In Collaborative Practice....Who owns the process? Who runs the process?

A recent thread on the CollabLaw listServe had me revisiting this topic. One professional had asked for help with a divorce case in which one of the spouses had requested, in the middle of the process, that the attorneys and mhps stop giving the financial professional any information about his/her "emotional state". One post suggested there might be more to do than simply decide whether it's "okay" or not to stop sharing....that there might be something going on for that client and that it might be helpful to ask him/her about it. I added the following thoughts:

The way I hear ____'s comments is "Is anyone listening to the husband other than his instruction?" When he says 'do this' or 'don't do that' it is almost certainly because he believes that will address some fear/concern that he has.
We need to be alert enough to ask the questions......[I try to avoid using "why"....ever in such inquiries] "What is your concern about the FP seeing those notes?" "How do you believe a better result will be reached if s/he doesn't?" "What is the result you are looking to create by seeking a change from what has worked so far?" "Is there something in particular you don't want this specific person to know?" There could be lots of questions. I find that asking them is often more productive than guessing what's going on in the client's head.

Some of this dialogue, in my mind revisits a question of "who controls the process". While I believe it is rarely productive to tell the client, "this is how it's done". I also believe that it is rarely productive to say to the client "we'll do it any way you want". And I firmly believe that resort to the mantra of "this is a 'client-centered' process" is a pretty empty invocation on this issue.
It should be, in my humble opinion, beyond doubt that the RESULTS, should be determined by the clients. [I am of the "statutes be damned" school]. It should also be, again IMHO, that the clients are paying us for something. And if it isn't to tell them what they should agree to [and I believe it isn't], then we owe them something. I believe what we owe them is our commitment to a safe setting in which to make those decisions. And it is not a safe setting if the 'rules' keep changing......even if they are the ones demanding that the rules change.
This is not to say that we ever categorically say "no" when the clients ask about a change. It does, however, absolutely require that we have a belief to begin with in the structure of the process as we set it out for them. And that we understand how it is that that process offers safety. Only from that place can we make productive/positive adjustments to the process. Because only from that place can we really ask the questions above, appreciate the answers we get, and dialogue about the positive/negative aspects of the change the client is seeking.
Without that, we are left with nothing but......"I dunno, that's how I was taught....but it's 'client-centered'....so I guess I have to just go along with whatever the client 'wants'...." and then the "process" follows the fear-driven whims of the clients. Much like children, having tested the boundaries and 'won', having gotten what they think will give them what they individually want, they will press for more. And we will end up along for a ride in a rudder-less ship that may stay adrift for months or years.....may run aground and be abandoned....may even end up safely in harbor. But whichever it is, one thing will be clear.....it's arrival there won't have anything to do with us. Well, except for the fact that we abdicated our responsibility to the client....to the clients.

So, back to the point. When the client asks for a change in the "how", our best response is not necessarily "no, we can't" or "okay, if you want". Instead our best response may well be "what is it you're wanting to accomplish" And when the client asks "why" we do/don't do it a certain way, our best response may well be "because our goal is always and only to keep you and your partner safe so that you can focus your attention on meeting your needs going forward". If we believe that the process as we offer it does that, and we know how we believe it does that, then WE will feel safe enough to adjust it IF the adjustment will serve to keep everyone involved in the process safe.

Borrowing an old like from Hill Street Blues...Let's be safe out there.