Eric Wood: Person-centered monitoring: It is a JLAP journey

“We’re all just walking each other home.”

—Ram Dass

In my second month at JLAP, I got my first case to take on from scratch. I had inherited a handful of cases from my predecessor, but this was going to be my own from start to finish.

The young man, who I’ll call Chad for the sake of confidentiality, was a 1L at Fill-In-The Blank Law School. He had gotten into a bit of trouble and wanted to work with JLAP to prove to the school this was a one-off.

In addition, he wisely wanted to get ahead of the situation to lay the foundation for a compelling character and fitness defense he would need later.

I met him one afternoon at the school to assess the situation and to get to know him. I determined a course of action to help him address some evident issues. The plan included a voluntary JLAP Monitoring Agreement, which happened to be a handy tool at my disposal.

I figured the Monitoring Agreement would provide the necessary guardrails — namely, structure and accountability — that would help keep this young man on the right path.

I sent a copy of the Monitoring Agreement to Chad to review. The next day I received a call from his attorney, who wanted to speak with me about the Monitoring Agreement.

I said I would be happy to help, and he said, “Good, I’m in your building. I’ll be up to your office in two minutes.”

Even though I was new to the attorney game, this was a gentleman whose name I had already heard. He was described as a formidable sort who was likely to be the smartest guy in the room — any room.

I knew just enough to be apprehensive but not enough to be completely intimidated, which was a lucky break for me.

When I mentioned to my team that this particular attorney was paying me a visit, a hush fell over the office. When he came onto the floor, it was reminiscent of that scene in Elf when Miles Finch (“Miles Finch!”) exits the elevator and walks confidently into the boardroom.

The attorney dropped a copy of my Monitoring Agreement on my desk. It was covered in red ink. He proceeded to tear apart and reconstruct my Monitoring Agreement while I sat in stunned silence. That afternoon I learned the meaning of redlining a contract, which isn’t the point of this story. More importantly, I learned something very valuable about my job.

The attorney was simply trying to stack the deck as favorably as he could for his client. That’s his job. But he broke down an important lesson: There are two primary goals of a JLAP Monitoring Agreement.

On one side, he said, there is the tactical set of goals. This pertains to the objectives related to passing muster with an employer, a school, or licensing authority, such as the Board of Law Examiners or the Disciplinary Commission (now OJAR) – pejoratively speaking, ‘hoop-jumping’. These objectives need to be simple, verifiable and measurable.

The other set of goals, he said, are the clinical goals. These, he explained, are the overarching goals of JLAP and relate to the well-being of the attorney being monitored. He pointed out that most people approaching JLAP, in his estimation as a defense attorney, were interested in the first set of goals, or achieving only the optics of change, whereas JLAP, obviously, had actual change in mind.

My job, he suggested, was to bring these goal sets together.

This brought to mind from my psychological training the concept of Motivational Interviewing. This is a person-centered approach used in counseling whereby the counselor strives to meet the client where she is, compassionately considering the client’s own goals and reasons for engaging change.

During the client’s exploration of change, the counselor can introduce larger concepts of change and growth. By collaboration and guidance, small incremental change can lead to bigger change.

Similarly, in 12-Step Recovery, there is a credo that often inspires division, depending on how one interprets it. The saying is, “Fake it ‘til you make it.” Disbelievers will point out that faking something renders the faker disingenuous. How can someone achieve anything by just going through the motions? Believers will note that embracing and enacting behavioral change will likely inspire attitudinal change in time. In other words, if one can commit to the change and ride it out for a while, the benefits of the change will become evident and rewarding, thus reinforcing the commitment.

I have found this principle applies to the person-centered approach of JLAP monitoring. Clients typically view monitoring from a negative perspective — as if monitoring is equivalent to punishment.

The misconception persists that JLAP is an extension of the disciplinary process and that we exist to be the enforcers of discipline. The reality is we are our own entity. We have been entrusted by the Indiana Supreme Court to oversee monitoring precisely because we believe change is possible, and because we see the change of the individual as upholding the Court’s desire to advance the standing of the legal profession as well as to protect the public.

It may surprise the reader to know that referrals for disciplinary cases only comprise about 4% of the people we help. And of the cases that involve monitoring, many are completely voluntary. With all of these cases, my job remains to meet the clients where they are and help them meet their tactical goals while introducing clinical goals.

This process of compassionate collaboration is the heart of what we do at JLAP. We are, after all (and borrowing the words of our mission statement), in the business of improving lives and fostering connection – ‘walking each other home,’ indeed.•

__________

Eric Wood is a Licensed Clinical Addictions Counselor and Clinical Case Manager at JLAP. Opinions expressed are those of the author.