 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| marcy sharafian |
I bring to mediation a firm belief that all conflicts, legal and otherwise, can be best resolved
through connection and understanding, and that litigation (strong advocacy of any kind) nearly
always results in broken relationships, with both parties losing dearly. I hadn’t always held this
philosophy, as is evidenced by own personal journey.
After graduation from the UC Davis School of Law in 1992, I had a deep desire to care for those
who seemingly weren’t able to fully care for themselves. I worked for several years in both paid
and volunteer capacities as a legal advocate (with Legal Services of Northern California, the
Advocacy Center for Long-Term Care in Bloomington, Minnesota and STAND in Contra Costa
County). Somehow, though I helped my clients find voices in labyrinth bureaucratic systems, the
impact on their lives seemed to be without depth for them.
In my divorce, I saw clearly how legal wrangling can easily deepen an already inconceivably-
painful experience. It was then that my professional path became clearer: I would attempt to bring
compassion and connection to those navigating the emotional and legal challenges of separation
and divorce. And so I followed the path walked by so many well-meaning attorneys. I became a
litigator in family law matters. But of course, there was the very difficult lesson: no matter how I
tried, I could not bring meaningful connection to my client and his/her opposing spouse. The
system simply does not support healing and creative resolution because clients are viewed as
having opposing interests, and attorneys are ultimately the ones who speak on behalf of their
clients. At times my clients “won” the legal issues of the day and at times they lost the legal
issues of the day. But in both cases, nearly all of my clients—these people I came to care deeply
about—lost what was critically important to them: the opportunity to go on with their lives in
peace, both for themselves and for their children.
Only when I became personally involved in the practice of Non-Violent Communication (NVC) did I
see a different way. It dawned on me that through facilitated conversation, people can work out
almost any issues, and especially those which involved longstanding pains. I studied NVC (and
mediation) for several years and then began to use my learnings in the practice of family law. I
quickly found that my earlier work (both as an advocate in a bureaucratic legal system and as an
advocate in the deeply personal matters of family law), could never have brought what I had
hoped, and that helping people hear each other led naturally to healing and enduring solutions to
challenging personal and legal problems. My path ultimately crossed with Larry Rosen’s, who
through his own journey, had come to learnings and conclusions very similar to my own.
While my time as an advocate, and especially as a family law litigator, was often very painful for
me (and my clients), I am grateful for the experience. Now, when I have two people sitting before
me, speaking directly to each other and taking full responsibility for their future and often their
children’s future, I know what the alternative could look like. Even if the couple before me is
arguing, I am happy that they, and not their attorneys, are doing the arguing. At least in that way,
they have the chance to hear each other, understand each other, and ultimately make
agreements that are based on mutual care and respect. My work has become deeply meaningful
for me because I now provide people a healing alternative in perhaps the most challenging time
of their lives.
through connection and understanding, and that litigation (strong advocacy of any kind) nearly
always results in broken relationships, with both parties losing dearly. I hadn’t always held this
philosophy, as is evidenced by own personal journey.
After graduation from the UC Davis School of Law in 1992, I had a deep desire to care for those
who seemingly weren’t able to fully care for themselves. I worked for several years in both paid
and volunteer capacities as a legal advocate (with Legal Services of Northern California, the
Advocacy Center for Long-Term Care in Bloomington, Minnesota and STAND in Contra Costa
County). Somehow, though I helped my clients find voices in labyrinth bureaucratic systems, the
impact on their lives seemed to be without depth for them.
In my divorce, I saw clearly how legal wrangling can easily deepen an already inconceivably-
painful experience. It was then that my professional path became clearer: I would attempt to bring
compassion and connection to those navigating the emotional and legal challenges of separation
and divorce. And so I followed the path walked by so many well-meaning attorneys. I became a
litigator in family law matters. But of course, there was the very difficult lesson: no matter how I
tried, I could not bring meaningful connection to my client and his/her opposing spouse. The
system simply does not support healing and creative resolution because clients are viewed as
having opposing interests, and attorneys are ultimately the ones who speak on behalf of their
clients. At times my clients “won” the legal issues of the day and at times they lost the legal
issues of the day. But in both cases, nearly all of my clients—these people I came to care deeply
about—lost what was critically important to them: the opportunity to go on with their lives in
peace, both for themselves and for their children.
Only when I became personally involved in the practice of Non-Violent Communication (NVC) did I
see a different way. It dawned on me that through facilitated conversation, people can work out
almost any issues, and especially those which involved longstanding pains. I studied NVC (and
mediation) for several years and then began to use my learnings in the practice of family law. I
quickly found that my earlier work (both as an advocate in a bureaucratic legal system and as an
advocate in the deeply personal matters of family law), could never have brought what I had
hoped, and that helping people hear each other led naturally to healing and enduring solutions to
challenging personal and legal problems. My path ultimately crossed with Larry Rosen’s, who
through his own journey, had come to learnings and conclusions very similar to my own.
While my time as an advocate, and especially as a family law litigator, was often very painful for
me (and my clients), I am grateful for the experience. Now, when I have two people sitting before
me, speaking directly to each other and taking full responsibility for their future and often their
children’s future, I know what the alternative could look like. Even if the couple before me is
arguing, I am happy that they, and not their attorneys, are doing the arguing. At least in that way,
they have the chance to hear each other, understand each other, and ultimately make
agreements that are based on mutual care and respect. My work has become deeply meaningful
for me because I now provide people a healing alternative in perhaps the most challenging time
of their lives.
| Offices in San Francisco, Oakland and Walnut Creek 415.356.9834 |
| Resolving Conflict through Understanding |
is there any rational alternative?
| juris doctor |