We should always be questioning ourselves. Not second guessing what we do, but questioning whether what we did was the right thing to do. Did my actions have a negative effect on the Process? Did my actions move the Process forward? By always asking, we will always be improving.
Our Ethical Standards require that we not only monitor ourselves, but monitor each other on the team. That is the purpose of de-briefing after every meeting and at any time during the Process that it is needed.
One of the most predominant questions I ask myself is am I remaining neutral?
How do you remain neutral when one of the clients is being unreasonable? Of course, that unleashes the question of “What is unreasonable?” And many of the times they are being unreasonable they are acting contrary to the Participation Agreement. I have one case in which the wife will not settle unless the husband pays dearly for his indiscretions during the marriage. And this is above and beyond the credit she is receiving for his dissipation of assets. She bullies him and tries to guilt him into things. How do you remain neutral? In another case the husband is being totally unreasonable in being unwilling to split an asset that is clearly marital.
Finally, how do you remain neutral if either one of the clients questions your fees? Does that require resignation?
Always question yourself. If you don’t know the answer, join us on Fridays at our Happy Hour. Some of the top professionals in North America are ready to give you their educated and seasoned thoughts.
Thank you for your thoughts. I have learned each time reading them you offer solid insights.
And here your speaking to the honorable attributes of remaining reflective and nuetral.
From a mental health counselor pov I see doing so as essential for supporting safe healthy productive spaces where families benefit and we as professionals can stand by our practices.
Appreciated!
Hi Ed: I’ve just finished a book by Adam Grant called: “Think Again” and your choice of this headline to “Always Question Yourself” is fully and brilliantly reinforced in this book! There’s far more to this than the space here allows Suffice to say, for anyone who chooses to read “Think Again,” they will find that your suggestion mirrors Adam Grant’s main thesis that we should all think like a “scientist” and not like a “preacher”, “prosecutor”, or “politician.” Bottom line: good scientists constantly question and learn to rethink their assumptions, ideas and beliefs and are sufficiently confident in the process of learning (and unlearning) to “think again.” Mark