I don’t know about you, but recently I have increasingly realized that the philosophy of conflict resolution that I practice daily as a litigator is an awful template for resolution of conflict with loved ones.[1] While the divorce rate in the United States generally is quite high, it runs higher amongst attorneys. Certainly we must be responsible for not imputing a highly imperfect system of conflict resolution at home, but we are imperfect beings and it takes focus and attention to not impute these modes of conflict resolution to our home lives.

Here are some of the places where the conflict resolution systems fail us at home:

• The Complaint or Indictment

• ADR

Discussions of Alternative Dispute Resolution as a more effective means of reducing conflict than litigation are legion. Let’s be honest. ADR is effective in limiting litigation. It is not, however, some panacea for the resolution of conflict. It also provides piss-poor means of resolving conflict at home.  Several reasons: a) I don’t know about you, but I do not have an effective third-party neutral just hanging around in the basement. And it seems that if you have someone hanging around in your basement, they are highly unlikely to be an effective third-party neutral; b) For similar reasons that a Complaint is an ineffective means of focusing an at-home conflict, the tendency of each party at a mediation to begin from a position that is their best-case scenario ineffectively begins a discussion that seeks to resolve a conflict. Again, ADR resolves litigation, it doesn’t resolve conflict; c) I’ve heard a mediator say that the best negotiated settlements have both parties feeling like they gave up too much. That’s a good result that probably indicates fairness against a backdrop of litigation. If, however, both my wife and I feel like dissatisfied with the end of a conflict, that conflict is certain to rear its ugly head tomorrow, the next day, the day after that…

• Trial