Blog moved to my website

Hi, My Blog has moved to my website. Please visit there:
Kathy Elton Consulting

Getting the "Whole" story

I find it interesting how a night at the Utah Symphony often teaches me something about the work I do in mediation. It happened again. On Saturday night I attended the much lauded final performance of Keith Lockhart as the Music Director for the Symphony. I bought the tickets at the first of the season with my regular season tickets and had not thought much about it since then. I have had a hectic month or so and so my connection to the newspaper, news, the world in general has been limited (this I like!) so I missed all of the stories about the performance scheduled for that night.

The perfomance was "Leonard Bernstein's Mass" and this meant nothing to me as we drove to the Symphony that night. When we arrived I took care of the personal essentials - a cookie and the restroom - and got to my seat about 10 minutes before the perfomance began. I looked at the program notes, but did not have my glasses and the print was too small, so I didn't read anything. As the program was beginning I leaned over to my partner, who had read some of the program notes, and asked what was this about. She responded "you should have read the program notes, I cannot explain it to you now."

I sat there for the next two hours, there was no intermission, totally bewildered by what I was seeing, hearing and feeling. You see, I love the Symphony and this night I did not. I won't bore with you all the details, I'll just say that at the end I could not understand why the Musical Director had picked this performance as his last and I was disappointed.

The next morning I was headed out on my daily walk with my dog and I was listening to podcasts. I came across one from the week before which was an interview with Keith Lockhart and others on the upcoming final performance. My first instinct was to hit delete... but I didn't and I am glad I didn't. Over the next 40 minutes I listened to an amazing explaination of what I had seen and experienced the night before. As I walked and listened I found a new appreciation for what I had witnessed and been a part of the evening before. All of a sudden something that was confusing and unpleasant became something moving and interesting.

So, how does this relate to mediation and conflict resolution? Many times when I am working with parties who are unable or unwilling to talk with one another, I find it frustrating that they each have compelling stories about their side of the issue, yet they are unwilling to sit in the same room and share them. I fear that as a mediator, when I carry those stories back and forth between the parties, that something important is lost. I am not able to carry the "Wholeness" of what the parties need to hear and experience with one another. They may leave my office feeling like I did when I walked out of Symphony Hall that night, confused and disappointed. I think one of the challenges for us as mediators is to find ways for the parties to have these experiences and see the other person in context, in their "whole" story and expereince.

There is one more part to this story. One other element the guests on the podcast talked about was the difference between listening to a performance on a recorded device versus being there in person. I also relate to this. I LOVE the Symphony, but I do not enjoy listening to classical music as a recording. There are some things that you have to experience, be in the middle of, to appreciate fully and for me classical music is like that. I love it when I am sitting in Symphony Hall and the music washes over and through me. I don't have that same reaction when it is on my home stereo or ipod.

There are things that people have to experience in context and in person for them to fully understand them. Often, conflict falls into this category. For conflict resolution to happen the parties have to understand the back story of the other and to listen to the experience of the other in person. They need to allow the story and experience of the other to "wash" over and through them. It is my experience that when this can happen in a mediation, transformation begins.

Mediation with Gay and Lesbian Couples; It Is Not Straight Forward -- Click for full article --

This is an article recently published in ACResolution Magazine, Winter 2009 ACRnet.org

By Kathy Elton

A couple of years ago, my partner and I spent the weekend with a male friend who happens to be a mediator. His wife was unable to join us, so it was just the three of us. One night we stayed up late and somehow my partner and I ended up telling him the details of each of our past relationships.

The next morning our friend brought up the discus-sion and asked if we were OK. The question was unexpected because there was no reason, in our minds, not to be OK. He went on to share that the topic of our past relationships and the way in which we talked about those relationships in front of one another had made him uncomfortable. He said that if he or his wife were to discuss a past relationship in front of the other, it would create negative tension between them. He could not imagine that we did not react in a similar way.

That experience has stayed with me and when I came across research that outlined the similarities and differences between same-sex and cross-sex couples I was intrigued. In this article, I will review some of the research on same-sex couples in conflict and make suggestions for mediators based on my own experience that reinforces the research.

Limited research
When you think about same-sex relationships what comes to your mind? Some of the common myths about same-sex relationships are:
· Homosexuals are unhappy individuals who are unsuccessful in developing enduring

relationships;
· Gay and lesbian relationships are inferior to cross-sex relationships;
· Gay and lesbian relationships are less satisfying than cross- sex relationships, more prone to

discord, and people in gay and lesbian relationships are "less in love";
· Homosexuals arc socially isolated and lacking in social sup­port.

The research on same-sex relationships is sparse, but those studies that have looked at these relationships have found that same-sex couples are comparable to cross-sex couples on measures of relationship satisfaction and quality. A 1987 study by L.A. Kurdek and J. P. Schmitt tided "Partner Homogamy in Married, Heterosexual Cohabiting, Gay, and Lesbian Couples" published in the Journal ofSew Research found that same-sex and cross-sex couples who are matched on age and other relevant characteristics do not usually differ in levels of love and satisfaction. Kurdek and Schmitt's studies on this topic are all based on self-report questionnaires. The bottom line is: Same-sex couples are not any more prone to relationship dis­satisfaction and difficulties than are cross-sex couples.

So, how do same-sex and cross-sex relationships differ?

Some of the most recent research (2003) on same-sex relation­ships was conducted by Dr. John Gottman of the University of Washington and Dr. Robert Levenson of the University of California at Berkeley. In a 12 year study, they evaluated 42 same-sex couples (21 gay and 21 lesbian) all of whom were cohabitating and in a committed relationship of at least two years. These couples were compared to 42 cross-sex couples who had been married for at least two years and whose reports of satisfaction in the relationship were roughly equivalent to
the same-sex couples. In a 2001 article in the Los Angeles Times, reporter Kathleen Kelleher summarized the then unpublished results of the Gortman/Levenson study:
· 20 percent of same-sex couples had broken up at the end of the 12 years, compared to 38

percent of the heterosexual couples.
· Same-sex couples use fewer controlling, hostile emotional tactics during arguments.

According to Gottman, generally, power-sharing and fairness are more prevalent among

same- sex couples than among cross-sex couples.
· In a fight, same-sex couples take negative statements less per­sonally than do cross-sex

couples. "A gay or lesbian person can say something negative in a fight and a partner is much

less likely to be defensive than those in a cross-sex partner­ship," Gottman said.
· Unhappy same-sex couples are better able to cairn down while in a fight than cross-sex

couples. For some reason, cross-sex couples become more physically agitated during a fight

than same-sex couples. The upshot, Gottman said, "is same-sex couples appear better able to

soothe each other during conflicts or in the aftermath of a fight."
· In a fight, lesbians show more anger, humor, excitement and interest than conflicting gay men.

Gottman speculates that this may be the result of two women in a relationship who have been

raised in a society where emoting is more accept­able for women than men.
· Gay men need to be especially careful to avoid negativity in conflict. If the initiator of conflict in

a gay relationship becomes too negative, his partner may not able to de-escalate the conflict as

well as lesbian or cross-sex couples.

Given the research, mediators working with same-sex couples should consider the following:

Understand your own comfort level with high emotion
I believe that all mediators should be aware of their own com­fort level in regard to conflict so they do not intervene because of their own discomfort. We, as mediators, should only inter­vene when the conversation becomes unproductive.

When working with lesbians, mediators may experience a higher level of emotion than they experience when working with gay men or cross-sex couples. My partner and I tend to express our emotions with each other in front of our family members on a regular basis. At times when we are having a disagreement with one another and I feel like we are just getting into a good discussion, a family member (often my father or my partner's mother) will say something that is meant to calm us. During those moments, we do nor need to be calmed down and, in fact, we are both feeling very engaged and connected to one another. However, the level of emotion we are willing to express makes others uncomfortable. Is the discomfort others experience just a generic response to any emotionally laden situation? It could be, but I think it has to do with both of us being women. I also think it can be related to Gottman's speculation that it is more accepted in society for women to emote. With a lesbian couple you get double the emotion. In the family context I do not mind being "shut down" because of someone's discomfort with the level of emo­tion, but if I were a participant in a mediation talking about something important and a mediator intervened, it would frustrate me. Mediators need to be aware of the possibility of this higher level of emotion and should be prepared to allow the lesbian couple to engage in a way that is comfortable to them. Mediators need to be careful not to intervene because of their own discomfort when working with lesbian couples; the last thing you want to do is to shut them down, because that may increase their level of stress and frustration and derail the mediation process.

Conversely, when working with gay men, a mediator needs to be sensitive to the level of negativity exchanged between the parties. If the level of negativity becomes too high, the relationship can be further damaged. 1 still advocate for keeping my gay clients in the same room and using caucus sparingly. In instances where I would likely not intervene
with cross-sex or lesbian couples, I may intervene with gay couples, just to make sure the relationship is not negatively impacted while the couple is in the mediation process. In instances when I do intervene, I usually reveal my rationale to the parties so they do not assume I am being too controlling of the process. Once they understand the reason for the intervention, they often self-regulate or, at least, understand why I am breaking in.

The use of caucus
The use of caucusing should be limited when working with gay and lesbian couples. If you are a mediator who uses caucuses as a regular part of your mediation process, you may want to re-think this approach when working with same-sex couples. The Gottman/Levenson research basically concluded that gays and lesbians display less belligerency, domination and fear with each other than cross-sex couples. The research also found that gays and lesbians who exhibit more tension during disagreements are actually more satisfied with their relation­ships than those who remain unruffled. When working with cross-sex couples, we as mediators know that the higher the level of tension, the more trouble the relationship is in, so we may instinctively separate the parties. This can be counter­productive when working with a same-sex couple, unless the caucus is held to lessen the damage between two men.

Respect the parties and the relationship
Finally, and most importantly, as a mediator you must respect the parties and the quality of their relationship. I recommend that mediators who believe in the old myths about gay and les­bian relationships decline such cases, instead referring the cases to a mediator who understands and uses the unique techniques associated with mediating gay and lesbian relationships. In
any type of conflict, gay and lesbian clients need and deserve the same support and respect from the mediator that would automatically be afforded a cross-sex couple.

Kathy Elton has more than 12 years experience as a mediator in many different dispute areas. She is the owner of Kathy Elton Consulting in Murray Utah and offers mediation, conflict coaching and training.