coach4pros

What is 'Normal'?

2011-11-28T08:58:00.000-08:00

While changing clothes at my gym some years back, I frequently ran into a guy I'll call Tim. After Tim found out that I made my living as a psychotherapist, he invariably greeted me like this: " Hey, Jimmy!! How are you? and how are the crazies, today?"

Typically, I just played it off somehow, but eventually got so annoyed with it whenever I happened to run into Tim that one day I said, "Tim, you know, my practice isn't really about 'crazies'...those folks have a tendency to be seen in psychiatrists' offices."

"Oh..." he said. "But I thought..."

"No," I interrupted, "most people going to psychotherapists are not 'crazy'...the ones who really need psychotherapy have a tendency to stay away."

"Really?" he said, looking a little nervous now.

"Yeah, really. Most of the people I see are 'normal'...people just like you and me."

And with that, I pretty much killed the 'how're the crazies?' gambit. But it makes me think about what we mean when we say that someone is 'normal'?

It seems that 'normal' has become another way of saying 'healthy', and that either word can be used to describe a state of being in which a person appears to contain no internal conflict, no challenging mood, is not disturbing associates or family and friends, does not question himself about anything, and is not particularly dependent on others. 'Normal' seems to mean that a person is not driven by compulsions or desires they can't control, that he is perfectly 'in control' of himself at all times.

A typical question in therapy is the the one that begins, "Is it normal to...(fill in the blank with whatever it is about yourself that puzzles you)". Which means that if the therapist can be gotten to pronounce a thought, action or desire 'normal', then all is well. I could probably go on quite a bit more about the popular conception of 'normal', but I think I've made my point. Perhaps we could just boil 'normal' down to 'appears to need no help' or something like that...whatever.

I happen to believe that 'normal' is the pathology I deal with in my psychotherapy practice. Anybody who has read Shakespeare will know that humanity is full of odd desires, uncontrollable compulsions, delusion, willful dishonesty, aggression, hatred, sorrow, remorse, etc.

'Normal' also includes those who have witnessed acts of violence, been recipients of same, or were raised by those who committed acts of violence against themselves either in sudden, catastrophic acts, or by lighting one cigarette after another for years on end. Or, who drank one whiskey after another....

'Normal' also includes those married people who love one another, but cannot quite figure out how to live together happily. 'Normal' is to experience crippling self-doubt, paralyzing fear, profound self loathing, or unhappiness with life itself.

It is normal for teens to be moody and self-involved, to show little empathy for others, to be fascinated with 'darkness', to fear commitment. It is normal for children to have trouble structuring their time and taking responsibility for their actions.

Does all this mean that people should not seek help when it all becomes too much? Not at all- what is wish to say is that it is 'normal' to suffer, and to seek assistance with that suffering.

And that is all for now, but perhaps to be continued...

What was your face before your mother was born?

2011-09-06T08:41:00.000-07:00

Readers slightly familiar with Zen will recognize the question in the title of this post. It is a koan- the koan is a question the Zen student is asked by his teacher which has no logical answer. Almost everyone, I am sure has come across the classic "what is the sound of one hand clapping?"

The attempt to answer the question in the koan can take years or seconds- in the practice of Zen it matters not how long one must work with a koan because there is no absolute correct answer, and when finally answered, it is more of a by-product of the changed thinking produced in the attempt to find an answer. It is that changed thinking that is the real goal.

But I think of this particular question today because it is pointed directly at why it is that one takes up any spiritual discipline at all, which to me is to come in direct contact with one's true self. How does it do that?

It is our habit to define ourselves by what we do, the tasks at hand, whatever they might be, that become the organizing principle of our lives. Child-rearing, meal preparation, decorating a home, leading a Fortune 500 company, whatever it might be, we know ourselves by our labor at that task. But, what happens when that task is completed, the child grows up and leaves home, the home is decorated, etc?

What usually happens is a period of emptiness, depression, disorientation, restlessness, boredom. What to do, now? The great problem for we who possess a self-aware frontal cortex is that somehow, at some level, we are always working to solve the problem of our own existence. What is my purpose, my calling, to what am I directed?

But if asked, 'What was your face before your mother was born?", we are forced to consider ourselves in the absence of the self defining task. Before mother was born, there was no career, no home, no child to raise, no bank account to worry about; there is not even a 'self' to consider. There is only the emptiness of what is.

And if continued attention is given to this question, without trying to leap to a 'logical' answer, the mind begins to devote itself to the empty moment. What is there, now, at this very moment? A paradox emerges- the vastness of the present, which we would demolish with 'something to do', and the swiftness of the past and the mysterious path it has followed until finally becoming the here and now.

Why is this important? I think it is important because it brings us to a fuller attention to what is right now, not what we are anxious about, or regret, or hope for, or are angry about. And it also implies the possibility of a new understanding of the self as it is, and is becoming, not as what it does.

And so, I challenge the reader now to entertain this question, and to refrain from leaping to an answer- What was your face before your mother was born?

An Early Course in Leadership

2011-04-12T07:30:00.000-07:00

In February, 1971, I was a more or less lost, nineteen year old human being. I'd failed the first year of college, during the height of the Viet Nam war and was in danger of losing my deferment. I had been told emphatically by friends in 'Nam to do everything in my power to avoid service. To that stress was added my mother's preparation to move to remote, Southeastern Arizona to take a mining company job at a copper mine in the mountains. My younger brother and sister were going with her, but I was on the cusp of leaving home, and I had to decide what to do.

I'd had a couple part time jobs since blowing my 69/70 freshman year, and was enrolled at community college. I'd also had a failed roommate relationship with a friend whose father heard that I partied too hard, and insisted that he move. I was...miserable, and lost.

My mother offered to help me get a job as an orderly in the operating room of the hospital where she was a nurse anesthetist. I hemmed and hawed, and was honestly frightened about that encounter with the rawness of the surgical environment. But things closed in, and I had to take the job. It was very rough going in the beginning, as needless to say, the OR is not for the faint of heart. But out of necessity, I persisted. The family was gone, and I had nowhere to go and no one to be with but my little efficiency apartment, my girlfriend, and school.

Compressing things somewhat, I was eventually trained to become a surgical assistant, and became quite proficient in almost all areas of surgery, but mainly in orthopedics, cardiovascular and chest, and neuro. I kept the job well past graduation, until I landed my first mental health job (another story altogether) and eventually went on to graduate school.

The OR is a concentrated heirarchical environment, with the surgeon at the pinnacle. You can see all manner of leadership styles there, from the totally insecure rage-aholics who throw things, insult staff, complain about everything and browbeat whoever will allow it on up to those whose grasp of leadership can be said to be sublime.

It is this last I want to talk about here. There was a surgeon named Dr. Wayne G, who had been a flight surgeon during the Korean Conflict and was the epitome of the 'right stuff'. Instead of putting on a show of arriving in the OR, Dr. G merely washed his hands, came in the room, gowned and gloved, and greeted each individual by name. He was quiet, but radiated strength and commitment.

When he asked any member of the team for something he needed, he always phrased it this way, "Blank, would you please get me this, hand me that, or find that for me? Thank you." If he needed particular assistance, he would say something like, "I would really appreciate it if you would X, Y, or Z" If someone was struggling with a request they didn't understand, he would educate them. When I was in my early training phase, he would tell me the instrument he needed, and if I did not recognize the name, he would point it out, matter of fact, without drama, impatience or sarcasm. He never, ever lost his cool, because he knew that would cause others to lose theirs, and with a human life hanging in the balance, cool heads must prevail.

When procedures were over, he thanked everybody for their help by name, and congratulated us for a good job.

In a study of leadership, we can see that Dr. G had a complete grasp of 'being a leader' as a state of being, rather than as a transitive verb. People automatically fell into line, because they felt safe to follow. He radiated confidence, politeness, gratitude, compassion, understanding. These are the qualities people look for in their leaders, and if they find them, then they will be looking for ways to fall in behind them.

I call this 'Sign Up'- the desire in all of us to join an enterprise larger than ourselves because we have been shown a way by a trustworthy leader. It should be obvious that this human tendency can also be used for negative purposes as well, i.e. cults, bigotry, war etc. But even in these negative environments, the leaders still show the basic quality of being 'safe to join'.

If you are a leader of other humans reading this, and are struggling with those you lead, ask yourself if you are using the methods employed by Dr. G-

Do you really know their names, and who they are?

Do you greet them, and ask how they are doing, even if you know you'll get stock answers?

Do you listen to what they say?

Do you use your manners, your Please and Thank You's?

Do you express your gratitude for their help?

Do you keep your cool at all costs?

Do you spread shame and anger, or do you spread confidence and cooperation?

Do you want your job to be easy or hard?

Dr. G made his job easier by helping staff to cooperate with him, freeing him to concentrate on the important work at hand.

If you've read this and would like to converse more about it, please feel free to contact me.

Why Do I Do This To Myself?

2011-01-18T06:49:00.000-08:00

A thing I've been puzzled about for many years is what motivates us to to do things that make us uncomfortable. Make ME uncomfortable. I've been at it for a long time now.

At the dawn of the 70s running boom, I was drawn to the notion of covering long distances rapidly on foot. The image of the gaunt yet elegant Frank Shorter blasting through the streets of Montreal against Valdemar Cierpinski in the Olympic marathon was burned into my memory banks. I wanted that, somehow, and began to explore the limits of my own capabilities.

Injuries after 5 or 6 years of running long distances on a big frame (6'2" and 170 at my lightest- bone thin at my size but still not the 5'9"/135 of the best runners) forced me into triathlon (an event I loathed) and from there into bike racing. I was a licensed bike racer for much of the middle 80s, but then had to back out with the growth of my family and my practice.

I found swimming, the sport of my youth, and was fortunate to be coached for many years by the great Jerry Heidenreich, Mark Spitz' most fearsome competitor. Jerry's main focus for ALL his Master's swimmers was competition, no matter the age, fitness or skill level. He organized all workouts, and the entire year around swim meets. By the time I found Jerry,in the last days of the 80s, I had been involved in competition at my highest attainable levels for many years, and so I embraced this philosophy without thinking.

Going to swim meets again, willingly, as an adult was one of the most invigorating, or should I say, re-invigorating experiences I'd had in some time, as I'd been out of competition of any kind for several years.

I had always noticed that the period approaching an event was marked with a certain kind of anxious anticipation that was quite unpleasant. And yet, once the event, whatever it was, began, the anxiety would dissolve. Each time I would enter some new event, I experienced the anxiety all over again. I can truly say that I hate that feeling, and yet I do it to myself again and again.

Here is the crux: Why?

I swam competitively for nearly 21 years. In my best events, I was nearly always in place 1, 2, or 3, and nationally at the bottom of the top third, occasionally scraping near a Top 10 time without actually getting there. Before every meet, I would be almost unbearably anxious. And yet I signed up for every meet I could get to, rarely missing a one. I went to Regional championships every year from 1990 through 2010, and went to Nationals three times. I would often think that I would be much more comfortable just swimming for fitness and recreation, and letting the meets go. But each time I gave that serious thought, I would recognize the loss of something bigger. It just seemed that something crucial would go out of life, something I had to have, no matter how uncomfortable it made me.

In April of last year, I went to my 21rst Regionals in a row. At that meet, I phoned in every race, thought about nothing but driving home, and could not wait to leave. Burnout had arrived in full force. It had been coming in varying doses for years, ever since the death of Jerry Heidenreich in April 2002. Now it was on me full force, not to be denied.

I have not been in a pool since then. I have been riding a bike, farther and faster every week and every month since last April. I have that renewed sense of vigor and anticipation of starting over at the beginning of something. I have been reconfiguring my body, losing almost 30 pounds in the last 6 months. To top it off, I've taken out my first bike racing license since, I think, 1987. My racing age for this year will be 60. Yes, I really did write that number.

And yet it seems like the best thing I could possibly do with the arrival of that year. My first race will be Saturday, January 22nd, in Central Texas, a 55 mile road race. I will be in the lowest category of rider, Cat 5b, which is fine with me. My goal will be to finish upright. As I type this, my heart accelerates and my toes tingle. Why do I do this to myself?

For me, I think it is because of what I have just written. To commit to what causes those feelings, to go into that unknown place and find out what's there, and to return to tell about it. I don't think I write any new insight here in saying that in the Race, I find life boiled down to its basic elements and I engage in them fully, discomfort and all. I push back against that in me that would quit, that would sit comfortably on the couch and be an observer of life rather than a participant.

I readily admit there is nothing new being said here, and yet I feel compelled to say it. I go into the Race in order to be in a dark place that only I can find my way out of, and when that job is done for the day, I can rest, knowing that for that day, I did not back down.

Perpetrators and Victims

2010-08-10T08:01:00.001-07:00

In the mysterious world of the interpersonal environment, so full of subtle cues, instinct and non-verbal communication, there are positions of power and positions of vulnerability. Dominance and submission, the Call of the Wild- are you the Doer or the Done To? We see it on the playground at pre-school. There are those kids who cannot do anything but lead the play, and those who either follow, or disengage. If you put two leaders together in the same group, each vying for standing in that group, a struggle will ensue.

We never really leave the playground as we move into adult life, we only become more skilled at masking the rise and fall of instinct and its imperious demands. We also become increasingly attuned to the power of the Victim and the weakness of the Perpetrator.

In my work as a coach and psychotherapist, I have worked in conflict resolution for over 30 years. I have come to recognize that buried within nearly any conflict, business or personal, there is the sense by one side that it has been victimized by the other. And quite often, the side said to perpetrate claims itself as a victim by the other. In other words, they are competing with one another for the victim position. To further blur the picture, there are overt perpetrators who see themselves as victims, and overt victims who are nothing more than habitual perpetrators.

Why would the two sides of a conflict compete for the victim position? Obviously, because it is the more defensible and therefore more powerful position. It is easier to prove that something did happen than it is to prove that you did not do something.

There is also a perceived moral high ground that goes with having been victimized that plays on the human tendency to root for the underdog. If I can claim that you have injured me effectively, then I can force you into a defensive position in which you must show you didn't do something. And if I react with force against this claim, I have only proved your point.

By the way, how long has it been since you stopped beating your wife?

When working with the two sides of a conflict, one of my first steps is to establish this motto as a working rule for both sides during the course of conflict resolution: "In all of the following dialog, I promise to neither be your victim, nor your perpetrator, no matter how strongly it may appear that I am one or the other."

With this statement, one that each side must be reminded about over and over again, I might add (remember, we never really get too far away from the playground), we have neutralized the power of the victim position and have forced the dialog onto the new ground of personal responsibility, rather than having the interchange devolve, as most do, into a conversation about who did what to whom, or, as they call it in Texas, a 'pissing contest'.

Scylla and Charibdis: Depression and Anxiety in the 21rst Century

2010-06-18T09:44:00.000-07:00

Scylla and Charibdis appeared in the Odyssey of Homer as two sea monsters inhabiting opposite sides of a narrow strait, through which Odysseus was obliged to find passage. One, six headed Scylla, would leap from the sea and consume sailors as they passed. If a captain chose to avoid Scylla on his course, he inevitably then came too close to Charybdis. Charybdis lay beneath the surface and swallowed and disgorged huge amounts of sea water, creating gigantic whirlpools that sucked down passing ships.

It wouldn't take too much squinting to see Homer using the language of myth and poetry to describe the buffeting of the human psyche between anxiety, the many headed muncher of inner calm, and depression, always pulling us down into its whirling depths.

Having reflected some on depression in a previous post, here I am concerned with anxiety. I am prompted by an article I read in the most recent issue of Outside Magazine by Matt Samet--http://outside.away.com/outside/culture/201006/matt-samet-climber-addiction.html. Samet is a rock climber of considerable fame, and while now a freelance writer, was at one time the editor of Climbing magazine. In the Outside article, Samet writes about his struggle with anxiety, and the medications he was given for it.

Those meds were of a family known as benzodiazepines, which include Valium, Klonopin, Xanax, and others. He notes how quickly and desperately he became dependant on the meds, and how he never had trouble finding a physician who would prescribe them to him.

The medical thinking was that his panic disorder was evidence of a brain with chemicals unbalanced, requiring re-balancing with meds. Long story short, Samet experienced difficulties with his medications that far outstripped his original complaints regarding anxiety.

Anxiety can be said to be the powerful sense that something catastrophically dangerous is about to happen. For example, a saber tooth tiger is outside the cave. But for us in the 21rst century, our saber tooths are often abstractions. Our sophisticated brains can see a saber tooth in a column of numbers, the morning light, or even a brief contemplation of the unknown future.

Samet's article describes how he eventually came to understand that his real problem lay in the use of the anxiolytic meds he was taking, and that his 'underlying panic disorder' was nothing more than his dependancy on them.

In my own practice, I am well acquainted with patients taking various medications for depression and anxiety. My observations of patients taking SSRI's since their introduction in the late 90s lead me to conclude they do little if anything therapeutic for patients experiencing the mild to moderate depression of everyday life. However, they almost always cause side-effects, and these cause patients, in their naive, often desperate way, to think the meds 'must be working'. Please note, I am NOT talking about major depression- in this case, I have seen therapeutic results of SSRI treatment.

And to this I would add that I've never seen anything therapeutic come out of patients' use of benzodiazepines, which in my experience would primarily be Ativan and Klonopin, two of the most commonly prescribed anxiolytics. Yes, the meds are fantastically effective at ameliorating or even eliminating the feelings of anxiety or panic. Xanax yields a beatific calm that becomes almost impossible to resist.

But, people do not learn to deal with their anxiety when they are in the medicated calm of a drug.

Millenia ago, Homer was indicating that anxiety (Scylla) was a part of Odysseus' journey home. From this we can conclude that to be human is to be anxious, and that to find an effective route past it is part of the trip. We cannot usefully medicate human nature. It is possible to learn that anxiety will not kill you, that in fact there is nothing really wrong with anxiety. It is unpleasant, yes. A panic attack can scare the living crap out of you. But the medicated solutions are even worse.

The search for a drug solution to anxiety can lead a person into a dependancy on meds that takes root before he or she is even aware it has happened. Tolerance develops quickly and leads to more drug seeking, higher dosages, variations of drug combination. Fear of dependancy sets in, and the person attempts withdrawal. This then unchains all the chemical demons lying in wait for the unwitting. The suffering from benzo withdrawal is so intense that it leads almost inevitably back to more drug use and ever higher levels of dependancy.

The person is no longer dealing with the relatively manageable issue of anxiety, but is rather dealing with the monstrously unwieldy business of drug addiction. And that is the problem with the anti-anxiety meds. It is their very effectiveness and the brain's rapid adaptation to them that make them dangerous.

Anxiety won't kill you, but drug addiction will.

When we love bad people

2010-03-30T07:03:00.000-07:00

One of the most prevalent issues that brings people to psychotherapy is the problem of having been raised by abusive people. By 'abusive', I do not mean those who were stern, or remote, or emotionally detached, unavailable, or difficult. In using the term 'abusive', I refer to those who actively and intentionally did harm to themselves, to one another and non-relatives, and to their children. People who assisted others in committing crime against their own, i.e. the mother who held her five year old child still while the boyfriend raped her. Or the father who committed pre-meditated murder, with assistance from his own brother. The uncle who coerced his pre-school niece into oral sex. The parents who stole their young adult daughter's financial identity in order to defraud credit card companies.

You know who I'm talking about-- bad people.

We all agree that there are bad people in the world. We read about them every day in the newspapers, online, etc. They blow themselves up on train platforms, decapitate members of rival gangs and post the heads for all to see, hatch plots against the government. We can also agree that bad people have children, just like good people do. But the logic breaks down when those bad people are our own parents or relatives.

When the bad person is a parent or relative, the issue is nowhere near as clear. The adult survivor of abuse quite often still harbors feelings of love for the attacker, alongside the profound resentment. And it is this sense of attachment that blurs the vision and stops us from knowing the truth.

The central issue for the survivor is Why? Why was this done to me? The most common answer, deeply embedded in human nature and exposed by abuse, is that there must be something wrong with me, that I must somehow invite this treatment. It is the child's best answer, because the self is all the child has to offer as an explanation. She does not have the breadth of experience with the human race to place the crimes in context, and so blames herself. The child's implicit trust in those who raised her will not allow her to understand that she is not the reason why she was victimized.

And so, when discussing these events, the survivor says things like "I don't want to judge him...", "I'm not saying he's a bad person..." when describing a person who committed murder. Because the family itself has probably been rationalizing evil for generations, the child also learns this trick and so becomes numb to his sense of empathic outrage for himself, his own suffering and that of other victims. If treated badly enough long enough, one of two things happen: 1) the survivor becomes a victim of himself, and his search for the nullification of pain through drugs, alcohol, sex, or a combination of all three 2) the survivor begins to prey on others as a way of escaping the enveloping sense of helplessness experienced by all victims.

In therapy, we are always seeking to stand before the truth. The answer to the question Why? is that the perpetrators are, or were, bad people, who succumbed to and were enslaved by their own evil. A potentiality we all share, but do not all give ourselves over to.

The question then becomes, how does one have a relationship with a bad person? How does one resolve the ambivalence of love and resentment, while struggling with the truth of having been victimized by someone you love? And what about forgiveness?

I believe that for most, forgiveness is beyond them. In therapy, I do not make forgiveness a goal, as I believe that is between the perpetrator and whoever he or she takes her Creator to be.

If ever there was a 'no easy answers' issue, this is certainly it. What is the right way to have a relationship with a person we know to be bad? (Hint- one thing for sure to NOT do is to allow any further abuse/manipulation/crime, etc)

To Be Continued

Depression in the 21rst century

2010-03-15T13:36:00.000-07:00

Any reader who has been staying up with the latest information about the human race's ongoing and titanic struggle with the condition known as 'depression' will know that we still have not arrived at the end of the story. And most likely never will.

Depression is a mental/emotional condition shared by more of us than probably any other, with the exception perhaps of its close relative, anxiety. They both seem to reverberate along the same continuum of experience, and both are just about equally unpleasant. The two states are so closely related that there is even a diagnostic category called 'anxious depression'.

And just as many had begun to assume that we could almost certainly point a well informed finger at the brain and its chemical bath as being the culprit, we discover that the target has moved again. There is plentiful recent research calling into question the serotonin hypothesis, and all the major anti-depressants have showed questionable results in several large, recent studies.

This questioning echoes my own observations as a clinician. Thirteen years ago, I wrote this article http://lotuseaters.net/waydepres.shtml, as a way of responding to the hype surrounding the still relatively new Prozac. I personally have never seen Prozac or any other medication cure depression. Most patients have, at best, mixed results with meds, and many more have hosts of side effects they'd prefer to not have.

It is my opinion that in instances of severe, morbid depression, then by all means, patients should be medicated with anti-depressant drugs, and quickly, with much medical supervision. But I have also come to the opinion that most of the 'depression' being treated as such is really nothing more than the suffering most humans do in the course of a lifetime. That suffering has to do with human nature itself, and is as mysterious in its origins as is the transition from animal to self-aware, reflexive consciousness.

As I did thirteen years ago, I still believe that most depression is the suffering that comes with making and knowing our place in the world, securing it, and enduring the buffeting of instinctual life, its hungers, demands and cravings, against the light of consciousness that knows the difference between right and wrong, and what it can and cannot have.

Understanding and Being Understood

2010-01-13T04:58:00.000-08:00

If I am fortunate enough to experience much failure, and little success, as do most of us, and if I allow those failures to teach me, which can take many years of one's life, then I can begin putting into place some learnings that cannot be taken away from me.

Among these can be the transition from the primal need to be understood, to the more valuable and productive position of trying to understand.

When I was young, my relationship to the Universe was like this: ME > Universe. It was my endless task to enter conflict in which I challenged the Other to understand me and all that I struggled for and hoped to accomplish. In doing, I unwittingly walked the tightrope of self destruction, for I was inviting others, as representatives of the Universe, to teach me my actual position within it, which so happens to be infinitesimal.

This happened over and over again, but as my chosen field happened to be understanding and helping others in their conflicts with one another, I was also afforded the more objective view of what happens within those conflicts.

It began to emerge in my view that much, if not all, conflict arises out of one party's need to be understood by the Other. Nations, states, departments within corporations, people in friendships, families, marriages, all inevitably come to the point of challenging the Other to understand and make good on their individual or collective needs.

What is the result? You guessed it- the Other pushes back with an assertion of HER needs. "So, you want that? Yes, but do you not see that what I (We) need is THIS? And if you do not give it to us, we will take it, one way or another, or at least we will no longer deal with you?"

To which the first party, still committed to being understood, as is the second, reasserts the original need, and so forth and so on to the bloody end, which is really not an end at all, but only a return to the beginning from which a new cycle of emotional, or physical violence arises.

The cycle truly ends when one party gets out of the business of needing to be understood, suspends that need, and then tries to understand what is being communicated from the Other. Now, the Other finds no barriers, no resistance, but instead discovers a willing partner in dialog. The first party may not have given up at all on what they need, but holds it in suspension, comprehending that if those needs will EVER be realized, it will only be after the Other has felt fully understood, and is now in a state of willingness to cooperate.

This is one of the biggest, most subtle, but nevertheless most important transitions we make on our way to maturity. It is an acknowledgment of our place in the Universe, and the beginning of a true understanding of its depths and mystery, and how we belong within it.

The relationship with the Universe is now this: Universe> Me.

What to take away? How about this: if you find yourself in an endless round of conflict, see if you support it by continually asserting and reasserting your needs, trying to be understood. And then conduct this experiment: What happens if you fall silent, but attentive, working to understand what the Other has to say?

Maj. Nidal Hasan

2009-11-12T07:47:00.000-08:00

Maj. Hasan Nidal has made a name for himself that will go down in American history along with the likes of John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, James Earl Ray, the Columbine killers, and etc and so on, ad nausea.

Already it is being batted about in the media that he suffered PRE-traumatic Stress Disorder, or that he was reacting to harassment for being Muslim. And we can be sure that there will be other explanations thrown around, too.

And we can already see that somehow, in some way not yet clear, he was indeed living some kind of wounded life-residing in a rundown $300 a month apartment while earning a salary of 90k a year. We already know as well that he was of the oft recognized in the annals of heinous crime 'loner' personality type, and that he'd been collapsing into the kind of religiosity that any trained mental health professional recognizes as the harbinger of a personality in full scale decline.

I for one am glad he survived his suicide/homicide mission, as that will be punishment at least a little adequate for his massive theft of life and the well being of his survivors. What I know not to expect is any kind of statement from him that will cast light onto his motives, or help us make sense of it all. At some point there will be a statement extracted from him, and I am willing to bet $5 right now that it will be inscrutable, hyper-religious gibberish full of paranoia and self fulfilling prophecy. Clearly, he had somehow worked himself around to a perceived state of victim-hood.

As I have discovered from my three decades in the practice of psychotherapy, when a person sees himself exclusively as a victim, he has freed himself to perpetrate. Hasan Nidal has given the most extreme example of this I've ever seen. This is also the same logic used by any of the fundamentalist and/or homicidal nuts we've seen over the last several decades as rationale for their idiotic solutions to the problems of how differing peoples can co-exist.

Each time a hyper-religious fundamentalist resorts to terrorist tactics, what he fails to see is that he places others of his faith in greater peril by arousing our suspicions about them. I think back to a plane flight I took just a couple days ago when a couple of olive skinned, black bearded young men boarded my flight a few rows ahead of me, and I felt my stomach lurch involuntarily.

The problem we face with Hasan Nidal is how to avoid reaching for explanations or rationales, as none of any worth will emerge, and instead treat his actions for what they were: expressions of human evil.

Those who are most certain that their actions are certified by Divinity are most certainly those who are committing evil....and Nidal should be dealt with as an evildoer. Nothing more, nothing less.

But how to deal with those who continued to certify him for service? When he gave his Grand Rounds lecture in 2008, and the topic was not mental illness but Islam and its current state of siege, how did his superiors not recognize someone who should not be allowed to treat the emotionally and psychologically wounded?

To me, that is the real brain twister.

Buddhas, Gurus, and Healers

2009-10-21T07:53:00.000-07:00

I have recently been fascinated with the story out of Northern Arizona about the loss of three lives during and after the sweat lodge event at a New Age retreat. I was astonished to learn that the participants were folks who had paid ~ $10,000.00 or so for a week long retreat to become 'Spiritual Warriors'.

I was further astonished to discover that these folks had ponied up the big bucks to, among other activities, fast for 36 hours on a mountainside and then pile into a closed, super heated hut with 40 or so people as part of a 'vision quest'.

How is it that these folks were willing to subject themselves to this, where is their 'common sense'? Why was it not obvious that this was not something to participate in? Why are people willing to believe that if you go through some kind of arduous, discomfiting experience it will 'change your life'?

I am not writing to condemn or judge the attendees, but rather out of genuine curiosity about what causes people to suspend their good judgment, their critical functions, and undertake these 'healing' or 'life expanding' practices.

And why is it that commonsensical methods of confronting the difficulties of life that are safe, and without drama are overlooked by those same seekers? I am going to try and propose some answers to these questions, and maybe query deeper, because this issue has intrigued me for as long as I've worked in the field of psychotherapy, which is now over 30 years.

As a young therapist, I had to accept early on that the field was not, is not, one that is highly paid. Starting salaries were below those made by entry level publis school teachers. The hours were long, the patients numerous. I quickly began to look at private practice, and eventually moved into it within five years of leaving grad school. I've been in private practice since 1983.

When surveying the financial landscape of the late 70s, early 80s, I noticed there were certain giants. Wayne Dyer had written an extremely popular book, 'Your Erroneous Zones'; the author of 'I'm OK, You're OK' was raking it in; EST was beginning its massive impact on the culture. It seemed that if you wanted to do well in the field of psychotherapy and human potential, you had to go beyond the idea of simply wading through a weekly schedule of troubled individuals seeking help.

You had to develop a show, a routine, a product, a schtick of some kind. You had to somehow promise or imply that you could help create a more enjoyable life, or remove the obstacles to the enjoyment of same. It seemed it would never be enough to patiently listen to people as they offloaded their cares and concerns, and try to help find solutions to what could change, and accept what couldn't.

Most seeking psychotherapy are not suffering 'mental illness'; rather, they are you and me, the moms and pops and brothers and sisters, and sons and daughters of the world. We who do the best we can with our lives, and from time to time fall prey to all the traps the world and human nature have to offer. The truly evil and truly ill seldom seek help voluntarily.

At any rate, I began to learn that the field was open to the entrepreneurial and opportunistic. If a therapist could appear to provide solutions that were sudden, dramatic, magical, extraordinary, if those solutions, methods, cures etc. could somehow slay the beast of human failure and insecurity, then he was going to see more clients and make more money.

And so, over the years, we've seen providers of every kind of pseudo-scientific healing practice come into the marketplace: there are Voice Print Analysts, Color Therapists, and there are those who insert tubes into peoples' rectums and irrigate their bowels; others will read your feet through Reflexology, and Phrenology is still alive.

There are providers of Iridology, in which the colors of the iris are read. There are Rolfing therapists and Cranio-Sacral Therapists, and those who read auras and others who do Past Life Regression. Some do healing through different scents, and others apply crystals to the forehead, while still others insist that patients buy CDs and listen to them while resting under a pyramid built in the home. Still others will help you walk over a bed of 1100 degree coals, and thereby eliminate 'failure' from your life.

Much of this is what is called New Age. A common fixation in the New Age is the 'toxin'. Many are the therapies and healing procedures intended to remove or flush toxins from the system. For instance, fasting for 36 hours and then plunging into a super heated hut with a bag of nicotine tied around your neck will not only 'flush' all the 'toxins' from your system, and thus rid you of what all has been 'holding you back', but will also completely divest the body of all sugars and electrolytes it needs to keep the major organs and central nervous system running. As these elements disappear from the body, major warning signs in the form of hallucinations occur, signalling breakdown, or, as the healer interprets it, visions and spirits are now visiting and carrying the participant to a 'higher place'.

Why is it that if a solution seems commonsensical and relies on the adult faculty of taking responsibility for oneself and accepting that there are no rapid solutions to the challenges of life, a good number of seekers will look elsewhere?

Or maybe I just answered my own question, but I'll go on for now.

Good psychotherapy proposes that each patient become aware of his or her own part in sustaining the difficulties they are wish to free themselves from. It does not exonerate a perpetual sense of victim-hood, nor does it endorse dangerous, spurious, magical cures. In many ways, it can be said that it also neither 'heals' nor 'cures', in the medical sense.

Rather, it increases awareness and indicates possible paths to change. It is not sudden or dramatic. It does not relieve the Biblical itch to drive the demon out. It suggests that some problems simply come from a resistance to taking responsibility for oneself, and adult solutions come from facing the truth and acting accordingly.

This is not very dramatic or sexy. There are no short-cuts. You do not walk through hot coals, or take a shamanic journey, or become a 'spiritual warrior', or walk with spirits, or take an animal avatar. You simply look the truth in the eye and take heart that responding to it, no matter what you must give up, whether it be the affair, the drugs, the gambling, the dishonesty, whatever, will work out for the best. And that being a perfectly ordinary, self sustaining human in itself is an act of heroic proportions.

And, I suspect that many of us simply don't want to accept that. We hunger for the ecstatic, the epiphanic, the extraordinary. We want to believe that there is something out there, beyond our everyday experience that can lift us up and make life the thrilling adventure we want it to be, like the lives of those who've 'made it' however the culture currently defines such. We don't want to patiently and painstakingly face the truths of our lives, and let go of the drugs, the booze, the gambling, the affair, the dishonesty, the greed, the whatever, and deal with the pain of its loss. We want something, someone, to make it better for us. We want, as Scott Peck pointed out (Peck was one of the honest gurus, in my opinion)our lives to be different, without us having to change.

And to that I would add that we also don't want to accept our lives, as imperfect and filled with struggle, confusion, bewilderment and partial success, as they are. We reflexively attach to Buddhas, Gurus, and Healers, forgetting that what is here and now, right in front of us, transpiring minute by minute, is the life we seek to lead, and the truth is obvious if we would but see it.

In the late 60s, an humbly brilliant man, Sheldon Kopp, composed one of the true masterpieces of self help, entitled If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him! He borrowed his title from the old Zen dictum meant to indicate that in our search for the Buddha (enlightenment, coming to terms with oneself), we must accept that the Buddha is not to be found 'out there', on the road. That such Buddhas are false, and dangerous, and must be destroyed, i.e. ignored.

The true Buddha is only found within, through the slow process of accepting life the way it is, and discovering the true self-- a gift that, once found, we would never turn over to someone else, or endanger in any way.

In the end, I feel badly for those individuals who lost their lives in Sedona, for their families, and for the other attendees. I feel badly for them because, quite plainly, they got ripped off, and some paid with their lives.

Let it be said, there is no Buddha on the road, or in the mountains; there is no healing to be had in a fast or sweat lodge; there is no 're-patterning' to be achieved through Voice Print Analysis or Iridology or Color Therapy, there are only people willing to take your money and give you nothing in return.

What Is Honesty?

2009-08-24T07:57:00.000-07:00

Is any human being ever completely honest? Is it within human capability to be 'completely honest'? That is, to leave nothing out, and add nothing in?

The lie is an attempt to create an advantage for oneself in the world. We lie actively by communicating that we possess something that the other wants, or don't possess something the other is looking for, when in fact we do.

We lie to get: power, money, sex, the admiration of others (power). Anything else? Oh, yes: to avoid consequences of wrongdoing. Anything else?

And we lie because we think we HAVE to have whatever it is we want, or because we don't think we can withstand the consequences of our wrongdoing, and because we think that lying is the only way to get what we want or don't want.

It is also worth noting that lying seems to be a developmental stage through which we all must pass-- the most chronic and seemingly pathological liars are children. They will lie when they don't have to, or for the fun of it, or in order to get something they covet, or to cover their tracks. From this we can learn that there is something immature about the impulse to lie, and that there is something about honesty that is learned. Or, perhaps, earned.

Honesty in its original usage meant to speak honorably. The honorable person is one who readily accepts the consequences of his actions, whether they are desirable or problematic, he does not shirk the outcome.

Why this investigation of honor and honesty here? Because as service providers, we are all playing a confidence game- that is, we are gaining the confidence of potential clients in order to sell them our services. Our product is intangible- confidence and service. The same as the 'con man'. We walk in a gray zone where the customer buys because he has placed his confidence in us. And of course what separates the professional service provider from the 'con man' is that he provides what he has promised for a fee disclosed at the beginning of the relationship.

This places some providers in a position to think that because they have gained the client's confidence, they can sell them anything, or shoddy service. The lawyer who claims to have taken action on a cause when he hasn't, the physician who prescribes a procedure that is not necessary, the financial adviser who churns the account, etc.

Most notable about issues with honesty in professional practice is that there is no surer way to terminate a career prematurely than by practicing in a less than honorable way.

In honorable practice, there is no trace left behind one's actions, nothing that can be used against the provider after the fact. While those who commit wrongdoing have left at the scene a weapon that can and will be used against them when the time comes, and they will have to face, dishonorably, the consequences of their actions.

The Daily Practice of Business Development

2009-08-13T07:48:00.000-07:00

Every piece of news I see from the world of law practice seems to be bad news-- no one needs to be reminded of this. It can be discouraging, and create a sense of hopelessness. There is no denying these natural human reactions to an avalanche of bad news. Despair can lead to paralysis, depression, and increased reliance on artificial methods of feeling good.

Lawyers are workhorses, and nothing satisfies them as much as a good day's work. A good day's work is a great defense against the fear that lays in wait for every professional service provider, self employed or working in a firm. But, face it, everyone is self-employed nowadays, no matter how big the firm.

So, what work is to be done when there seems to be none to do? Whoever guessed 'business development' gets the gold star. There can be no better time than the present to devote oneself to the job of increasing your business network. It still surprises me to see how few lawyers are regularly involved in practice development. It is crucial to remember that law practice depends entirely on relationships, and the time and attention you give to building them pays off directly in the amount of work you do.

In this period of slack, you can put in your day's work enhancing and building your business relationships, reviewing your existing clients needs, and studying how service delivery to those clients can be expanded. It's not nuclear physics- going from doing nothing to doing something will yield big rewards over time.

I feel that far too often, professionals in service industry think too big when considering how to get started with business development. Remember, we are talking BD, not marketing. Marketing has to do with creating an image, sending out a signal to the world that conveys that image, draws attention to the image and creates interest in that image. However, the image and the interest it creates is useless unless the marketplace (potential clients) is able to connect a person with that image- potential clients want a name and a face.

And that is where business development begins- putting your name and face with the 'brand'. It is not necessary to think in terms of making yourself a 'rainmaker' overnight, or ever. It is necessary, though, to understand who your clients are, and who referred them. It is necessary to pick up the phone and call those people, or email and follow up with a phone call. It is important that you inform those clients of your latest research in areas of importance to them. It is important that you ask those people to help you locate others whom you HAVE NOT MET so you can arrange meetings with them. It is important that you do this regularly, day in and day out, week in and week out, monthly, yearly.

When committed to as a daily practice, you will soon begin to see a direct connection between those activities and the amount and kind of business you are doing. The mere fact of making commitment, and setting your mind to the task itself seems to send a message out to the universe that you are now ready to work, and sure enough the work starts to show up.

How to Select a Coach, and Just What Does a Coach Do, Anyway?

2009-07-19T10:42:00.000-07:00

Sherman Chavoor, the legendary coach who developed Mark Spitz throughout childhood and was his trusted advisor at the 1972 Olympic games, could not swim a stroke. And yet, he brought Spitz to the absolute pinnacle of the sport.

I tell this story because I am a coach to people in a variety of professional endeavours that I have never personally been involved in. It helps that I've been a psychotherapist to lawyers for years, and have thus developed a deep understanding of the insecurities and burdens that pertain to the profession. It helps that I've worked around physicians in a variety of settings for many years, but I've never practiced law or medicine, or been an architect or a traditional business consultant.

Far more important than having 'been there, done that' is the formation of a trusitng relationship. The coach sets the tone for the relationship, but is careful to not impose his own goals or needs on his client. His job within that trusting relationship is to understand what the client is capable of, whether the client fully grasps this or not.

Example: On the night before the 100 meter freestyle final against a field that included a fierce challenger named Jerry Heidenreich, Spitz was so frightened he could not rest, and called Chavoor to say he didn't think he could do it, and wanted to drop out. Chavoor wouldn't hear of it, and we know the rest. Of note is the fact that had Chavoor not been there, Mark would probably have dropped the race from his program.

Also, had Spitz not seen Chavoor as someone he could trust, then he would never have called him.

It is that element of trust and engagement that the good coach brings to the relationship.

It is interesting to me that so often, I meet professionals who have already worked with a 'coach' and have become disenchanted. Why? Because, I have discovered, the coach failed to develop precisely the sense of trust in the client that they were ostensibly trying to help the client develop with HIS clients. How often I've heard of practice coaches being disingenuous, unavailable, unengaged.

The good coach 'engages'---a quick check reveals that to 'engage' is to be 'under pledge'....that is, I pledge to you that you will have my full attention and that when you reach out, I will be there for you. And this is backed up in behavior with quickly returned phone calls, meetings held regularly and on time, and the hard to define sense that as a client, it is clear to you that you and your work are important to the coach...

That is all for now, but will be back soon with a continuation of the series on business development....

Further Developments in Business Development

2009-07-10T07:46:00.000-07:00

when we left off in june, we were discussing business development, and i plan to continue here today.

the last topic touched on had to do with how to react after you have done the following: 1-scheduled a meeting with a prospect 2-gathered information on what services that person needs 3-showed her how you could provide that and 4) asked for the assignment

we all know what to do next if the prospective client says 'yes': say 'thank you for the assignment, it will be an honor to help you with that' and then get proactive.

but what to do if the answer is 'no'?

a recent very popular book 'the four agreements' by miguel ruiz speaks to this in agreement #2. Don't Take Anything Personally--Nothing others do is because of you. What others say and do is a projection of their own reality, their own dream. When you are immune to the opinions and actions of others, you won't be the victim of needless suffering.

i interpret this in the following manner. of course, you will take the rejection personally. it is unavoidable. that is the primordial emotion. but we must educate ourselves past that with ruiz' important observation about the true nature of the interpersonal universe. i will go on to say that this interpersonal universe is a mysterious place that knows no centers. by that i mean, it is only my deeply flawed illusion that tells me i am the center of this world.

how does this guide the lawyer or service professional who has gotten over all his misgivings about 'sales' and taken it upon himself to make his own good fortune? it means that she will take note of the fact that she got as far as the meeting, and gained valuable information not only about the prospect's business but also about their competitor's businesses (i.e. potential clients), and she will go back and further research the company and industry for legislative changes that will impact them. she will then contact that person regularly with the results of this research and will continue to speak to and interact with this person for the foreseeable future...

more later

We Were Talking About Business Development

2009-06-26T07:06:00.000-07:00

But were interrupted by vacation.

So, you've made your list of existing business, made appointments to get together with those who are inactive, have done research on their companies and latest developments in their industries, have sat down and made direct, personal contact with them, informed them of what you've been learning about upcoming changes and potential legal exposures.

What now? Now comes one of the most important parts of these interactions. You must do what many would avoid doing- you must make yourself vulnerable by ASKING FOR THE BUSINESS. "I would like to help you with that" "I believe I can help you with that" "It would be a pleasure to assist you with that" "That sounds like something I could help you with, if you will give me that assignment"

I suspect it is this part that many would avoid, because you are jumping off into the interpersonal void-- that area that exists between yourself and anyone else, where you have no control whatever, the 'ball' has left your racket and is now sailing over the 'net' into the other's 'court'...

keeping the analogy going, if you've hit the ball well, the odds are good that it will come back softly in the middle of your side, and you'll get your racket on it. but there is always that unpredictable, unknown element in human relations. if you've positioned yourself with knowledge, quiet confidence, good, attentive listening, then you will have an assignment.

but, if the other side is in an unspoken budget crunch or constrained by some element that keeps him or her from giving the assignment, and all you get is 'We'll see...' or 'Thanks, but no thanks'.

the great tendency among us (humans) is to assume that this reply has something to do with ourselves, with 'me'...

A Dumb Question: What is Business Development?

2009-06-07T14:53:00.000-07:00

Some answers: "It's something you do when you don't have anything else to do-like surf your auctions on ebay, or update your facebook account". "It's something that some people are really good at, and some aren't." (if this is anything like your answer, you are probably also secretly relieved that you are not like the shallow extroverts who are 'good' at business development, but you would never say so out loud) "Its something that you have to do that is unspeakably horrible, awkward and embarrassing, and someone like me shouldn't have to go around in a plaid sport coat and ask for business"

I'm sure more answers can be given, too. But what it really is, to me, after 30 years of continuous, successful self employment in a professional service business is this: it is the professional activity that I must do at least as well as I actually provide my service ( for me, coaching and psychotherapy), and there is no way out of it. And if you are reading this, you know there is no way out of it for you, either.

The Firms, whatever field they may be in, are no longer 'carrying' those who dont' bring in work. It is no longer safe to bury yourself in the office, and pay attention to your computer screen and your desk. You know that you are expected to Develop Business.

For many, this makes ice water run in the veins. Others take to it as naturally as birds to the air. The thing to remember if you are one of the ice water people is...you can do it. You must do it, and you know it. It's now or never. So, lets begin.

First things first. Who are your clients? Look at that list, and subdivide it into two groups- those with whom you are currently engaged, and those who are idle. Have those who are idle heard from you in the last 6 months?

Take this step. Review the work you did for them, understand what is going on in their world at the moment, make contact with them, and arrange to meet. No agenda, just arrange to meet. When you meet, make sure you keep the spotlight on the client, by asking all the open ended questions you were ever trained to make: how have you been doing, what vacations have you taken, have you run that marathon you were training for? etc. Then talk business.

How're things going at XYZ Corp? How's your life there? At this point, you can begin referring to what you've learned about their industry over the last 6 months, and about what unique challenges they face. Your real job here is make easy, non-threatening, client centered contact, with the emphasis on listening, quietly.

If you are a lawyer, you must be knowledgeable about legislation that affects the industry. Bring this up, and ask if the client is aware of the ramifications of changes. Briefly outline a way that your firm could help them with this. "Just FYI, Mr. Client, and of course, as always, it would be our pleasure to help you with this matter. Or, perhaps there's something more pressing we haven't discussed?"

More later

More Crossing the Line: When You Get in Bed w/Clients...

2009-06-02T07:54:00.000-07:00

When you get in bed with a client, you get screwed every time.

I can think of no better reason than this to stay on the right side of the line. Usually, when the topic of 'dual relationships' is discussed, there is a kind of moralizing, Just say no, Shame, Shame attitude that develops.

It's wrong because it hurts people, but the professional service provider who crosses the line financially, sexually or in some other way, rarely if ever takes into account that he has now set him/herself up for some very serious counter-exploitation.

The client is now someone who expects special treatment, because of a privileged position with the doctor/lawyer/adviser. The client may indeed be somebody with criminal intent, who laid a trap for the provider, and now is ready to go about extracting what he came for.

An example would be the lawyer who, under threat of the loss of significant business from a high $$ client, looked the other way while that client committed serious white collar crime. And was then turned in by his erstwhile client when he got busted, and the lawyer wound up doing Federal time for his trouble.

When you get in bed with a client....

Crossing 'The Line' With Clients

2009-05-29T12:44:00.000-07:00

We all have them, and our livelihoods depend on them- they are our clients (etymology-- a client is one who 'leans on another') The client is one who has willingly created a paid dependency on another based on expertise that one does not have and which the other does.

There is a line in this relationship, and that line defines who works for whom. Ostensibly, and of course, the expert, being paid by the client, works for the client. However, human nature what it is, this line rarely remains entirely clear. The expert can easily become 'a client' of the client as well.

The line is totally violated, though, when the expert becomes romantically, emotionally or sexually involved with the client. One of my greatest teachers from long ago, John Gladfelter, Ph.D, had the best analysis of what's wrong with this that I have ever heard:

"When you get in bed with a client, you get screwed every time."

Says it all, doesn't it? But we'll dive deeper into this as we go along. That's all for now.

The Stopping Point is the Starting Position

2009-05-26T16:17:00.000-07:00

One Friday you were working on a detail section of an exit stair, your third of the past week and your fortieth of your architectural career. You were trying to keep your head in the drawing, keeping your focus sharp, but you can’t help but feel the general sense of unrest in the office.

Two cubes over, a work-friend had been called into one of the principals’ office. When that work-friend came back, his head had been hanging low, and he hadn’t met anyone’s questioning gaze. When he started cleaning up his desk, you knew that this was the day you have feared for the past six months. Work was drying up, and you noticed more and more colleagues looking blankly at their computer screens for hours. That Friday was Axe Day, and you prayed that you wouldn’t get called into the principals’ office.

But you did get called. The principal was kind, acknowledging that it hadn’t been your fault that the economy had taken a nose-dive. It wasn’t your fault that your firm specialized in high-rise residential projects, and that the bubble for such projects had just burst. Loud and fierce.

But, the principal went on to explain, there was really nothing else that could be done at this point but trim payroll. You were thanked for your valued service, assured that when business picked up you would be called. But you were also asked for your office key and parking card. You were assured that you would get paid for the rest of the day, but that you could leave with your desk contents at your earliest convenience. You were given a packet explaining your options on how to COBRA your health insurance, roll over your retirement account.

What now? Well, you will run through the Grief Cycle.

Shock: You are numbed, paralyzed. You move through a gray emotional soup, unfeeling, poised over an abyss.

Denial: The mind kicks into gear, spinning up various scenarios in which what is, isn't.

Anger: Ah, now we're getting somewhere, it just isn't clear where except that you've found someone to blame. Your supervisor, the Republicans, the Democrats, Ralph Nader, your third grade teacher, your mother/father/step-father/football coach in high school, ex-wife, the Managing Partner, The Firm, or, or… Aha! Yourself. There it is – self-blame. It’s a reliable and renewable abuse object, oneself. More on that later.

Bargaining: Another aspect of denial, a pointless effort of the imagination to seek a way out that comes in the form of 'If...then' thoughts. 'If only I had x, y or z, then this wouldn't be going on...'

Depression: The truth sinks in, the gravity and inevitability of the loss hits home.

Testing: Various realistic solutions are beginning to appear, and are considered

Acceptance: Ties are cut with what is gone, realistic solutions are undertaken, and a commitment to the here-and-now takes hold.

It is important to remember this cycle does not progress in an orderly, checklist way. Rather it moves as a jumble of cycles, back and forth through a number of different phases, but with an overall progressive journey toward the final resolution of the loss.

Also worth remembering is that the feelings of loss, sadness, the overwhelming grief, fully felt (tears, sobbing, feelings of profound helplessness) is precisely what needs to happen, as those feelings, while signaling the end of something, are also the onset of healing.

Remember the part about self-blame? Think of it this way: the mind, while still clouded with shock and denial, seeks to reclaim some sense of control over the universe. The lay-off, in a sense, was a loss of control. The mind wants that control back. It thinks, “Let's see, who was in control of this universe before the lay-off? Oh, yeah, I was. So, who

fell asleep at the wheel? You guessed it, I did. Therefore, I am to blame, and it is I who will get the emotional butt kicking.”

“I should have spent less time on Facebook.”

“I really shouldn’t have forwarded that YouTube of the guinea pig to everyone in the office.”

“I could have worked faster. I should have responded to that RFI sooner.”

“I should have been paying attention to the signs and had my resume ready.”

And the mind does this to itself over, and over, over and over until...

Somehow, that next phase in the cycle moves to the fore, and the mind begins to see that it had very little control over this; it does not control the universe, and it can let go of this three-year-old's assumptions about its centrality in it. Now it’s free to seek solutions, less encumbered by self-blame.

Really, is blaming oneself going to change the economy, find a new job, or put you back in the driver's seat at the center of the universe? Of course not, it will only keep you rooted to your inertia and postpone the search for a new job or beginning a new career – i.e., getting on with it. Be aware, self-blame is a stopping point on the way to recovery.

And in a way, this stage can be seen as an opportunity for self-improvement. Could you have spent less time on Facebook? Could you have responded to that RFI sooner? Maybe these little things, after looking at them realistically, didn’t get you fired – maybe that’s an overstatement. But maybe in your quest to be the best architect you can be, you can watch your time on the internet or pay closer attention to your RFI log.

Above all, though: You have to go there, so you can move on.

Stop, have a look, move on. Good luck to you in your new job, life, career, relationship, enterprise, or whatever it might be.

what is your true value

2009-05-26T15:52:00.000-07:00

What Is Your True Value?

Having recently experienced the suicide of someone close to me, I am mindful of certain things. I will not speculate on his motives--who can know what passes through the mind of the suicidal in those last few moments when there is still time to rescue an entire future, and spare family and friends enormous suffering? I'll never know, but I suffered his death intensely for many days.

The suffering is passed now, but it has left me thinking about the employment crisis in the legal world, and I know how lawyers think-- 'I am only as good as my last case/settlement/fee/billable hours/promotion/client signing/income/bonus, etc' If there is a group in our world who judge themselves by what they do, and how they do it, and whether it is done better than someone else doing the same thing, then that group is lawyers.

Pass/fail, good/bad, right/wrong, win/lose, black/white, good guy/bad guy-- the legal world is a binary world, and most lawyers are far harsher judges of themselves than any judge they might face in court. There is always the huge tendency to judge oneself according the narrowest and strictest performance related parameters. And thus, the tendency to confuse being a good lawyer with one's self worth.

Yes, of course it feels to good to succeed. But, you are not loved by your husband or wife, your kids, friends, brothers, sisters, parents, because you are a good lawyer. How you feel about yourself as a lawyer is mostly a private affair, just between you and the judge that lives in your head. Those who love you do so because of who you are, not what you do.

Which is why I say, when the topic comes up in my work, that we cannot know our own true value, only those who know and love us can know that. Time and again, in my work with people who have experienced the suicide of someone close, I see the loss, sadness, deep hurt and longing for the dead. The suicide most often thinks he is solving a problem for survivors, surmising his value has to do with quantities, or with something tangible or measurable. His death is seen as a way of relieving survivors of the problems his existence has caused.

Of course, the only thing that happens is an emotional neutron bomb the effects of which are felt forever after. When the suicide happens, the loved ones and family don't grieve the lost income, the lost job. They grieve the person and the hopelessness he inadvertently dragged them all towards. No problems are solved, only larger ones created.

So, what is your true value, and is it really for you to know? Perhaps it would be best to put those thoughts aside, and pay attention to the truly valuable elements of life, which are not, and can never be measured. Only those who love you truly know.

Jim Dolan
Professional Coach to Legal and Medical Professionals
Psychotherapist

6310 LBJ Freeway, Suite 213
Dallas Texas 75240

vm-972 934 1283
mobile 214 629 6315
www.coach4lawyers.net