Two Heavy-Duty Partners in Relationship

So, Bill Clinton will be fast and furious on the campaign trail supporting Hillary’s bid for the Presidency. Good news or bad news? In 2004, Howard Dean’s spouse, Judith Steinberg Dean, stayed more “stage right” and was seen infrequently. Good news or bad news?

The question that surfaces is this: Can two full-time, fully-engaged-in-a-professional-life partners maintain a conscious, healthy, intimate relationship? When two professionals spend a great deal of, or an inordinate amount of time, pursuing their careers, is there time to pursue each other on a consistent basis, that is, to continue to see their relationship as “fresh” every day, to continue to ”work” on their relationship consistently, and actually “be” in a relationship on a true like- and love-level? Or, does something (read: someone) have to give? Does the relationship begin to evaporate to the degree that the two spouses or partners are more roommates, and ships passing in the night, than they are committed and intimate partners? Do the partners lose sight of “shared values” and the notion of a “we” and replace these relationship foundational supports with “my values” and “your values” and “I” and “you”?

Can two high-powered professional folks truly support one another emotionally, physically, mentally, spiritually and socially? Can this be a win-win relationship? Do high-powered couples more commonly grow apart than grow together?

With late night work/dinners, travel, children and their needs and wants, pet care, medical appointments, school meetings, work around the house/living space, shopping and all the rest, can a loving, caring, committed (in deed as well as thought) relationship between two fully-engaged professionals work?  Does it work? For you?  Where does “relationship” lie on your list of priorities? And do your actions (not just thoughts) reflect that priority? Or, does your relationship have to give and, if so, are the consequences? What compromises do you make; what non-negotiable exist vis-à-vis your relationship requirements, wants and needs? What choices are you making when it comes to your relationship? Is relationship failure a real or potential outcome?

Peter Vajda, Ph.D, C.P.C. is a founding partner of SpiritHeart, an Atlanta-based company that supports conscious living through coaching, counseling and facilitating. With a practice based on the dynamic intersection of mind, body, emotion and spirit, Peter’s coaching approach focuses on personal, business, relational and spiritual coaching. He is a professional speaker and published author. (You can contact Peter directly: pvajda at spiritheart.net)

I Love Your Being a Lawyer; I Hate Your Being a Lawyer

I’m excited to share some thoughts about lawyers in relationship with you this week.  Why relationships? In addition to my work as a life and business coach, I have dedicated much of my coaching practice to support couples in relationship. Having been in a 15-year failed marriage, and married to one who had been in a 14-year failed marriage, I have dedicated my professional life, (and my own continual personal growth work) coaching and supporting couples to create healthy, conscious relationships, where two partners learn to continually “work” their relationship ,where the relationship gets to “work” them. I find the relationship journey to be particularly challenging for relationships where both partners are professionals – in this case, lawyers in relationship. I hope the readings I offer this week will provide some food for thought, perhaps pique your curiosity, about who you are, and how you are, as an attorney in relationship. 

I love your being a lawyer; I hate your being a lawyer. 

Hmmm…maybe “hate” is too strong a word, but in my relationship coaching work, I have come to believe there a flavor of the love-hate dynamic in nearly every personal relationship…new relationships, committed and exclusive relationships, with engaged couples and with married couples. If there’s not, then, (tongue in cheek), perhaps it’s because you haven’t known the person long enough to find something to resent. At any rate, a love-hate relationship does not mean there is no passion, no intimacy, no sincere and deep love, commitment and devotion.  

So, in the lawyer-non-lawyer relationship, I’m curious how the lawyer piece plays out in both supporting the relationship and in limiting, even sabotaging, the relationship. For example, if the lawyer piece points to being a skilled negotiator what does that look like in your relationship? On the “I love your being a lawyer” end of the continuum, does the non-lawyer-partner depend on the (skilled negotiator) lawyer-partner to purchase (negotiate the price/sale) a new car or other big-ticket item? Or, does your non-lawyer partner depend on the (“time-is-money-focused”) lawyer-partner to manage projects that demand efficient and effective use of time? Does the non-lawyer partner rely on the (“socially-skilled”) lawyer-partner to be the life of the dinner party, to break the ice, get things rolling and generate lively energy? Why else might your non-lawyer partner say, “I love your being a lawyer?” Does the non-lawyer partner achieve a sense of worth and value by continually suggesting the lawyer-partner to friends and neighbors who are in need of legal advice? 

On the other end of the continuum, what might it be about the lawyer-partner that gets in the way of a smooth relationship? When does the attractive, “plus” side of the lawyer-partner perhaps morph into a more repelling side that may cause resentment or bitterness, or teasing and sarcasm (which are veiled forms of anger and resentment)? For example, when the non-lawyer partner needs support, a kind ear, and silence in order to be heard, does the lawyer-partner become overbearing, dominating in a manner that is insensitive, undiplomatic, holier than thou, or argumentative? Does the lawyer-partner always need to have the “logic” of a discussion drive the discussion, and perhaps drive the non-lawyer partner away? Or, do most discussions become “arguments”?  So, my curiosity. When does it support your relationship to bring the “office” home and when does it support the relationship to leave the “office” behind? My curiosity is directed to lawyers and to non-lawyer spouses or partners who are in relationship with lawyers.

Peter Vajda, Ph.D, C.P.C. is a founding partner of SpiritHeart, an Atlanta-based company that supports conscious living through coaching, counseling and facilitating. With a practice based on the dynamic intersection of mind, body, emotion and spirit, Peter’s coaching approach focuses on personal, business, relational and spiritual coaching. He is a professional speaker and published author. (You can contact Peter directly: pvajda at spiritheart.net)

Vacation; ABA meeting; Introducing guest blogger Peter Vajda

“Vacation used to be a luxury, however, in today’s world, it has become a necessity.”
Unknown
“Vacation is what you take when you can’t take what you’ve been taking any longer.”
Unknown

“Isn’t it interesting that people feel best about themselves right before they go on vacation? They’ve cleared up all of their to-do piles, closed up transactions, renewed old promises with themselves. My most basic suggestion is that people should do that more than just once a year.”
David Allen, author of Getting Things Done and productivity guru

I’m off for vacation!  In just a few hours, I’ll be headed to San Francisco; from there, my husband and I will travel down Highway 1 almost to LA, stopping at various points along the way for great scenery and relaxation for mind, body, and spirit.  It’ll be 5 glorious days in places like Big Sur, Carmel, Monterey, and Half Moon Bay — and even more gloriously, the stretches in between the towns that are broad sea vistas on one side of the two-lane road and rocky hills on the other side.  I can’t wait.

Following our vacation, we’ll return to San Francisco, where I’ll be attending the ABA annual meeting from Thursday through Saturday.  If any of you reading this will be there, please drop me a note — I would love to meet you!

While I was planning my vacation, I considered taking a week-long hiatus from blogging.  But one morning while I was taking a walk, a great idea came to me.

Side note: have you ever noticed how often inspiration strikes while your body is active and your mind is either relaxed or concentrating on other than work?  What does that tell you about the benefit of time away from your work?

My idea was to invite someone to serve as guest blogger for the week, to offer a different perspective on Life at the Bar.  And as soon as the idea bubbled up, a name did the same: Peter Vajda.  He and I met in December, thanks to Stephanie West Allen,  and we shared a delightful 3- (or maybe even 4-) hour lunch.  Peter has often commented on this blog, and I’ve observed that his comments bring richness to the conversations that go on here.  When I invited Peter to blog here for a week, he accepted immediately and began floating ideas right off the bat.

I’ve seen what’s in store for next week’s posts.  Peter has elected to focus on lawyers in relationships, and his thoughts and suggestions hold relationship in a new light, particularly in view of lawyers’ tendencies and pressures.  Although his posts next week are specifically about dual-career couples and lawyers in romantic relationships, the applicability of his ideas spread much further.  He brings a new perspective that’s thought-provoking and intriguing, and I think his posts will be a treat for readers.

I am delighted to introduce Peter (he’ll handle the formal introduction on Monday) and pleased to welcome him as the first Life at the Bar guest blogger.  Enjoy!

Feeling a bit out of control? Welcome to law — and life.

I was visiting DC earlier this week and flew out on a 7 AM flight.  Thanks to the early hour and my grogginess, I put my regular reading material to the side and spent some time reading Business Traveler magazine, dreaming about luxury travel.  And then I happened across an article titled Flight Fright, which included this paragraph:

Many of the people who are afraid to fly say their anxiety stems from the lack of control they feel onboard a plane . . . SOAR’s Tom Bunn agrees.”A lot of my clients are lawyers,” he says.”They’re used to being in control, and then they board a plane and suddenly they’re not.”

And suddenly, there I was, pondering the effect of control and being out of control on lawyers’ lives.  Are lawyers, as a group, a class of control freaks?  And if we are, what does that mean for practice and for “civilian life”?  I came up with three observations.

1.  Successful lawyers know that they’ll find themselves out of control at some point, and they know how to recover.  A client told me a story about a lawyer who was taking a case to trial.  He’d won partial summary judgment, so the trial was limited to a single issue of liability and damages… Or so he thought, until the court opened the trial by reversing the grant of summary judgment and announcing that trial would proceed immediately on all issues.  He had a good team of junior lawyers and a paralegal with him, and he revised his opening statement while the team revised their trial strategy.  Several steps allowed him to excel in an out-of-control situation.

  • He accepted the situation on its face (as unpalatable as it was) and moved forward.  When it was apparent that the court intended to proceed right away, the lawyer set aside his outrage and moved to what he could control: the presentation of his newly defined case.  Had he distracted himself by composing the appellate brief in his head, there’s no way he could have performed well.
  • He relied on the input of others.  While lead counsel generally sets the course of a representation, this lawyer was able to get the ideas and input from every member of the team.  That’s the benefit of having top-notch professionals as colleagues and team members: when you really need to rely on them, those relationships must already be in place.
  • He requested time to regain some measure of control.  Although the 1-week continuance was denied, the court agreed to giving him two hours.  He spent the first part of that time making the strategic decisions that made him master of his newly defined case.

2.  Successful lawyers know when and how to loosen the reins.  Lawyers who don’t delegate well tend to fall into one of two traps: either they fail to provide sufficient information to guide the performance of the work and get back imprecise results or a product that doesn’t meet their needs, or they over-describe, micromanage, and rework the finished product because they believe no one can do the work as well as they can.  Knowing when to accept work performed in a different, but equally effective style, is a key skill.

3. Successful lawyers understand that control is, in many ways, an illusion to be held lightly.  Whether in a professional or a personal setting, control is often illusory.  For instance, turning back to the fear of flying article, travelers may feel safer because they’re in control while driving, even though studies show that flying is safer — and even though we all know intuitively that controlling the wheel won’t always provide safety.  In the practice context, “control” over a book of business is important for professional advancement, but that control lasts only as long as the clients are satisfied.  Personally, we can control nothing except ourselves, and even that’s a dicey proposition at times.  Being in control, then, is actually a delicate balance that requires attention and adjustment.

Control is often a topic in coaching.  The questions I pose to clients and now offer for your consideration: Are you really in control of this situation?  In what ways are you not in control?  And what’s the impact?