I was reading a recent post by ChristyV, and I realized I have no clue what an intermediary is really supposed to do. Is it negotiable and flexible to fit every situation? What really works best when put to the test? In ChristyV's situation children are involved so there will have to be some communication between the parents. What role should the intermediary play?


1. Both parties speak to the intermediary. They are asking him to get involved because he has to hear one verbal message, interpret it in his own mind (he can't help but do this, it is just how communication works), and then present it to the other party, and consequently accept the arguments of the other party.

Is the intermediary supposed to get that involved? Should the intermediary be hearing arguments from both camps and acting as recipient for all the hurt, anger, and frustration that are bound to come out?

2. The intermediary listens to the messages of each party and works with them to create a to-the-point non-emotional message before it is passed on.

3. The intermediary just relays messages. If this is the case, I think email communciation is viable, as long as the Plan B-er is extraordinarily careful with their communications (i.e. run them by the board first, wait several hours or a day and edit out extraneous stuff and emotions before clicking send).

So, those of you who have been through Plan B with children involved, and those of you who have watched successful and unsuccessful Plan Bs, what works best to protect and insulate the BS when communication (re: the children) must occur?

Turtlehead, I have not yet had the need for an intermediary but it may be coming. But if I was in Plan B I would not want my messages edited in anyway. I'm not sure they should appear on the board either without the prior consent of the parties involved. It just seems that the message should remain completely unchanged so that the involved parties/partners get exactly what was said. It could include subtlety that only is understood by those partners. Things intended as light or joking could be unintentionally edited changing the meaning considerably. That's just my take as I have zero experience.

WOE

Heh. Let me give you a completely fictional example of why intermediaries are a good thing:

Spouse1: "You tell that #$$&*# so-and-so that if he doesn't show up at precisely 5pm tomorrow to pick up the kids, I will %&$*%ing throw his precious baseball card collection into the shredder!!!"

Intermediary to Spouse2: "How's 5pm sound to you?"

Spouse2: "5pm is fine. But you tell that #$$&*# so-and-so that her G-- D---- dog is peeing on the rug again and if she doesn't get it to the vet tomorrow, I'm going to take it to the pound!!!"

Intermediary to Spouse1: "He'll be there at 5pm. By the way, would you be able to take the dog to the vet tomorrow? He's peeing on the rug again."

Etc.

The LAST thing you want is an intermediary who gives the messages verbatim.

In intermediary's job is twofold:

1. Protect all parties and the marriage.
- Don't pass along hateful and hurtful words.
- Don't pass along threats.
- Limit contact and emotional content.

2. Pass along urgent and necessary information.
- Children's schedules.
- Pet stuff, if any.
- Financial stuff, if any.

Intermediaries should NEVER get involved in legal proceedings or discussions thereof. That's what attorneys are for. And intermediaries should absolutely refuse to pass along ANY information regarding divorce. Divorce is NOT an emergency, nor is it urgent.

JustJ, I stand completely corrected. Your response makes a lot more sense. Hope I never need to implement this.

WOE

Is the intermediary supposed to get that involved? Should the intermediary be hearing arguments from both camps and acting as recipient for all the hurt, anger, and frustration that are bound to come out?
Depends on how long you want to use this person as an intermediary and keep them as a friend...

The intermediary is a simple go-between.
They are not supposed to negotiate (is 5 PM good for you?) or pass on stuff more than simple messages.
Most of the stuff should be worked out PRIOR to Plan B.

There should not be much to pass along except things like work schedules as it may relate to pick-up/drop-off of kids.

JustJ,

Makes good sense to me. I think, from what I've seen, that sometimes an intermediary is picked and the parties involved (especially the intermediary) don't understand what they're getting themselves into.

How many Plan B-ers need to have an intermediary, for purposes of finance, pets, and children? I'd think a fair amount.

It might be worthwhile for someone (not me! I'm the clueless one here!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" /> ) to write up a post on "how to be an intermediary" so Plan B-ers could print it off and give it to their potential intermediary. That way the intermediary would know what they're getting into, and would have a guideline to refer to when things get really heated. It's got to be awfully hard to avoid getting sucked into all that emotion and drama when you're untrained and a friend or relative of one or both parties.

edited to add:
Chris, you raise a valid point about negotiations. That *is* an invitation to get entangled, except now there are three people involved. Hmm... guess my question wasn't as dumb as I'd feared <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

<small>[ March 31, 2004, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: turtlehead ]</small>

Chris, while I agree in theory that most things should be worked out beforehand, in pracie it turns out that you do end up dealing with these things. Particularly with a WS who wants to escalate (and they ALL want to escalate...) attempts to force contact.

And a good intermediary will also be a negotiator by nature. Perhaps not all intermediaries will need to be, but I think it's an important part of the job.

Turtle -- You're right that there should be guidelines for being an intermediary. I've been thinking about that for a while, but haven't gotten to the point where I'm comfortable enough with it to write it all down. Plus this -is- the Harleys' site. I guess they may have reasons for not having something like that avaialble, though I don't know them and don't know what the reason might be.

Hmm. Baby's awake. Guess my play time is over!

Chris, while I agree in theory that most things should be worked out beforehand, in pracie it turns out that you do end up dealing with these things.
Whether it is worked between the spouses or worked out only with the bs (in other words, mandated) there should be little discussion.

For instance, if the ws is not willing to agree on times for pickup/drop off, then the bs should appropriate times and simply inform the ws of the times. And then be ready to get the kids when they are not picked up because the ws decides to be a dill hole about it.

You should do your best to minimize getting the intermediary "involved."