|
Law in Contemporary Society
|
|
Dissociation-- By NoahRushin - 26 Feb 2021Introduction:This essay will explore the roles that dissociation has in the practice of law. More specifically, the essay will analyze how subconscious dissociation is created, and how it can become detrimental in the practice of law. The essay will first highlight how subconscious dissociation is brought about. Then, the detriments of this subconscious dissociation are explored. Finally, readers will be able to understand how they can become more aware lawyers, that rely on automatic dissociation less.Defining Dissociation:Before analyzing dissociation, the term “dissociation” must be defined. For this essay, dissociation is defined as subconsciously not looking at or analyzing the totality of one’s actions in terms of who or what they impact (Lawyer Land). Dissociation is automatically taking a surface level and inaccurate view of the impact of one’s actions. Lawyers do this because their mind cannot handle the truth surrounding their actions. It is an automatic reaction to protect a person’s ego.This is a new definition, based on conscious decision-making, "opting to take a surface level view ... without careful analysis." Dissociation, in other words, is defined as deliberately sloppy thinking. But we have been discussing dissociation as an unconscious process, involving the automatic suppression of awareness of traumatic events through the diversion of overwhelming experience into alternate identity states, holding, as state-dependent learning and memory, what can otherwise not be borne. The elision of the unconscious, and the reduction of a complex psychic process into "opting" against "careful analysis" is not justified here, or the difference in outlook acknowledged. Creation of Dissociation:In small doses, dissociation is necessary/natural in law and day-to-day life. A certain level of unconscious habits is necessary for an organization to run. In order for unconscious habits to be able to work, a certain level of dissociation is necessary (Lawyer Land). A certain level of dissociation is necessary when handling and dealing with clients and being in practice as well. Dissociation occurs when a person’s action does not coincide with the type of person, they think they are. Most humans label themselves as “good”. As a result, when lawyers or others commit acts that don’t coincide with them being “good” the initial reaction is to automatically dissociate. When lawyers repeatedly perform task that do not align with their morals consistently “splitting” occurs. As a result, the lawyer completely dissociates and does not realize how their actions effect reality.Negative Impacts:Dissociation has negative effects on a lawyer's ability to develop a fulfilling practice and perform their duties. The main effect of dissociation is that it can lead to a “split” in a lawyer’s mind as discussed in the reading (Lawyer Land). The situation explored in the reading highlights the great harm that dissociation can cause. When a lawyer automatically dissociates from their actions the negative psychological effects build up. This harms the lawyer’s mental psyche and can cause them to break when their subconscious can no longer automatically ignore the repeated tasks. This ignorance makes people less insightful about their job and therefore less creative. It has been repeatedly stated in class that creativity is necessary for the development of a fulfilling legal practice. Lawyers become uncreative by not being able to accurately analyze the current legal sphere and how the law is shaped by certain forces, including their own actions. These lawyers have less understanding of the legal system and reality. As a result, these lawyers cannot build a successful practice.Guiding Principles:A few guiding principles can be developed to help lawyers have less of a need for dissociation. Through the analysis of dissociation, a clear framework can be created to help readers decrease this unconscious dissociation. The first principle is for a lawyer to have a clear set of beliefs and goals that coincide with their values. A lawyer figuring out their “why” is the most important step in developing a fulfilling legal practice. Passions and communities that lawyers wish to help can all serve as a basis for these goals and beliefs. Lawyers carefully analyzing what brings them joy outside of material possessions can allow them to make a concrete list of acts and pursuits that would decrease their subconscious need for dissociation. Before going into practice lawyers must develop some sort of moral compass and have a concrete awareness of what actions align with their morals. The second principle in order to dissociate less is that lawyers should be looking at their overall impact consciously and periodically. These check-ins should occur periodically in a lawyer’s practice to ensure that their unconscious day to day actions actually coincide with their fundamental beliefs developed in the first principle. It is important to take into account that not every action will always coincide with what a lawyer wants to do. However, the larger portion of a lawyer's actions should be morally satisfying. The third principle is to take into account the systematic nature of law and how that affects a lawyer’s patterns of dissociation. A lawyer should differentiate between actions that they can freely choose to not take, and actions that they are forced to take because they are part of a larger system. Before entering into a legal practice, a lawyer should understand how the legal system may run counter to their beliefs. This conscious awareness early on about how the legal system interacts with the lawyers’ personal values is necessary. This can lead to less unconscious dissociation while practicing. When the legal system runs counter to the persons values there are three options. One, is to focus on enacting systematic change. Secondly, the lawyer can leave their profession. Third, the lawyer can engage with the system frequently, and in a way that may lead to “splitting “and unconscious dissociation. The approach I think that is the most feasible is to work toward systematic change while still engaging with the system. This engagement will cause lawyers to sometimes follow these rules that do not coincide with their beliefs (which could lead to some dissociation), instead of leaving the legal practice all together.Conclusion:Not all actions by lawyers can be consciously done, but the majority of actions a lawyer performs should coincide with their larger goals. A lawyer should never dissociate from the larger purpose of their actions. With these three guiding principles, lawyers can decrease the amount of unhealthy dissociation. A lawyer who dissociates less is more present and aware about the true nature of their legal practice. As a result, the lawyer is better able to understand their legal practice, allowing them to better improve their practice.The point of the draft seems to be to assert that dissociation is not an unconscious defense mechanism but rather a chosen cognitive strategy, which lawyers, in particular, can turn on and off. One obvious route to improvement is to explain why this change of the concept represented by the word is valuable, or necessary. This would involve putting your idea in contact with the other reading we did after this draft was composed. Perhaps these "guiding principles" are supposed to substitute for the way untutored minds work, as a kind of comprehensive cognitive behavior therapy for lawyers. Or perhaps the essay's real point is that the idea we call Freud is wrong, that the majority of human mental activity isn't unconscious, and that dissociation and repression do not ever actually happen, as writers from Freud to Putnam have thought they showed. Evidently how we cone out on this point will have a very significant effect on the overall lawyer's theory of social action. So the stakes are significant, and the next draft's clarity on its position will be a large part of its value. You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
|
|
