This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Deconstructing Decision Dilemmas
Decision dilemmas arise when the “right” path isn’t immediately clear and the stakes for making the “wrong” choice are high. As attorneys and judges, we regularly encounter decision dilemmas. Our legal training sharpens our ability to see all sides of an argument, which is a crucial skill in legal practice. However, our aptitude to hold competing viewpoints can turn into a burden when it leads to over-analysis and impedes committing to a single course of action.
To further complicate matters, when we feel stymied, we often come down hard on ourselves by criticizing our indecisiveness. In these moments, we may lose perspective of the legitimate reasons for our indecision, such as competing priorities, complexity of values, and colliding ethical perspectives. In these instances, our self-criticism further thwarts our decision making. However, it is not moral weakness, intellectual short-comings, or lack of will power that makes it difficult to determine the best course of action.
Dismantling decision dilemmas begins with understanding the root cause of the block. Most often, indecision arises not from a lack of legal or general knowledge, but from internal pressure brought on by different aspects of ourselves in search of a “no lose” solution in a “no win” situation. In Internal Family Systems (IFS), this is called an inner “polarity.”
Practically speaking, deconstructing a decision dilemma involves stepping back from the mental tug-of-war between competing internal perspectives and understanding the perspective of each part. This might include asking: What facts are objectively known? What values—personal, professional, or ethical—are at stake? What assumptions or fears might be unconsciously influencing the process? This kind of structured reflection helps to “unblend” from the internal polarization and arrive at decisions with more confidence. In doing so, the dilemma shifts from a source of internal conflict to an opportunity for greater self-awareness and well-reasoned action.
For an in-depth discussion of this topic and a step-by-step process to dismantle decision dilemmas, please read my article in the North Carolina State Bar Journal entitled “Analysis Paralysis: A Five-Step Method to Move Through Decision Dilemmas”.
To hear a live demonstration applying the five-step IFS-based process, listen to the correlating Sidebar podcast episode in which I guide North Carolina Lawyer Assistance Program’s (NCLAP) Assistant Director and podcast host, Candace Hoffman, through a decision dilemma using this five-step process.
Laura Mahr is a North Carolina and Oregon lawyer and the founder of Conscious Legal Minds LLC, providing well-being consulting, training, and resilience coaching for attorneys and law offices nationwide. Through the lens of neurobiology, Laura helps build strong leaders, happy lawyers, and effective teams. Her work is informed by 13 years of practice as a civil sexual assault attorney, 30 years as a teacher and student of mindfulness and yoga, and eight years studying neurobiology and neuropsychology with clinical pioneers. If you are interested in learning more about Laura’s coaching, consulting, and CLE offerings that grow your team’s resilience and offer decision dilemma tools, contact Laura through www.consciouslegalminds.com