The following is a book review I published in the Tarrant County Association of Mediators regular newsletter.
"It's All Your Fault! (12 Tips for Managing People Who Blame Others for Everything)" Bill Eddy (2008).
Five stars (out of five). Highly recommended for all ADR practitioners.
Bill Eddy is an attorney, mediator, and licensed therapist who has focused his practice on what he calls "High Conflict Personalities" (HCP). In the psychopathology realm, HCP are often people who exhibit traits of personality disorders that result in an amount of conflict that is higher than the population norm. While Bill Eddy has previously published a number of commendable books, all generously exhibiting his unique perspective, this particular book is remarkable for two very strong reasons.
First, Eddy puts all the psychological knowledge in lay terms. He describes high conflict behavior that is easy to identify by any mediator, without necessitating a psychology degree to do so. He makes it clear that the existence of the traits is enough to justify practicing the techniques that he advocates - in other words, there is no need for a formal diagnosis, nor intensive psychotherapy in order to successfully interact with an HCP person. He draws very simply point-to-point lines between behavior and the possible emotional disturbances that may be taking place inside the mind of the HCP. This helps him explain how his techniques to deal with these HCPs work. Which leads to the second strength of this book.
As mentioned, Eddy doesn't try to turn every layperson into a practicing psychologist. Instead, Eddy simply creates a very straightforward "if you see this, then do that" instruction set that can be used by anyone, in any mediation. This instruction set includes both the proactive things a person can do when dealing with an HCP, as well as the maladaptive reactions that a person may ordinarily do, but that they should avoid when dealing with an HCP. Using everyday examples of interactions with HCPs, Eddy constructs possible responses in each example, and then discusses why each one will or will not work.
For mediators who believe in interest-based negotiation, these examples are the real gems of the book. With each one, Eddy reveals the emotional interests that are often driving HCP participants. These are the interests that often escape detection in a mediation. The emotional interests of an HCP often seem to be expressed in just the opposite manner than one who is not similarly emotionally challenged would predict. So, high-conflict interactions, taken at face value, often seem intractable in mediation. Eddy's book provides a path of understanding to the emotions of an HCP person, so that uncovering their interests -- the goal of interest-based negotiation -- can be achieved.
Eddy's book also serves an important "big picture" purpose. In his introduction, Eddy points out the cultural and environmental shifts that have caused our society to increase in combativeness in recent generations. This helps to lay a great framework for motivating alternative dispute resolution. Those of us who are dedicated to mediation and other alternative methods of dispute resolution can often get our best intentions knocked "off-center" whenever we encounter a high-conflict individual. It can leave us feeling as though we have failed as mediators. When we see the increase in conflict in our society, and read Eddy's explanation for why it exists, it can re-energize us in our purpose to more passionately evangelize a better way to solve disputes.
Part II of "It's All Your Fault!" outlines the "CARS" method for dealing with HCPs. This includes a worksheet that Eddy gives permission for the reader to re-copy and use in each encounter with an HCP. Along with the "CARS" method, Eddy utilizes other acronyms and helpful mnemonics to aid the mediator or conflict resolver in remembering the steps in the methods. This is handy, because, as Eddy explains, when we are dealing with HCPs, their emotionality can be contagious - and it can cause us, the mediator, to shut down the thinking/reasoning part of our brain. Having a quick, easy way to reconnect with our own thinking/reasoning brain will allow us to use the tools to help the HCP get out of emotionality and back into thinking/reasoning as well.
I recommend that any mediator add this particular book to their library. But don't let it set there collecting dust! This is one of those books that you will refer back to again and again, every time you encounter another high conflict person in your everyday mediation practice.
"It's All Your Fault!" is only available from Bill Eddy's High Conflict Institute website: www.highconflictinstitute.com; or from Janis Publications: www.janispublications.com.
Peace.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Psych Evals - The Nuts and Bolts
Once you have been immersed in the system known as "Family" court, you will often find yourself amidst a swirl of different activities about which you know almost nothing. The biggest problem with this is, right when you want to make the best decisions you can for yourself and your family, you cannot seem to get the information you need.
So... from time to time on my blog, we'll have some nuts and bolts lessons. This is one.
Many acrimonious divorces are a fight about who should "get" the children. One of the family court tools available for attempting to figure that out is the psychology evaluation.
In the state where I practice, and in many other states as well, from I've learned, there are basically three types of evaluation.
Forensic Psychology evaluation: this is the most in-depth evaluation; it includes childhood history, any previous psych/counseling history, may include multiple evaluative instruments such as the Beck Depression Inventory, MMPI, or others; and interviews with extended family members and anyone else close enough to the family to provide insight. It is very thorough, and often involves several lengthy interviews with each party. The information is *not* privileged - meaning the report can be entered as evidence, and the Forensic Psychologist can be called as an expert witness - and while any specific item in the report (such as a previous counselor's verbal summary to the Forensic Psychologist) cannot be subpoena'ed, the conclusions made by the Forensic Psychologist are subject to any form of discovery, including subpeona. Usually, a Forensic Psych eval is court-ordered, considered impartial (that is, the Psychologist is not hired by either 'side'), and usually the judge is the one asking for the report back. The attorneys for the two sides then spend their time attempting to squelch or mitigate any damaging testimony brought out by the Forensic Psych. Unlike a Social Study or CPS study (see below), a Forensic Psychologist can enter a conclusion as to which is the "better" parent, if they so choose. Typically, a Forensic Psychologist is one that has plenty of schooling, long-term specialized experience, and multiple specialty licenses. They are generally well-respected by the court, and their conclusions are more trusted. They are also (in my opinion and experience) less likely to make a mistake, come to a wrongful conclusion, or be bamboozled by the superficial charms of either party. They are also a lot more costly.
Social Study - also called a home study, or parenting evaluation, this is usually the method employed by most courts to determine if there is any "danger" to a child. It is *not* supposed to determine which is the "better" parent, only to rule out any parent that would be dangerous. A Social Study can be requested by either party, or by the judge. Unfortunately, since the purpose of a social study is often intended by one of the parties to provide justification for reducing parent-child involvement, accusations against the other parent are often exaggerated, so as to meet the "danger" threshold, since merely meeting the "better-than" threshold isn't enough to convince the court to adjust parenting time. A social study is often conducted by lesser-qualified individuals: folks that may only have a masters degree in social work or psychology, who often are just starting out and don't have a lot of experience, and who may more easily be swayed by the superficial charms of someone trying to circumvent the system. They may also not be as adept at selected or interpreting evaluative instruments such as the MMPI. In addition, a Social Study is usually less rigorous and thorough than a forensic evaluation; many times consisting of a single 50-minute session with each party, and then a 1-hour session at each party's home, evaluating both the home's safety and appearance, as well as evaluating how the children interact with the parent in the home environment. Considering that they always give at least 72-hour notice of a home visit, it's rather easy for anyone to gloss it up temporarily. Because of these limitations, judges are less likely to weigh the results of a home study heavily... although I have also seen it go the other direction: if a judge is biased toward a pre-determined outcome and wants justification to back up his/her decision, then if the home study says what they want it to say, all of a sudden, it's v-e-r-y important.
Child/Family Protective Services Evaluation: this is the bottom rung of evaluations, and often means nothing (unless, again, it backs up the judge's pre-determined outcome). Usually conducted by students who are interning their first Mental Health Professional job and working for barely more than minimum wage on an overloaded case load, a CPS eval has as much chance of reflecting reality as a coin toss. I've personally reviewed "home studies" on case loads that when you do the math, the evaluator could not possibly have spent more than 5-10 minutes in each home they claimed to have visited. Physical evidence means more than anything to these people, so if you have any (bruises, scratch marks, etc.) take photos. They are so poorly trained that many of them don't even know how to spell "psychology". So forget about mentioning verbal abuse, emotional abuse, personality disorders, etc. to them... you probably know more about these than they do. They are also the most easily biased - which means the first person to make a claim has the upper hand. (by the way, this is also true of many of the Social Study/Home Study folks, so if you do find yourself the subject of a court-ordered home study or social study, do everything you can to get your evaluation date on their calendar ahead of the other party).
Keep in mind that the greatest danger to your children when you are restructuring your family is CONFLICT. As mentioned before, not merely the open, above-board kind with the yelling and screaming, but also the insidious, passive-aggressive kind with the subtle parent bashing and undermining. While it is important to do everything you can to collaborate and minimize conflict, it is also important to understand what is going on in the system. Sadly, I've seen too many well-meaning parents become the victims of false or exaggerated claims - all because they didn't want to "fight". There is a time to "fight", and there is a time to use the system to help you. Understanding the different elements of that system is an important first step to choosing how and when the battle must be engaged.
Peace.
So... from time to time on my blog, we'll have some nuts and bolts lessons. This is one.
Many acrimonious divorces are a fight about who should "get" the children. One of the family court tools available for attempting to figure that out is the psychology evaluation.
In the state where I practice, and in many other states as well, from I've learned, there are basically three types of evaluation.
Forensic Psychology evaluation: this is the most in-depth evaluation; it includes childhood history, any previous psych/counseling history, may include multiple evaluative instruments such as the Beck Depression Inventory, MMPI, or others; and interviews with extended family members and anyone else close enough to the family to provide insight. It is very thorough, and often involves several lengthy interviews with each party. The information is *not* privileged - meaning the report can be entered as evidence, and the Forensic Psychologist can be called as an expert witness - and while any specific item in the report (such as a previous counselor's verbal summary to the Forensic Psychologist) cannot be subpoena'ed, the conclusions made by the Forensic Psychologist are subject to any form of discovery, including subpeona. Usually, a Forensic Psych eval is court-ordered, considered impartial (that is, the Psychologist is not hired by either 'side'), and usually the judge is the one asking for the report back. The attorneys for the two sides then spend their time attempting to squelch or mitigate any damaging testimony brought out by the Forensic Psych. Unlike a Social Study or CPS study (see below), a Forensic Psychologist can enter a conclusion as to which is the "better" parent, if they so choose. Typically, a Forensic Psychologist is one that has plenty of schooling, long-term specialized experience, and multiple specialty licenses. They are generally well-respected by the court, and their conclusions are more trusted. They are also (in my opinion and experience) less likely to make a mistake, come to a wrongful conclusion, or be bamboozled by the superficial charms of either party. They are also a lot more costly.
Social Study - also called a home study, or parenting evaluation, this is usually the method employed by most courts to determine if there is any "danger" to a child. It is *not* supposed to determine which is the "better" parent, only to rule out any parent that would be dangerous. A Social Study can be requested by either party, or by the judge. Unfortunately, since the purpose of a social study is often intended by one of the parties to provide justification for reducing parent-child involvement, accusations against the other parent are often exaggerated, so as to meet the "danger" threshold, since merely meeting the "better-than" threshold isn't enough to convince the court to adjust parenting time. A social study is often conducted by lesser-qualified individuals: folks that may only have a masters degree in social work or psychology, who often are just starting out and don't have a lot of experience, and who may more easily be swayed by the superficial charms of someone trying to circumvent the system. They may also not be as adept at selected or interpreting evaluative instruments such as the MMPI. In addition, a Social Study is usually less rigorous and thorough than a forensic evaluation; many times consisting of a single 50-minute session with each party, and then a 1-hour session at each party's home, evaluating both the home's safety and appearance, as well as evaluating how the children interact with the parent in the home environment. Considering that they always give at least 72-hour notice of a home visit, it's rather easy for anyone to gloss it up temporarily. Because of these limitations, judges are less likely to weigh the results of a home study heavily... although I have also seen it go the other direction: if a judge is biased toward a pre-determined outcome and wants justification to back up his/her decision, then if the home study says what they want it to say, all of a sudden, it's v-e-r-y important.
Child/Family Protective Services Evaluation: this is the bottom rung of evaluations, and often means nothing (unless, again, it backs up the judge's pre-determined outcome). Usually conducted by students who are interning their first Mental Health Professional job and working for barely more than minimum wage on an overloaded case load, a CPS eval has as much chance of reflecting reality as a coin toss. I've personally reviewed "home studies" on case loads that when you do the math, the evaluator could not possibly have spent more than 5-10 minutes in each home they claimed to have visited. Physical evidence means more than anything to these people, so if you have any (bruises, scratch marks, etc.) take photos. They are so poorly trained that many of them don't even know how to spell "psychology". So forget about mentioning verbal abuse, emotional abuse, personality disorders, etc. to them... you probably know more about these than they do. They are also the most easily biased - which means the first person to make a claim has the upper hand. (by the way, this is also true of many of the Social Study/Home Study folks, so if you do find yourself the subject of a court-ordered home study or social study, do everything you can to get your evaluation date on their calendar ahead of the other party).
Keep in mind that the greatest danger to your children when you are restructuring your family is CONFLICT. As mentioned before, not merely the open, above-board kind with the yelling and screaming, but also the insidious, passive-aggressive kind with the subtle parent bashing and undermining. While it is important to do everything you can to collaborate and minimize conflict, it is also important to understand what is going on in the system. Sadly, I've seen too many well-meaning parents become the victims of false or exaggerated claims - all because they didn't want to "fight". There is a time to "fight", and there is a time to use the system to help you. Understanding the different elements of that system is an important first step to choosing how and when the battle must be engaged.
Peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)