ILNews

Quality of Life: Making significant life changes with purpose

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Commentary

If you have ever considered making a major life change, you know that it isn’t easy. Sometimes it seems next to impossible. There are times, however, when significant changes are necessary in order to move forward with your life. Because all of us will be faced with making transitions at some point in the future, here are some tips that might help with initiating and following through as you make life adjustments.

There are five steps that can be helpful as you make life changes. First, develop a vision of what is possible if you make the change. While it may sound a little “out there,” it has been proven that visualization can help to turn dreams into reality.

Second, acknowledge that change is scary. Virtually any change involves not only facing the unknown, but also letting go of the familiar. This can be terrifying sometimes — and often is so scary that it keeps people from making a change that, in the long run, would be much better for them. So, it is important to weigh the risks against the potential benefits. Compare the potential payoffs of the change with the personal cost of maintaining the status quo. What is the worst thing that could happen if you try to make the change? What is the best thing? What is the worst thing that could happen if you keep things as they are? What is the best? This type of assessment can be very helpful as you maneuver through life’s transitions. It may be helpful to enlist the help of a close friend, family member, or counselor to assist you with this analysis. Don’t isolate yourself in this process because there may be alternative courses of action or outcomes that you wouldn’t think of, or consider, if left to your own devices.

Third, don’t “over analyze” the situation. OK, I just told you to do a risk/benefit analysis and now I’m saying don’t over analyze. Attorneys are so accustomed to analyzing situations that there is some chance that you will get bogged down in the analysis stage and never move on to the action stage. If you come up with too many possible scenarios and outcomes, you will effectively paralyze yourself and keep yourself from taking any kind of action.

Fourth, consider the steps necessary to making the change. Acknowledge that some people may not understand or may be hurt by your actions and determine how to make the change with the least amount of fallout if possible. Write down the steps you plan to take so that you can chart your progress and have a feeling of accomplishment as you move closer to your goal. Realize that you might experience “growing pains” as you initiate the changes, and try not to let those pains keep you from making changes that could improve your future.

Fifth, don’t allow yourself to be blinded to other options if during the change process you come across information that makes the change seem unreasonable, or if it ceases to be feasible. It may not be an either/or situation. There may be compromises or alternatives that you could pursue that could serve a similar purpose to your original plan. Fluidity is often a necessary part of the change process. It may not happen as quickly as you had hoped, or the change may wear a different face than you had initially anticipated. This is not a reason to abort the mission entirely — just stay open and flexible to modifications to your first plan. A fallback option does not mean that you failed. It means that you are prepared for any eventuality.

Remember to stay optimistic and enthusiastic. This can be hard, but if you remind yourself that you are doing the right thing and your actions are taking you to a fresher, better place in your life, you can keep your enthusiasm for the task. Although frightening at times, change can lead you to a new and better life.•

__________

Jonna Kane MacDougall, an Indianapolis attorney, is assistant dean for external affairs and alumni relations at the Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis and a former law school career services director. A professional career/life coach, MacDougall can be contacted at (317) 370-4361 or via e-mail at whatsnextforyou@comcast.net. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT