I’m pleased and honored to be elected to the Board of Directors of the Pennsylvania Council of Mediators. I served from 2013-2106 and recently began another 2 year term. PCM is the only state-wide organization dedicated solely to conflict resolution. The organization brings together individuals and organizations that share a common interest in mediation as the preferred form of dispute resolution. PCM strives to increase the use of mediation through: Education; Increasing the demand for qualified practitioners; and Providing a network for professional development.
I’m happy to do my part to spread the word about mediation and support fellow practitioners.
Pennsylvania Council of Mediators
Professional Development
Workshop at the 2020 PA Council of Mediators Conference
Note: When this conference was canceled due to the coronavirus pandemic, I was invited to convert my content to webinar format and offer it as the Pennsylvania Council of Mediator’s inaugural webinar. The program was co-hosted by PCM and the Chester County Bar Association. The recording is available through the Bar Association.
I’m pleased to have been selected to deliver workshop again at the Pennsylvania Council of Mediators Annual Conference, May 1-2 in Harrisburg. The workshops is entitled ” What is Tone Policing and Why Every Conflict Resolution Professional Needs to Understand It.”
Tone policing is a popular term used to describe the silencing of a party in a conflict because they are expressing strong emotions. Dig a little further and you find complex dynamics at play: class, race, gender, ableism and other power dynamics as well as messages about what feelings are acceptable and how, or even if, we can show them. This workshop will dive into the details and nuances of: tone policing, how our personal demographics might sway our perceptions of tone policing and whether we might be tone policing, how to differentiate between tone policing and healthy boundaries, and how we as conflict resolution professionals can help address these sensitive and contentious concerns.
Honoring Emotions in Divorce Financial Negotiations
In April, 2018, I was a speaker in two presentations at the Make Divorce Healthier Symposium — “Coaching to Enhance the Healthy Divorce Process” and “Strategic and Smarter Property Settlement Agreements.” Here are my remarks about emotions and divorce financial negotiations from the session on property settlements.
My co-presenters Samantha Evian, James Graves, Ellen Morfei, Loretta Hutchinson covered the nitty gritty of what equitable distribution means in PA, legal and financial case studies, and financial forecasting. I kicked off the session with the mediator’s perspective and a call for sensitively incorporating the emotions of the spouses into the financial negotiations. This is the text I used to guide my presentation.
I can’t tell you how often new clients come to me and tell me “we just want to split everything down the middle.” Then I get to meet with each of them. I talk to them both privately. And I review their finances. And I learn that they have different goals, different emotions, different cash flow, different earning power. So, if so many things are different, why do they both THINK that they want the same settlement?
All of this reminds to me of a story…
Do you know the famous short story “The Gift of the Maji” by O. Henry? It’s about a young couple of modest means at Christmas time. Both wants to give a special gift to the other, but they have little money to do so. In short, he sells his beloved pocket watch to buy her an ornamental comb for her beautiful hair. She cuts and sells her hair to buy a chain for his pocket watch. Even with a happy couple who is very much in love, knowing only half the story can have tragic consequences.
In a divorce, this same issue of knowing the view only one side – their emotions, goals, interests, feelings, and positions – can yield similarly undesirable outcomes. As a mediator, I’m luck to got to hear from both spouses in a divorce. But once you know all this, how can you help craft an agreement that accommodates, to the extent possible, the interests of both sides?
As a mediator, it’s critical that I support both sides in reaching an agreement that works for each spouse. But, even amicable divorcing couples have divergent interest – along with shared interests like the well-being of their kids and each other.
I’m going to leave it mostly to my colleagues to address some of the specific financial vagaries between divorcing spouses and how those might be addressed in property settlement negotiations. I’m also going to leave it to them to discuss the nexus between behavior and cognition and how it can undermine good decision-making.
What *I* want to do is pause and recognize some of the emotional issues that can influence the property settlement agreement. I think the typical perspective on emotions in property settlement negotiations is that emotions need to be managed and minimized – that decisions infused with emotions are bad decisions or inferior to decisions made “rationally.” I would never argue that emotions should be a primary driver in crafting a property settlement agreement, but a couple CAN reach a creative, effective and equitable agreement that honors the emotions of the parties.
And, although I don’t have data to support this, I have a keen sense of two things. One, is that when emotions are honored, parties are more satisfied with their agreement. (Note there is data to support greater satisfaction and compliance with mediated agreements.) Second, that parties that feel better about their agreement and the process used to reach it are in a better position to enter their post-divorce life with a sense of hopefulness and self-efficacy.
Some examples of emotions or emotionally-loaded issues in divorce that can be effectively considered when crafting a property settlement agreement are:
- Fear of change/uncertainty (will be discussed much more by my colleagues)
- Fear of finances/financial illiteracy
- Fear of possible destitution or other financial tragedies (“I don’t want to end up as a ‘bag lady’”)
- Risk tolerance
- Tolerance/attitude toward debt
- “Symbolism” of debt in the marriage – how was it acquired
- Other “symbols” in marriage – I never wanted the house, boat, Lexus, or to move near his mother
- Desire to retire early
- Desire to keep “my retirement” money
- Concern for supporting the kids in college and into young adulthood, may include weddings
- Desire to keep the house – often underpinned by the desire to minimize disruption for the kids
The emotions – in general or around specific issues – can be honored in the agreement How?
- Riskier assets retained more or fully by one party
- More of retirement held by one party
- More cash flow (or liquid cash) held by one party
- Creative financing or buyout structure for the family home
- College or other designated funds created for the kids
- Debt retained more or fully by one party
- Specific debts retained by one party
- Specific assets to one party – the boat, the Lexus
Having said all that, feelings should not be honored to the detriment of an equitable settlement or sound finances. We can get creative, but we can’t please everyone all the time. And, as I often say, I can help you figure out all sorts of ways to slice up your pie, but I can’t make your pie bigger. I’m a mediator, not a magician.
But with creativity and collaboration, one can guide clients to reach prudent financial agreements that honor their individual interests, their goals, AND their emotions.
My Interview About Healthy Divorce
I often say the perfect is the enemy of the good. Well, I’m accepting imperfection and releasing my unedited interview from the Make Divorce Healthier Symposium 2016. View now to hear my impromptu thoughts on:
- What it means to have a healthy divorce
- My personal connection to divorce and how it effects my profession
- My bigger vision of healthy divorce
Teaching PA’s Judges About Mediation
I’m pleased to be teaching PA judges about alternative dispute resolution. Retired Judge Stephanie Klein and I will be co-teaching in the Minor Judiciary Education Board Continuing Education Program over 14 weeks from September through May. All of the Commonwealth’s Magisterial District Judges attend these week-long training sessions where they are instructed on a wide variety of issues. We’ve been introducing mediation and arbitration, discussing mandatory mediation and arbitration clauses in contracts, and illustrating the benefits of mediation for conflicts when the relationship between the disputants matter. It’s an honor to be able to share the important message of ADR with such an influential audience.
Speaking at the Annual Conference of the Pennsylvania Council of Mediators, April 22, 2017
I’m pleased to be presenting a workshop at the Annual Conference of the Pennsylvania Council of Mediators in Harrisburg. This year’s theme is practice challenges. The two-day conference will be kicked off with a full-day workshop with internationally renowned conflict resolution expert Bernie Mayer, who will present “The Conflict Paradox: The Dilemmas and Contradictions that Define our Work (and our Lives).”
On day two, I’ll sharing some of my unique approaches to mediation in “Coaching to Improve Mediation Outcomes: An Examination of Processes, Pitfalls, and Ethics.” The program description is below:
Careful and skilled application of coaching approaches can effectively support parties in making free and informed choices, deepen their understanding of the conflict, achieve greater clarity about their goals in the mediation, reach more thorough understandings about their decision-making, bolster their self-advocacy, and strengthen their commitment to and compliance with their mediated agreement. But the application of coaching techniques without care, caution, and skill, can raise questions about the mediator’s impartiality and potential for favoritism. We will examine how practices of conflict and personal coaching can be applied to support self-determination and avoid appearances of partiality.