Posts Tagged ‘divorce’

Being Tough in Divorce

What does it mean to be tough? In divorce, most people (including many lawyers) believe that it means “sticking to your guns”, never compromising, issuing the bigger threats, puffing more, “big talk”, using intimidation. In the name of toughness, people are frequently encouraged to be uncaring, to deny any empathy for their spouse, and to turn off all humane or positive feelings about their marriage and their spouse. That’s one way to do it.

Why Smart People Can Have Dumb Divorces

Left brain = logical thinking Right brain = emotional thinking

Left brain = logical thinking
Right brain = emotional thinking

Working in Research Triangle Park (Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill) a region renowned for its education level, I have the privilege of working with a lot of very smart people.  Doctors, professors, business executives, entrepreneurs, nurses, techies, and domestic geniuses all bring healthy IQ’s to the collaborative divorce conference, mediation or negotiating table. Certainly raw intelligence helps in a divorce.  The ability to learn, process and analyze complex legal issues and numbers is immensely helpful to efficiently resolving a divorce. But, in my experience, it pales in comparison to the ability to recognize, understand, process and deftly handle the emotional component of divorce, both in yourself and in your spouse.

Don’t Confuse Arguing for Negotiating

Arm WrestlingDoes your attorney argue or negotiate? Arguing is not the same as negotiating. Negotiation, at its root, is problem solving.  It is the act of solving joint problems. Arguing, by contrast, is at its best the act of trying to persuade someone to adopt your point of view. It is the act of trying to convince someone else that you are right, and they are wrong. At its worst it is trying to convince someone that that you are worthy and they are not; they are bad, and you are good. Negotiating involves a consideration of the other party’s perspective, and what they need from the negotiation.  It involves some degree of effort to meet the other party’s needs in a resolution, in recognition that resolution is a two way street. By contrast, argument ignores the other party’s part in a resolution.  It treats the other party as if their agreement is not required for resolution.  It says to the other person “You are an obstacle to me having what I want.”  That may be true, but