After that case, walking into court never felt as good. As I dug deeper, I recognized that what happens in the courtroom is grounded in the belief that we are separate, when in fact, we are not. Answering harm with harm is not a good system, and when winning means someone else must lose, it is not the best we can do. It reflects a failure of imagination and a lack of understanding how, when we harm others, we harm ourselves.
Trial attorneys who are deeply immersed in that system may protest that they do a lot of good in the courtroom. There certainly are cases where the outcome is better than the conditions that existed before. That does not answer the question, is litigation the best system for dealing with conflict that we can provide? Few litigated cases produce the healing and transformation that is common when, instead, unitive justice is used to address the breach or the wrong.
In unitive justice, the goal is to achieve a win/win outcome. Healing, reconciliation and restoration are the measure of success. It costs far less than the punitive model of justice practiced in the courtroom. After years in the courtroom, I am convinced unitive justice is the better way.
Based on the author's book, Beyond Vengeance, Beyond Duality: A Call for a Compassionate Revolution.
Posted on GenuineJustice.com on Aug. 20, 2010.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
