Life Lessons I Learned From Flying Airplanes

About 20 years ago, my wife gave me an introductory flying lesson as a birthday present. I loved the experience and was soon on my way to earning my private pilot’s license. I was fortunate to meet an exceptional flight instructor, Tony Hicks, while taking ground school through the Florida State University Flying Club. Tony, a former Navy F-14 Tomcat pilot, was a great instructor because he not only taught the mechanics of flying an airplane, but also the psychology of being a pilot. With Tony’s guidance and training I was granted my Private Pilot’s license on September 11, 1998. I enjoyed flying regularly until the events of another September 11th three years later forever changed general aviation. Although I’ve flown a few times since then, the cost of aviation, plus the loss of freedom associated with increased security, have pretty much grounded me, and many of my pilot friends. However, the lessons of aviation have stayed with me and I often think of aviation problem-solving when facing a problem or challenging situation on the ground. Here are a few of the lessons that often go through my head:

Fly the airplane – No matter what happens in the air, a pilot’s first and foremost job is always to fly the airplane. It doesn’t matter if the wing is on fire; you fly the airplane first, and then worry about the fire. In 1972 the crew of an Eastern Airlines L-1011 violated this rule with disastrous consequences when they flew their aircraft into the ground after they became focused on trouble-shooting a burned-out landing-gear indicator light.  This is true in life too.  Paying attention to our task and our mission prevents unnecessary problems and failures.  Things are going to go wrong sometimes.  Our job is to stay focused and not create disasters by neglecting the fundamentals while we try to solve what are often minor problems.

Know your Limits – Not all pilots are the same. Experience, training, and proper equipment can safely take one pilot where another would be at great risk.  Just because you have an instrument rating and spent some time in the clouds doesn’t mean that you’re ready to fly an instrument approach at an unfamiliar airport after a 3 hour flight, with 200-foot ceilings, gusting winds, rain, and ¼ mile visibility in a Cessna. However, you might be fine at your home field with 1000 ft. ceilings, 1.5 miles visibility, and light winds. It’s a pilot’s job to know his or her limits and know that those limits aren’t constant. Recent experience, proper equipment, and being healthy and rested all impact on a pilot’s limits. It’s true for life on the ground too.  Sometimes it’s better to wait until conditions have improved, or we have better prepared,  before launching a new project or trying something new. There are limits to the number, type, and severity of challenges we can all handle.

Aviate, Navigate, Communicate – This is the prioritization for pilots when things go wrong. One of the best examples of this is Captain Sullenberger and the Hudson River landing. If you listen to this recording of his communications with air traffic control, it’s clear that his focus isn’t on talking with the control tower but on flying the aircraft and navigation. The reason for this is, there’s very little an air traffic controller can do to assist in an emergency other than get other aircraft out of the way.  A pilot’s first priority remains flying the aircraft, the second job is to know where the aircraft is, and where it’s going. Once you have those down, then you worry about talking to the tower. This is true in life too, when things go wrong our first job is to maintain personal control and do our part as best we can. Next, we need to figure out where we are, and where we want to go. Lastly, we can reach out to trusted others for guidance and assistance.

Collaboration – How to Thrive When Others Are Dying

I’ve just returned from a visit to Los Angeles with my wife where we celebrated Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. During our visit we attended two different synagogues, both of which appear to be experiencing exponential growth and vibrancy at a time when studies show that overall synagogue attendance and membership are in rapid decline. Of course, it’s not just synagogues that are in crisis these days. For example, the Christian Post reports that “Methodism in the U.S. has lost membership every year since 1964”. The Presbyterian Church reports that it lost 15% of its membership between 2012 and 2014. Moreover, it’s not just religious institutions which are suffering membership losses. In his book Bowling Alone, author Robert D. Putnam examines the severe membership declines in a wide array of organizations such as political groups, civic organizations, fraternal lodges, religious groups, and service clubs. He describes this decline as a destruction of the social fabric of our society. I agree with him and I’ve been trying figure out what is driving this decline and how it can be reversed. This is issue is so important to me that I actually take notes when I visit synagogues regarding the size and composition of the people attending, the nature of the service, and other characteristics that are notable to me.

I want to tell you about these two synagogues because I believe they reveal some important truths about the changes in our world. The two synagogues I visited at first appear to be very different. The first, Beit T’Shuvah, is a synagogue led by an ex-con turned Rabbi, Mark Borovitz, and grew out of an addiction treatment center that is attached to the synagogue. It’s very focused on addiction recovery and, while the crowd is predominantly under the age of 40, there are plenty of people of all ages. The second synagogue is iKar, and it is led by a dynamic Rabbi, Sharon Brous. iKar does not own a building, but attracts hundreds of people of all ages to its services. Neither of these two synagogues are old legacy institutions. iKar was started in 2004, and Beit T’Shuvah about 25 years ago. The weekly attendance at both these institutions is in the hundreds and for holidays grows beyond a thousand.

One of the factors that I see in common between these two institutions that I believe is allowing them to thrive when their cohorts are withering and dying is that they are collaborative in nature. These are not authoritarian institutions run in a top-down model by the clergy and board of directors who insist upon complete and total control. Instead, the synagogues seem to exist for the purpose of providing a space or mechanism through which the members can create their own Jewish experiences. The clergy are facilitators of the experience rather than providers of the experience. This is very different from my experience where people attending services are passive participants whose participation is limited to responsive readings and where synagogue boards concern themselves with issues of whether or not congregants should be allowed to wear blue jeans to services on the basis of maintaining tradition and without consideration of what experience is being sought by the members.

The services I attended were very participatory, allowing member input and expression. This was especially true of Beit T’Shuvah, where members frequently got up to share their stories and give their reflections on readings. Musically, these two synagogues have moved far beyond the operatic cantorial solo and utilize music that is engaging and participatory. Although it has an excellent band, at Beit T’Shuvah members often get up to perform songs they’ve written or to perform with the band. At iKar, drumming combined with traditional lyrics provides a musical experience that draws in the audience to sing along, dance, and move expressively. At both synagogues when people are called up to help lead or give readings they are allowed an opportunity for self-expression rather than being limited to reading words on a page. The result of this is that the experience is not simply something that is scripted out by the Rabbi or Cantor, but is dynamic and is influenced by the people attending. The congregation is no longer a passive recipient, but is an engaged partner in creating the service experience.

A few years ago, I was at a legal technology conference where the keynote speaker was Don Tapscott, who spoke about the transition to a collaborative society and who wrote:

“Collaboration is important not just because it’s a better way to learn. The spirit of collaboration is penetrating every institution and all of our lives. So learning to collaborate is part of equipping yourself for effectiveness, problem solving, innovation, and life-long learning in an ever-changing networked economy.”

In my law practice I sought to become more collaborative and I found that it creates very happy clients. I now use software such as Mycaseinc and clio that allow me to share files with clients, exchange messages, and to better bring them into the decision-making process in their cases. Rather than being simply the problem-solver for my clients, I now see myself as in partnership with them, my role being a resource and advocate, as we seek to find a solution to their legal need or concern.

We live in a new era, where old models of authority and top-down structures are being rejected. Sadly, many of our social institutions have resisted the change to a more collaborative world, and they’ve been steadily paying the price as people vote “no” with their feet and head for the door. My experience with the two synagogues leads me to believe that there is a great need out there for religious and civic institutions. I believe people are craving community and connection, but I don’t think most will find it in places of arbitrary authority where they are expected to passively consume the experience. The question is, can the old institutions adapt to this change? Or will their demise be required so that new institutions can arise and meet the need?


Rosh Hashanah: Finding Connection To A Meaningful Life

I am presently with my wife in Los Angeles, California where we are preparing to spend our second year celebrating Rosh Hashanah at Congregation Beit T’Shuvah.  We are both looking forward to seeing a young man from Tallahassee helping to lead the services at this synagogue.  A year ago this young man was at a very low point in his life, but thanks to the kindness and generosity of Beit T’Shuvah  he is finding a new lease on life.

It is always interesting to me to see how life evolves.  What follows below is a talk I gave at the very beginning of Rosh Hashanah 2013 in Tallahassee.  In the talk I mention Beit T’Shuvah and the work they are doing.  Little did I realize that my curiosity would take me on such an incredible journey that has created many wonderful new relationships, not just for me, but for a number of people in my life.  I actually got to meet the young woman I quote in the talk and she’s an incredible person who is doing amazing work in her life.  I hope you enjoy this look back at my writing from 2 years ago.:

Rosh Hashanah Talk 2013

Last year, a few weeks after we finished the High Holy Days I gave a talk from this very bima on why I don’t like the High Holy Days and described my struggle to find meaning in the rituals and words in the High Holy Day prayer book. In a way my talk was somewhat of a challenge to our tradition and maybe even to G-d to help me find some meaning the process we’re about to go through. Let me tell that if you come into a synagogue, stand before your community, and directly challenge G-d to help you understand something, you’re probably opening yourself up to some interesting opportunities for growth.

And that’s what happened for me, and through my experience I got a new perspective on not only why we observe the High Holy Days, but also why we even come here at all.

The answer, I have learned, is actually very simple. It’s all about connection.

For me all this understanding started with an email to my Mother-in-law. You know that in any good Jewish story there has be a mother or a mother-in-law. So, I was writing my Mother-in-law an email and I was telling her a story about some challenges people close to me faced many years ago. I’d told this story many times before, but this time when I hit send, I’m felt uncomfortable about what I had written. As I thought about my discomfort I realized that while everything that I’d told my Mother in law in the email is true, I haven’t really been honest in what I shared with her because the story I told her was carefully edited to leave out any of the struggles that I encountered or any of the failures I experienced. I was quite distressed when I realized that I had written myself out of what really was an important part of my life story.

It occurs to me that one of the challenges in life, at least for me, and I suspect for many of you, is to show up and tell our stories in the most honest way possible, disclosing not just our strengths and victories, but also our struggles and failures. I’ve certainly seen this in my work as a nurse and as an attorney. People will commonly talk around and evade disclosing information that reveals their struggles and imperfections. But why is this such a challenge? Don’t we all want to be authentic honest people?

To understand this further, I looked to the work of researcher Dr. Brene Brown who studies shame and vulnerability. I’m told that Brene Brown’s TED talk on vulnerability is one of the top ten TED talks of all time and she was named one of 50 most influential women of 2009. Brene Brown says we as human-beings are hard wired for connection with other human-beings, but that shame, which is really fear of loss of connection, creates a barrier to connection, and that to fully connect we must be willing to be vulnerable and tell our stories in a wholehearted way.

She writes: “We must remember that our worthiness, that core belief that we are enough, comes only when we live inside our story. We either own our stories (even the messy ones), or we stand outside of them – denying our vulnerabilities and imperfections, orphaning the parts of us that don’t fit in with who/what we think we’re supposed to be, and hustling for other people’s approval of our worthiness”. Brown says that in seeking avoid vulnerability we numb ourselves, but we’re not just numbing shame and vulnerability, we’re also numbing joy, love, and creativity.

A few days ago we gathered for Selihot and prior to the service we watched a film called G-Dog about a Jesuit Priest name Father Greg Boyle, who I met this summer that Chautauqua Institution. I’ve learned a lot about the impact of shame and the power of overcoming shame to reach connection from Father Boyle’s work. I highly recommend his book Tatoos on the Heart. Father Boyle runs, Homeboy Industries,  the largest most successful gang intervention program in the United States. In describing how he helps turn a 70% recidivism rate into a 70% success rate that has helped decrease gang activity in Los Angeles by 50% he writes: “ You stand with the least likely to succeed until success is succeeded by something more valuable: kinship. You stand with the belligerent, the surly, and the badly behaved until bad behavior is recognized for what it is; the vocabulary of the deeply wounded and those whose burdens are more than they can bear”.   It’s about overcoming shame and developing connection.

Similar work is happening in the Jewish community with the work of Rabbi Mark Borowitz, himself a former addict, who now leads a congregation whose work is a 120 bed residential treatment facility. The name of the facility, Beit T’shuvah. The house of return. Did you know that Jewish addicts and convicts exist? At Shomrei Torah we learned this several months ago when a Jewish inmate wrote to us and requested prayer books. I am very proud to say we answered the call. Unfortunately, the stories of our fellow Jews who struggle with addiction or who have had legal troubles rarely get told in our synagogues. Sadly, even when those stories get told, we often act as if they’re anomalies rather than real problems in our community. Consider what one young woman from Beit T’shuvah wrote:

As a young “nice Jewish girl” from Calabasas, to many people I am not the usual addict. Yet, still people do not want to hear what I have to say. They head nod me off until I shut up and then they give me the “not in my house” speech. Usually goes along the lines of my child gets great grades, they are in all AP’s, they are involved in extracurricular activities, we have Shabbat every Friday, or another excuse to make me believe they are perfect. But I too had all of those traits, yet I checked into rehab at 18 years old.

We all have issues. Every family is dysfunctional in its own way. The question is when do we stop leaving the dirty laundry at home and start talking about our problems? Judaism is rich in sources of comfort and teachings about the possibilities for change. When it comes to the social ills of our own, however, we often seem to prefer denial. People are coming into treatment younger and younger and from all different types of homes. But how can we stop it? My advice is to stop living in denial. Break the taboo and start talking about personal issues and stop hiding behind a mask. Learn how to cope in a healthy way with issues rather than just pretending they don’t exist. Without learning healthy coping mechanisms we turn to escaping through drugs, alcohol, gambling, shopping, work, food, etc. Addiction does not discriminate. If kids and adults believe that this disease CAN happen in their own backyard, they will become more aware of how their actions affect their lives

Bringing our troubles into the synagogue, telling our stories, it’s really what why we’re here. Sure, there are lots of reasons why people come to a synagogue. Some of us come to socialize, some for rituals, some for a sense of ethnicity, but at the core, it’s all about connection. Jewish philosopher Martin Buber wrote: “when two people relate to each other authentically and humanly, God is the electricity that surges between them.”

Rabbi Adderett Drucker recently recommended a book to me, and I want to recommend this book to every person who wants to strengthen and grow our community. The book is called “Relational Judaism” by Ron Wolfson and the basic premise is that it doesn’t matter how beautiful your building is, how many programs you offer, how charismatic your rabbi is, or how pretty your website is. None of that matters, what does matter is whether the people who come through your doors find a truly welcoming community where they find connection and build relationships? We need to ask are people, including newcomers, sharing Shabbos dinners, dinning in Succahs together, gathering to study, and is your synagogue a place where people can show up and share their story, and be heard. Is your congregation a safe place for people to tell their story?

One of the most powerful stories in the book is about a synagogue where huge overdone parties had become the rule but as soon the Bar/Bat Mitzvah was over the families left to never be seen again. In that synagogue they brought the parents of children preparing for Bar/Bat Mitzvah’s together to share their Bar/Bat Mitzvah stories and the author writes: “We realized that they were not happy with what the expectation were, but that they felt helpless to change it. They didn’t want their child to be the only one not having dancers, the games, etc.” As the families shared their stories, the conversation moved from the subject of parties, to what kind of children did they want to raise, and what is the purpose of the Bar/Bat Mitzvah.

The result of those conversations was not only to change the way the synagogue did Bar/Bat Mitzvahs, but it also turned their previous 80% drop-out rate of post bar/bat mitzvah families into an 80% retention rate. People changed from seeing their synagogue as a place of transactions, such as bar/bat mitzvah training and celebrations, to a place where they were seen and could share stories and experiences with other people. They had become a place of connection.

As we begin our journey through the High Holy Days, we refer time and time again to repentance and t’shuva, but what is this? I used to think that T’shuva meant apology, but that’s incorrect. The word for apology is actually “ sheliot”. T’shuva means “to return”, but return to what? I think it’s a return to connection.

William Tyndale, who coined the term “Day of Attonement” in his 1530 translation of the Hebrew Bible implied that sin is a matter of estrangement, of disconnection.   Maimonides writes that Teshuva “brings close those who are far off” and Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchek in commenting on Maimonides’s teaching defines sin as that which creates distance between a person and G-d.

There’s a Hasidic teaching that says that every human-being is tied to G-d with a rope. If the rope breaks, but is later fixed with a knot, then that individual is connected ever closer to G-d than if there never were a break in the rope. Thus, errors, mistakes, and failures have the potential of drawing us ever closer to G-d.

My readings on the High Holy Days lead me to the idea that the purpose of t’shuva and repentance is much greater than what most of us consider to be “sinful acts”. I’m seeing the purpose as a return to authenticity and a promise that despite our short-comings, imperfections, and failures, we are worthy of love and connection whether it be with G-d or with our community.

In closing, as we go through the next 8 days, I invite you to look at this as a process of connection, not of self-flagellation. In just over a week we’ll fast, not to punish ourselves, but to render ourselves vulnerable, so that when stand before G-d and recite the al chet prayer ten times, not listing our sins as is commonly thought, because this actually translates as the times “we missed the mark”, we do so with a whole heart showing our true imperfect selves.  This is our opportunity to share our stories, to become more authentic, to allow ourselves to be vulnerable, and in the process transform both ourselves and our community. Let’s connect.

Labor Day – The Rest of the Story

For most of us Labor Day marks the end of summer, one last long weekend to enjoy sunshine and cookouts with friends and family. Rarely do we ask where did this holiday come from and what does it commemorate? I don’t recall the history of Labor Day being taught in school and beyond advice for avoiding sunburn at the beach it doesn’t get much press attention. I think it’s a safe bet that few of us are aware of the fascinating and complex origins of this national holiday.

Labor Day, as an American holiday, has its roots in the labor movement of the late 19th century. The years after the Civil War were a period of incredible economic expansion and industrialization in the United States. Massive waves of immigrants were landing on our shores as workers arrived to toil in factories, logging, mining, and railroads. Working conditions were often very hazardous, wages were low, the labor market corrupt, and child labor was rampant. Early labor unions were formed to try to improve the lives for workers through solidarity. Individuals who identified as members of anarchist, socialist, and even communist groups organized and led many of these early efforts.

One important event leading to the creation of Labor Day occurred on May 4, 1886 in Haymarket Square, Chicago, Illinois. The event was a worker rally organized by a group of anarchists in support of the eight-hour workday. In many ways the rally was a complete failure as many of the speakers failed to appear and the expected crowd of 20,000 was only about 2,500. It was near the end of the rally, when only about 200 people remained that more than 100 police officers armed with rifles showed up to break up the rally. An unknown person then threw a bomb at the police, who panicked and opened fire, killing some of their own. In the end seven police officers and four of the workers were dead and scores were wounded.

The government responded to this tragedy by declaring martial law throughout the entire nation and then arresting large numbers of labor leaders including the anarchist organizers of the rally. Eight organizers of the rally were charged with murder despite there being no evidence that they had anything to do with the bomb and the fact that all but two of them were not present when the bomb exploded. The two who were present were on the podium and couldn’t have thrown the bomb. The eight anarchist organizers were put on trial and all were convicted in what most workers considered to be a horribly unfair trial. It is said that the company bosses selected the names for the jury pool and the Chicago Tribune is said to have offered money to the jury if they convicted. Five of the eight convicted anarchists were executed by hanging. The surviving three fared better when they were later pardoned after a new governor, John P. Altgeld, was elected. Governor Altgeld reviewed the case, found there to be no evidence to support the convictions, and granted pardons to the survivors.

This event became known as the “Haymarket Affair” and it became a rallying point for workers who began gathering every May 1st to remember the martyrs of the Haymarket Affair. This annual event grew into what is known as either “May Day” or “International Workers Day” which is celebrated on May 1st of each year. To this day, many countries throughout the world, including all the major industrial countries except the United States, celebrate some sort of worker’s holiday on May 1st.

May1stLaborDayThe creation of the U.S. federal holiday of Labor Day occurred less than 10 years after the Haymarket affair, following yet even more workers’ deaths at the hands of the government. This time it was railroad workers who were striking against the Pullman Palace Car Company. The workers were led by Eugene Debs, a founder of the Industrial Workers of the World (Wobblies), and who would later go onto become the leading socialist figure in the United States. The Pullman Company petitioned the Courts and obtained an injunction against the strike on the basis that, because the company carried mail on its trains, the worker’s strike was causing disruption of the mail. President Grover Cleveland then sent in the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marshalls to break up the strike. The Army opened fire on the striking workers, killing 30 and wounding 57. This violent suppression of the strike created conflict between President Cleveland and the labor movement. Less than six days after the end of the Pullman Strike, President Cleveland and Congress, both seeking to find political conciliation with the labor movement, pushed through legislation creating the national Labor Day holiday. However, to ensure that the holiday did not continue to become a memorial to the martyrs of the Haymarket Affair, President Cleveland moved the holiday from May 1st to its current date in September. President Cleveland appears to have achieved his goal, because few Americans today have any knowledge of the Haymarket Affair and few have ever heard of the deaths of the workers during the Pullman Strike.

The censorship of history continues to this day. The US Department of Labor website describes the holiday as “a creation of the labor movement and is dedicated to the social and economic achievements of American workers. It constitutes of a yearly national tribute to the contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our country.” It is telling that the Department of Labor website fails to mention the government’s bloody roles in the Haymarket Affair and the Pullman strike and how those two events contributed to the creation of the holiday.


Is Kim Davis A Truly Willing Martyr?

I wasn’t planning to write a blog post about Kentucky Clerk of Court Kim Davis and her refusal to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. I don’t see the situation as being especially complicated or interesting from a legal standpoint. I feel that her recent jailing was highly predictable. On the surface, this situation seems to be little more than a woman who seeks a special exemption for herself from  the  performance of her elected duties on the basis of religious belief. However,  when reading an ABC news report regarding her testimony during the contempt hearing, something jumped out at me that makes me suspect that this situation is  more complicated and I’d like to discuss what I think might be going on.

ABC news reported: “’I did a lot of vile and wicked things in my past,’ Davis said when asked about her life before becoming a Christian in 2011.” I think this is an important statement that tells us a lot about how Mrs. Davis sees herself and the role her religious identity plays in her life. Clearly, Mrs. Davis carries a great deal of shame about prior decisions in her life and she sees her religious conversion as a return to worthiness. She’s seeking redemption, a way to undo the mistakes of her past, through her willingness to be a martyr.

As Jewish person I can get my head around this idea of redemption. People who follow my religious tradition are currently in the month of Elul, which is a time of reflection in preparation for Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, two holidays in which there is great focus on redemption and repentance. Judaism recognizes two forms of redemption. One form of redemption involves healing the relationship between the individual and G-d, the other form involves healing the relationship between ourselves and other people, especially those whom we may have harmed. I believe that redemption is a universal human need. We all make mistakes in our lives and sometimes we harm others as a result of our mistakes.   It is important that we find some sort of mechanism that  allows us to repair whatever damage we may have caused and to move forward without carrying endless guilt.

It appears that Mrs. Davis believes that having even the most remote connection to same sex marriages will impair her relationship with G-d, and that she most prove her love and gratitude to G-d through self-sacrifice i.e. martyrdom.  I can’t help but feel that this martyrdom is rooted in an unhealthy degree of self-righteousness that is contrary to the spiritual renewal of redemption that she seems to be seeking. During her conversations with the same sex couples to whom she’s refusing marriage licenses,  her facial expressions are, at best, condescending and dismissive of their emotional pain.

Is there evidence to suggest that she’s being manipulated? There certainly is a crowd of opportunists surrounding her, for example, politicians like Mike Huckabee, who is championing her cause as  judicial tyranny and as a war on Christians . According to CNN, Ted Cruz recently issued a written statement that this is an attempt to drive Christians from public office. I also wonder about the religious education and guidance she is receiving from the clergy and elders of her Church, who generally have no formal religious training, do not attend any seminary, and are exclusively male. Is her situation different from those who, while seeking religious purpose and redemption, are manipulated into being suicide bombers or jihadists by those seeking political and religious power and control?

Politicians have no obligation not to exploit people or their causes. Likewise there is no legal duty of loyalty, or even competency, for a clergy person. However, there are ethical obligations for lawyers, and I have to wonder what role her lawyers may be playing in promoting her martyrdom? As an elected official involved in a dispute regarding the policies and procedures in her office, one might expect that she is represented by the County Attorney or a law firm that routinely represents elected officials. This is not the case for Mrs. Davis, who is being represented by lawyers through Liberty Counsel, a group that describes its purpose on its webpage as, “to preserve religious liberty and help create and maintain a society in which everyone will have the opportunity to discover the truth that will give true freedom.” The Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled Liberty Counsel as an anti-LGBT hate group. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, Liberty Counsel has championed causes such as removing hate crime legislation. The Liberty Counsel website contains a Marriage Solidarity Statement in which they claim “the Supreme Court has no authority to redefine marriage and thereby weaken both the family and society.”

Is there a conflict of interest between Liberty Counsel’s agenda and providing competent legal advice to their client, Mrs. Davis? That is, can Liberty Counsel competently advise  Kim Davis regarding her best interests, or is it about promoting their political agenda with her being a martyr to the cause? This important question was raised in a recent Slate article in which the columnist observes:

“Yet the Liberty Counsel didn’t mind putting their client at risk—perhaps because the idea of a middle-aged woman being hauled off to jail for purportedly following her conscience would send thousands of anti-gay Americans reaching for their pitchforks (and checkbooks).”

A lawyer’s duty paramount duty is always to the client. The question that arises in many cases, such as Mrs. Davis’ where a third party is providing funding, is who is the client? Are her lawyers working for the “ministry”, which has its own agenda, or for Mrs. Davis whose interests might align in some ways, but in other ways might be at odds with those of the ministry? Such a problem is not unique in the law, insurance defense attorneys sometimes face a similar dilemma, especially when the insurance company wishes to settle or contest a claim and the client being sued does not. However, in cases involving insurance defense lawyers there is some protection for the client in that if an insurance company refuses to settle a claim and the client is forced to trial and loses, the insurance company then has to indemnify the client for the full amount regardless of the policy limits. In Mrs. Davis’ case, the stakes are not simply monetary and it’s not Liberty Counsel who is going to jail or who will be burdened with a record of contempt, it is only Mrs. Davis. I note that while Liberty Counsel is standing in front of the national press promoting its cause of suppressing rights for gays and lesbians, no court has found merit in any of the claims it has raised so far, and their client is sitting in a jail cell.

There is another ethical obligation of an attorney to keep in mind when advising a client such as Mrs. Davis. As a lawyer I am not permitted to advise my client to disregard or violate a Court order. I can agree with my client that an order is unfair or unjust, but I cannot counsel a client to violate a judicial order. This is my obligation as an officer of the Court. I must give respect to judicial rulings, even when I don’t agree with those rulings. I am free to challenge them on appeal, but I am not free to advise my client to disobey those rulings. As an outside observer of this case I have no idea what  discussions have taken place between Mrs. Davis and her lawyers, but I’m left wondering what counsel she is actually receiving regarding complying with the Judge’s order? Is a client well served by lawyers whose focus may be their interpretation of Biblical law rather than the secular law of the Court? I think that an argument can be made that, unless you are able to encourage your client to follow the orders of the Court, you are not able to render competent legal counsel to the client.

I don’t agree with Mrs. Davis’ argument that her religious beliefs permit her to refuse to allow her office to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. I feel that as a matter of law it fails on many levels. However, I’m really wondering whether or not her need for redemption is making her susceptible to the manipulation of those who have surrounded her in this cause. Of course, in the end, it will be Mrs. Davis who will bear the costs.