Law Times

Law Times • August 19, 2013 I Page 7 COMMENT Healthy boundaries make for healthy lawyers t's a hallmark of psychotherapy practice that clients come in lamenting their various challenges even as they're unaware of the ways in which they sometimes actively perpetuate them both by commission and omission. From a place of relative objectivity, the therapist often views irrational, counterproductive or self-injurious conduct from clients that they're unable or unwilling to see themselves. In that sense, it's not entirely unlike how lawyers often see their clients. From addictions that persist despite clearly adverse consequences to individuals staying in toxic relationships for all of the wrong reasons, many clinicians experience a veritable parade of clients describing behaviour that's hurting them even as they remain blissfully or, to state it more accurately, miserably unaware. More than any other issue I observe in my practice, the inadequacy or absence of personal or professional boundaries is a persistent theme in the lives of so many of my clients. The concept of boundaries often arises but is something many clients don't understand, which is unfortunate since it affects so many aspects of a person's life. From parent-child relations to workload issues to marital interaction, the presence or absence of healthy boundaries is often the difference between chaos and contentment. In his book Boundaries and Relationships, Charles Whitfield describes the concept of boundaries as "how far we can go with comfort in a relationship. It delineates where I and my physical and psychological space end and where you and yours begin." He goes on to quote Karen Paine-Gernee and Terry Hunt: "The easiest way to understand healthy functioning of boundaries is to think of the role of cells. The cell is a semipermeable membrane. When it functions correctly, the cell wall keeps poisons out, lets nutrients like them and will rebel against in, and excretes waste. It also defines the existence of the cell by The Lawyer them as an unfair and arbitrary change in the rules. When a separating it from other cells. . . . The healthy person does much Therapist married man's mother has always felt she had licence to tell the same. To have a semipermehim how to live, what to do, able membrane, to know what and how to raise his children, to allow in and what to keep she'll likely not take well to his out, means you have a choice starting to rebuff her unsolicitin your life, and means you will ed opinionating. When he tells be an active rather than a pasher, for instance, that she can sive participant in it. To manage no longer just show up at the contact well is an expression of Doron Gold house to see her grandchildren self, integrity, and freedom." but must make prior arrangeIn essence, boundaries are the rules by which we live and inter- ments in that regard, there's a strong act with others. They are ours, just as chance that she'll take offence at what she much as others' boundaries are theirs. views as sudden disrespect. However, this man has a family to As such, when I set a boundary, it's up to me how it operates. So by way of a rela- maintain and every time his mother takes tively straightforward example, if I set a liberties, his wife winces. For the sake of boundary with my partner that I won't his marriage as well as his autonomy as tolerate physical violence, it's up to me to an adult, he needs to set boundaries and enforce that rule. While it sounds simple, enforce them. In the professional realm, how many how many times have you heard stories of people who insisted on that basic re- lawyers do you know who take on as quirement in a relationship only to stay much work as their senior partner gives with the person and forgive them for such them even if there are nowhere near behaviour because they loved the person enough hours in the day to complete and made excuses as to why it might have those tasks? Some people reading this been an isolated incident or why they will most assuredly say that this is the may have even invited such conduct. To price of being a professional and that we set a boundary and then not to enforce all have to pay our dues. That may have it is to have no boundary at all. Boundar- some truth to it, but too many lawyers I ies are about telling people how you want see are simply too afraid to set boundarthem to treat you and then holding them ies related to workload and they suffer to it. That requires clarity of terms, the profoundly as a result. The helpless feelclear communication of them, consistent ing that comes with being asked to do enforcement, and the implementation of more than one is capable of doing and consequences for a violation. Much as in not feeling able to say no often leads to contract law, a breach isn't a breach if no- depression, anxiety, and substance abuse. body acts on it or seeks remedies for it. It The key is that each person has choice simply amounts to words on a page that and is not, in fact, helpless. The person carry no weight in real terms and implic- not setting a boundary is choosing a itly instruct the parties to ignore those course of action and absorbing the consequences. In the same way, people who provisions going forward. The main challenge with the setting set a boundary for their own health or of boundaries is that others often don't sanity also accept, with open eyes, that there may be other consequences associated with that decision. It's about exercising choice and power in one's life. If the setting of a boundary results in blowback, so be it. The first time a government official decided to put a traffic light at the corner of Yonge and Bloor streets in Toronto, more than a few drivers likely recoiled at having to stop and wait. It was an encroachment on their autonomy. However, people slowly became accustomed to the mild inconvenience as they noticed how the new rules made things more orderly and, ultimately, more pleasant and functional. When people assertively set boundaries, if they can withstand the initial blowback, things often begin to settle down and people begin to relax into the new way of being. Things run more smoothly and there's less chance of disrespect and hurt feelings because people feel safer and more stable. In the same way a child rebels but ultimately benefits from parental rules, so adults ultimately benefit from clear boundaries. And if things don't settle down, the parties may be at an impasse, leading to compromise or even separation. That happens. At least they're acting authentically, assertively, and in line with their values and own best interests. If there's one person in the world who you should be able to count on to take care of you, it should be you. You know your values and your sense of well-being and when you defend and honour those things, life becomes better. Ultimately, good fences do, indeed, make good neighbours. LT uDoron Gold is a registered social worker who's also a former practising lawyer. He works with lawyers and law students in his private psychotherapy practice and is also a staff clinician and educator at Homewood Human Solutions. He's available at thelawyertherapist.ca. Capable, competent JPs deserve fair pay BY JAMES MORTON For Law Times J judges make.  In fairness, justices of the peace do make mistakes, sometimes serious ones. Justices of the peace, like lawyers, doctors, plumbers, and everybody else, are imperfect. But that's inevitable when dealing with human beings. And when justices of the peace do make mistakes, it's not an issue of paper qualifications. Every day, the Court of Appeal for Ontario hears up to a dozen appeals from judges, all of whom have law degrees and stand at the top of their profession. No one questions their eminent qualifications. While justices of the peace don't have to have legal training, many do. Regardless, all new appointments undergo a rigorous training cycle. After initial training, justices of the peace have a continuing legal education process. Justices of the peace have to have a post-secondary degree or diploma and years of work in business or the professions. Having been involved with the ongoing legal education of justices of the peace, I can attest to their professionalism and dedication to knowing the law they apply.  Justices of the peace are capable and competent. LT u SPEAKER'S CORNER udges and justices of the peace have their remuneration determined in a peculiar way. Contract negotiations are forbidden and the government can't merely establish a pay scale by fiat. Instead, a commission will consider what's fair and reasonable and, after hearing from witnesses and reading submissions, will recommend a compensation package.  The idea is that an independent body is responsible for what judicial officers earn. The next commission for justice of the peace compensation starts this fall.  There will likely be many witnesses and considerable debate over the proper compensation for a justice of the peace.  At present, justices of the peace earn less than half the income of a provincially appointed judge.  The role of justices of the peace isn't trivial. Unlike American movie descriptions, Ontario's justices of the peace rarely perform marriages; rather, they work in the trenches of the criminal justice system. Justices of the peace decide daily on the liberty of the subject as well as search and seizure issues. About 54 per cent of cases in Ontario are criminal matters. About 350 justices of the peace deal with all of them, at least in part. Justices of the peace preside over virtually all bail hearings in the province and the majority of criminal remand courts. In the vast majority of cases, justices of the peace decide if criminal charges can go ahead and whether to deny or issue search warrants. Finally, justices of the peace preside over and conduct trials in provincial offences matters, such as those under the Highway Traffic Act, and municipal bylaw infractions, such as those under the Liquor Licence Act. Of course, not everyone likes the decisions made by justices of the peace. A drug dealer tends to resent a search warrant that finds drugs. Someone denied bail looks to blame the person refusing it. It's easy to find someone disgruntled by a decision of a justice of the peace. Recently, there have been a number of rather harsh media attacks on justices of the peace. It may not be a coincidence that these attacks are now arising in light of the upcoming compensation commission.  Leading newspapers have written on cases reportedly botched by justices of the peace who are allegedly not up to the job. Last year, a private member's bill tabled in the Ontario legislature proposed major changes to the qualifications to become a justice of the peace. Each story and the proposed legislation focus on the fact justices of the peace don't have to have a law degree, a factor referred to at great length by the government when making submissions that justices of the peace should earn less than half of what provincial www.lawtimesnews.com uJames Morton is counsel for the Association of Justices of the Peace for Ontario and will represent it at the next compensation commission. He's a past president of the Ontario Bar Association and practises law in Ontario and Nunavut. The opinions expressed are solely his own.

• Cover