For trial attorneys, vulnerability is power

Brene Brown is a research professor at the University of Houston in the graduate College of Social Work. Her area of research involves relationships between people. She studies vulnerability, courage, worthiness and shame, and has published extensively about those subjects. Brown confirms what I believe about the essential need of plaintiffs' attorneys to be authentic and to be truth-tellers about themselves and their cases. In a trial, we are trying to create a bond with the jurors. We want to show them that we are members of their "tribe" by identifying a common belief or value. We know that we like people who are like ourselves. We tend to trust those with whom we identify. That common identity involves creating a relationship with the jurors. The similarity between Dr. Brown's subject matter and our profession is that we both study relationships. Her research shows that it all starts with how we see ourselves. What interferes with the ability to make a connection is a belief that we are not worthy - personally, professionally or both. She makes the point that in order to have connections or relationships with other people, we have to let ourselves be seen - "really seen." That involves being willing to be vulnerable to rejection or pain. So why don't people feel worthy? Brown contends it most often is due to a feeling of shame stemming from unrealistic expectations; that is, we're unwilling to accept us as we are because we think we should be perfect. We need to accept the fact we are not. Brown found that people with a strong sense of connection had a notable trait in common: the courage to be themselves. She suggests that we have to have the compassion to be kind to ourselves first before we can be kind to and connect with others. Her research showed that we can't practice compassion with other people if we can't treat ourselves kindly. She also found that people who can more easily make connections with others possess authenticity. They're willing to let go of who they thought they should be in order to be who they are. Specifically, people in good relationships fully embrace vulnerability. They don't see vulnerability as being comfortable; in fact, they recognize it as uncomfortable. But subjects in her study talked about it as being necessary. They were willing to be vulnerable. The willingness to say, "I love you," first. The willingness to do something when there are no guarantees that you will get a good response in return. The willingness to invest in a relationship that may not work out. They all believed that kind of vulnerability was fundamental to being a whole person and to have connections with others. Brown argues that people avoid that vulnerability by trying to numb emotion, but that's an impossible task. She says that the attempts to protect against vulnerability include trying to make everything certain that is uncertain. She argues that for many, religion has gone from a belief in faith and mystery to certainty ("I'm right and you're wrong, so shut up.") A similar reflection is the absence of political dialogue. In politics today, there is no gray area, no middle ground, and no area for compromise. It is all either right or wrong, period. So what has any of this got to do with plaintiffs' trial work? Everything. The need for authenticity, vulnerability and honesty is essential to greatness as a plaintiffs' trial lawyer. For example, one of the fundamental teachings at the Spence Trial College is the need to drop all the artificial walls we create around ourselves to protect against anyone finding out who we really are. They teach the need to be truthful about ourselves and our case with all the imperfections of both. Being real is the first step in winning a case. Why? Because we all have a strong sense of knowing when people are being themselves. We also have internal antennae that alert us to people who are guarded and giving slanted information. When that happens, we simply don't trust them. On the other hand, when we perceive that others are not trying to hide behind a mask and are willing to show us who they are, with all their imperfections, we are more likely to trust them - and accept that what they say is credible. In a trial with six to 12 people studying us and what we say, first impressions are lasting impressions. From the moment the trial begins, we need to show our real selves and be truthful. A trial lawyer who projects to the jury an unguarded and authentic person coupled with honesty and truthfulness about his case is someone who is trusted. But here's the rub: To do that requires being vulnerable, which requires real professional courage, because your case is made vulnerable as well and might be rejected. But there's no other choice if you want to be the best you can be in representing your client. You want everyone to think you're a great lawyer, but trying too hard to be the perfect lawyer will come off as slick at best, or worse, disingenuous. Be great by being a skilled, competent, but real, person. "Truth and courage aren't always comfortable, but they're never weakness, contrary to conventional wisdom," Brown has said. Many profound truths are simple to state. It takes courage to be vulnerable in front of a room full of strangers you want to impress, especially when so many others are doing their best to put on a glossy show. But the truth is that unless we are willing to be vulnerable, we will never be great. Jurors can be entertained by the illusion of perfection for only so long before they begin to question the performer's authenticity - and that's the end of the show. ----- Paul N. Luvera is the founder of Luvera Law Firm in Seattle. He was elected to the American Trial Lawyers Association Hall of Fame in 2010. Published: Tue, Nov 04, 2014