As legal professionals who live in conflict environments, we often observe that lawyers, without realizing it and as part of their professional practice and attitude, can become creators or enhancers of confrontational attitudes that end up being very negative for them. interests of your clients.
Representing and helping a client with a problem is much more than telling him what he is (supposedly) entitled to. Real help requires evaluating, from a broad and complete perspective, the consequences of following one way or another for the resolution of a conflict. Focusing on attitudes of “wanting to be right” or defending “having the right” help our clients little. Often these approaches lead clients to believe that they will achieve recognition of their claims without considering the economic, relational, emotional costs or the risks associated with the prosecution of cases.
At the same time, these attitudes generate in the opposite party the corresponding confronted reaction causing, of course, the search by his lawyer for the best legal arguments to defend the opposite. Without realizing it, with this approach, we have placed the matter in a situation in which two parties, through their lawyers, play their chess game before a judge that will end with the judge’s decision attributing the total or partial victory to whoever the better he has played and seems to have a better right in law.
As a game it is not bad, but the costs of the game are paid by the clients who often, even when they win the lawsuit, hardly obtain the necessary redress or the effective solution to their dispute. Lawyers must always be very aware of this and strive to provide real help to our clients, making good use of all the possibilities of reaching an agreement before prosecuting a matter and even before creating unnecessary tension with positions that only generate confrontation. only between clients but also between the parties’ lawyers.
That is why, to give valuable advice, lawyers must always make sure to help the client evaluate and make their decisions with the best serenity without being dragged by negative emotional influences.
On the other hand, it is necessary that we accompany you in the analysis of the advantages and disadvantages, risks and opportunities, which may arise from a pact against a judicial action. That is, to help him carry out a “realism test” that allows him to understand the real consequences of both alternatives, considering relevant aspects in the economy and in the client’s own life, such as the impact on their relationships, the consumption of time , the waste of energy that produces the prolongation of judicialized conflicts and even the insomnia that those who live in an uncomfortable conflict often suffer.
It is also necessary that we put the best capacities for dialogue and conversation with constructive attitudes to seek negotiated solutions that avoid the uncertainty and unnecessary risks derived from any judicial procedure for the client. In this sense, the possible convenience of submitting the dispute to mediation or other appropriate means of conflict resolution (ADR) should be evaluated, together with the client.
When people are affected by a conflict with a certain economic or relational or emotional relevance for us, we undoubtedly suffer a distortion in the understanding of situations from an objective perspective, with deterioration of our evaluation and decision capacities that are weakened from fear and inner turmoil. However, from the outside, without involvement, things are better appreciated.
Therefore, those of us who are dedicated to helping people in conflict situations must make sure that we never lose the coldest and most objective perspective of the situation and that we keep in mind the set of strengths and weaknesses of our clients’ position and the totality of effects, including emotional ones, which for them derive from a conflict situation. And nothing worse, to become the enemy of our clients, than to fall into emotional contagion or engage in a fight with the opposite party to see who is right.
Let us always be close to the client and understand him, but never lose our vocation and commitment to provide the best advice and always keep the protection of his interests as a guide. Let us stop fighting for reason and work for its interests. They will end up thanking us.
Alfredo Sanfeliz, of counsel of López-Ibor Abogados
– .
