|
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 dissociation can be both necessary and detrimental when practicing law. The essay will first highlight the positives and negatives of dissociation. Finally, readers will be able to understand when they should differentiate between needing to dissociate, and when they should not dissociate to avoid the negative “splitting” that occurs in the Lawyer Land reading.Defining Dissociation:Before looking at the benefits and determinants of dissociation, the term “dissociation” must be defined. For this essay, dissociation is defined as willfully or subconsciously not looking at or analyzing the totality of one’s actions in terms of who or what they impact(Lawyer Land). Dissociation is opting to take a surface level view of the impact of one’s actions without careful analysis.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. Positive Aspects:In small doses, dissociation is necessary in law and day-to-day life. One general benefit of dissociation is that it improves efficiency. A certain level of unconscious habits are 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). The person performing these habits, which, by their very nature are unconscious, cannot weigh how their actions impact every person in the system.. It is impossible for someone to carefully analyze the impact their actions have on the greater whole every time they act in a legal capacity. In small doses, or when executing mundane tasks that keep an organization running, dissociation allows for workers to perform unconscious tasks that improve the efficiency of the overall organization. A certain level of dissociation is also necessary when handling and dealing with clients. Part of being a lawyer is maintaining an air of professionalism around clients so that people can have confidence in your decision making. Sometimes lawyers need to dissociate to make the best decisions for them and their client, without becoming too personally attached.Negative Aspects:Dissociation can also have 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 lawyers dissociate too much it leads to them doing unfulfilling work. This happens because dissociation gives lawyers the ability to ignore the negative impact of their work that runs counter to their morals. In this situation, lawyers dissociate to the point that they are no longer bound by their morals, leading to dissatisfaction with their practice. It has been repeatedly stated in class that creativity is necessary for the development of a fulfilling legal practice. Too much dissociation impedes a lawyer’s ability to be creative. Excessive dissociation causes a lawyer to be uncreative by not analyzing the current legal sphere, how different legal actions impact others, and how the law is shaped by certain forces. These lawyers have less understanding of the legal system and where they can fit in and build a successful practice. The low surface level thinking that is fostered by dissociation prevents lawyers from being creative because it prevents lawyers from thinking deeply about the legal system and legal practices. As a result, this hinders lawyers from further developing their legal careers.Guiding Principles:A few guiding principles can be developed to help decide when dissociation can be beneficial or detrimental. Through analysis of the pros and cons of dissociation and enumerating instances where dissociation can be positive or negative, a clear framework can be created to help readers understand when dissociation should and should not happen when working as a lawyer. The first principle 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. 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 second principle is to understand that dissociation should never be necessary when a lawyer looks at their larger goals. Not all actions by lawyers can be consciously done, but the majority of actions a lawyer performs should coincide with the larger goal they have set out for them. A lawyer should never dissociate from the larger purpose of their actions. The third principle is to take into account the systematic hurdles and effects that the legal environment plays and how that affects 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. If the latter is the case, the lawyer can take three steps. The first step is to focus on enacting systematic change. Secondly, the lawyer can leave their profession. Lastly, they can dissociate from the problem completely. The approach I think that is the most feasible is to work toward systematic change while still engaging in the system. This engagement will cause lawyers to sometimes follow these immoral rules (which can lead to some dissociation), instead of leaving the legal practice all together.Conclusion:With these three guiding principles, lawyers can decide when their profession is causing them to dissociate to a point where it is unhealthy, or when the dissociation present in their profession is not detrimental to their enjoyment and fulfillment in their legal practice. Which legal practices or ventures that would cause a person to dissociate too much is up to each individual.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:
|
|
