“What you want, Baby, I got – What you need, Do you know I got it?”

Friends:

We aren’t given a lot in this world; we have to work awfully hard to get ahead, to be successful, to simply survive.  But there is something that we should be given, something that we shouldn’t have to work for or earn.  And you might be surprised by what I am talking about.

R-E-S-P-E-C-T.  We have all been taught that respect is earned, it’s not given.  Frankly, I think that’s an outdated and antiquated theory and one which contributes to society’s general sense of ill-will.

We view people as unworthy of our respect until they act in a certain way that engenders it.  They prove something to us; they show us something that makes us believe that they are honest or trustworthy.  They act in a way that shows that they respect themselves.  And then, only then, do we give them respect.  Sure, there are people who we agree should be shown respect simply by virtue of who they are, like judges and police officers and firemen and teachers, but I have seen too many litigants in court openly disrespect the judges and court staff.  Simply wearing a black robe doesn’t automatically mean respect is given.  It still has to be earned.

The problem with the theory of earning respect is that there are no criteria for it; how does one earn respect anyways?  Is it by graduating from some institution of higher education?  Is it making a million dollars a year?  Is it feeding a family of four without the need for government assistance?  Is it working two jobs in order to pay for college tuition?  Is it working hard at your job?

We as a society appear to be confused and because of our confusion, we tend to side with the belief that the other person has not earned our respect.  It is far easier than to examine the other person to determine if respect is warranted.  And we then act in accordance with that perception.  We criticize, we castigate, we offend and we ignore.  It’s a tough way to go through life, either being the critic or the subject of such criticism.

I see it every day in my career and it has, at times, made the practice of law agonizing.  Seriously, what does an attorney have to do to earn the respect from an opposing counsel?  The only people who truly understand the challenges in becoming an attorney are other attorneys, so why is respect so hard to come by from the people who know the trials and tribulations so intimately?  (pun intended)  There’s no respect, there’s no congeniality, there’s no reverence.  There’s a reason why there are so many jokes about lawyers… because some of them are true.  There used to be a time when being an attorney held a certain esteem; when one could walk down the street and hold their head up high knowing they were a part of a lofty profession.  The times have changed unfortunately and it just doesn’t feel that way anymore.  Instead we have backstabbing and name-calling and criticizing as a part of a normal strategy of representation.  If you represent the opposing party then you do not deserve my respect because you stooped so low as to take him/her on as a client.  No one in their right mind would have accepted that representation, so you get no respect from me.  Don’t believe me?  I’ve heard it from other attorneys, many times.

And it isn’t just attorneys or adults for that matter.  I see it in my kids and how they and her friends treat each other on the schoolyard.  So much of bullying is a product of a lack of respect; in fact, I would hesitate to say that all of bullying starts it.  If someone is different because of the color of their skin or their sexual preference or their size then they are not worthy of respect, right?  Teachers are not worthy of respect because their sole focus is in being a disciplinarian, they don’t really care about the students.

I want to suggest an alternative.  Instead of adhering to the philosophy that respect is earned, what if we just live by the tenet that everyone shall be given respect until they prove that they are not deserving of it?  You can think that my client is a terrible person, but you will respect me until such time as I prove to you that I don’t deserve your respect, such as when I fail to comply with a deadline, I deliberately mislead you to gain an advantage or I lie to you.  Then you may adjudge me to be unworthy of your respect.

The problem is that we simply don’t know enough about each other to make decisions about whether someone is deserving of respect.  The guy you bump into on the street, you don’t know if he cheats on his taxes, does drugs or works three jobs to feed a family of 5.  The attorney across the courtroom from you, you don’t know if he was top of his class at Harvard or took the BAR exam 7 times.  The kid on the playground who doesn’t have the newest Nikes, you don’t know if his parents are divorced of if he and his family are homeless.  You aren’t deserving of my respect because you don’t have the same fancy clothes that I do.  You aren’t deserving of my respect because you didn’t go to an Ivy League school for your master’s.  You aren’t deserving of my respect because you don’t work in a big downtown accounting firm, you’re just a solo practitioner working out of your house.

Life is incredibly difficult.  What’s the meaning of life?  I can tell you what it shouldn’t be.  It shouldn’t be about having to deal with people who disrespect you.  It shouldn’t be about enduring criticism or reprimand or disparagement or denigration.  It should be about happiness and satisfaction.  And having to deal with people who show you disrespect can certainly impede you other pursuits.

It is so much harder to gain respect then it is to lose it.  So why not avoid stacking the deck against each other.

“A kingdom for a stage, princes to act and monarchs to behold the swelling scene.”

Friends:

I don’t know much about Shakespeare, I confess.  Sure, I’ve read the popular ones, but go further astray into his catalog and I am virtually useless, a category I would not run on “Jeopardy.”  But over the past few days I learned a little bit more about his writings and I wonder what he would have to say about some of the cases I have to handle…

The 70^th anniversary of D-Day was just a few days ago and when the news ran its reports it made me think of the movie “Saving Private Ryan” and the HBO mini-series “Band of Brothers.”  I didn’t realize until our Rabbi mentioned it Friday night that the title “Band of Brothers” was taken from Shakespeare’s play “Henry V.”  (I don’t know anything about it, but I’m pretty sure they all die in the end.)  As the Rabbi was giving his sermon Friday night he touched on this passage from the play:

“We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

For he to-day that sheds his blood with me

Shall be my brother”

Powerful words about the relationships that are forged on the battlefield, the brotherhood that is created when strangers are thrust together on the front lines in pursuit of a common goal.  As the Rabbi was discussing this in terms of the recent Memorial Day holiday, I couldn’t help but think of the irony of the statement, these 416 years after they were written.

The purpose of the metaphor, to Shakespeare, was to describe the bonds between soldiers as being impenetrable, the most solid and impervious bond known to man; because Shakespeare viewed the bond between brothers as being strong and durable.  At the time, there was no connection stronger than that of brotherhood.

I highly doubt if he were writing “Henry V” today he would choose such a metaphor to demonstrate something so unbreakable.  All Willie would have to do is sit in the gallery in any probate court in the country and listen to the stories of brother versus brother, parent versus child, sister versus sister and he would give second thought to the perception of this impervious bond.  Because it isn’t.  We’ve heard that the bond between soldiers is stronger than any other bond because of the tension and stress that surrounds the relationship, the trust that must be present and which could be the difference between life and death.  That bond can be relentless.

By comparison, however, the bond between siblings is forced upon them, not by their own choice and not necessarily fostered by them.  Instead it is a bond that is frequently fraught with resentment, feelings of favoritism by parents, disparate treatment and misperception; which breeds not a relationship of deep trust and faith in each other, but of bitterness and hatred.  This creates a relationship that, over time, can frequently fester and worsen until a breaking point is reached, usually the death of the parents.  Then the gloves come off and it is no holds barred.

Would Shakespeare use the metaphor “Band of Brothers” today?  I just don’t see it.  I recently participated in a career day at a local junior high school and I asked the kids how many of them got along with their siblings.  You’d be surprised how few of them raised their hands.

A “Band of Brothers?”  Men who would be willing to die for one another and expect the others to feel the same… you would think that the bonds of family should be the strongest of all and in Shakespeare’s time it might actually have been that way.  But it is a sad sign of the times when those types of bonds are few and far between.