Diane wrote in part:
>> But I also thought, in reading your post,
>> that maybe we just have to accept that
>> there's no simple way to make the change.
>> Maybe people are just going to hate the
>> information until they've heard it too many
>> times to object.

>> This stuff isn't easy.  Maybe there *is* no
>> way to do it that won't offend some people.
>> But one way or another, eventually it has
>> to be done.

There is another factor to consider:  Respect.  Do you respect the person(s)
with whom you are dealing?  Do they know that you respect them?

If our frustration with our inability to get the truth out--and
accepted--shows and the other person perceives our irritation as
dissatisfaction with them, leaving them feeling judged and criticized, they
may be so busy defending themselves in their own heads that they never
really hear our message.  We are likely to be perceived as telling people
they are not up-to-date in their knowledge and their facts are wrong, they
didn't--or don't--give their babies the best possible care, and the advice
they have given out is counter-productive if not actually hurtful.  Any
wonder they may not want to see us coming?

In his book MAKE PEACE WITH ANYONE, psychologist David J Lieberman discusses
the interplay between self-respect (or self-love) and respect from others.
He writes, "This love that we need comes in the package of respect.  If
other people respect us, then we feel that we can respect ourselves as we
'convert' their respect of us into self-love."  The subtitle of his book is
"Breakthrough Strategies To Quickly End Any Conflict, Feud Or Estrangement"
and the first strategy is to establish mutual respect.  He suggests telling
a third party, perhaps a mutual co-worker, what you genuinely like and
respect about the person with whom you have difficulty.  This must be honest
and it may be something he or she is, has done, has said, or stands for.  If
you complement the person directly, they may suspect you are trying to get
on their good side but people rarely will question a complement coming
through a third party.  "This evokes a powerful psychological principle
whereby he alters his feelings toward you--to more favorable ones--in an
unconscius attempt to reconcile that he feels good about himself because of
you."

Another book that deals with why dialogues fail is CRUCIAL CONVERSATIONS, by
Kerry Patterson, et al, subtitled "Tools For Talking When Stakes Are High."
This is a business management book.  The premise of CC is that anytime (1)
opinions vary, (2) stakes are high, and (3) emotions run strong, you have a
hot issue and, to achieve a productive outcome, you need to back off the
content you want to discuss and deal with the emotions, until it is safe for
everyone to express themselves.  "Mutual Respect is the continuance
condition of dialogue.  As people perceive that others don't respect them,
the conversation immediately becomes unsafe and dialogue comes to a
screeching halt."  Written for managers, the CC team also have suggestions
for people on the receiving end of management too.  Their web site
www.crucialconversations.com has some freebies including a free weekly
newsletter.

Yet another book about improving mutual respect and the quality of
relationships is NONVIOLENT COMMUNICATION, A Language of Compassion, by
Marshall B Rosenberg.

I have no commercial interest in any of these books.

If you should apply these ideas, possibly first reading the books, I would
very much like to hear about your experiences, off-list if it is off-topic.

Alice Martino Roddy, MOM, LLLL, IBCLC

             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html