiger cages serve a purpose. 

~ "Worst Enemy, Best Teacher," Deidre Combs

When you are in conflict, pay attention not only to what is being said, but how your own beliefs influence how you hear, interpret, and respond to what is being said. 

If the Brahman had properly evaluated the danger of letting the tiger out of the cage, he would never have done so.  However, he placed his purpose, of helping the most pitiful, above his own personal safety.  His view of his purpose interfered with his ability to properly evaluate the danger and respond to it effectively.

Similarly, when the tiger said that the Brahman could go and ask others to determine his fate, he followed the tiger's instructions, rather than simply leaving and protecting his own personal safety.

The road gave its advice based on its own experiences, not based on what was in the Brahman's best interest.

The jackal recognized the tiger as a threat to safety. He had no moral qualms about tricking the tiger back into the cage.

The tiger allowed his anger to be triggered by the jackal's behavior.  Had the tiger remained calm in response to the jackal's questioning or laughed it off, the tiger would still have been free, and could have eaten both the man and the jackal.

How do your beliefs influence how you hear, interpret, and respond?