My recommendation would be make some space for the way he's acting and let him know you and his sister love him regardless, know how difficult this must be, and are there for anything he needs and then, don't say anything else. Don't provoke him. Let him come to you. He may not and if he doesn't, then accept that there is nothing else you can do that won't make the situation worse. But it's just as possible that simply listening to him if and when he talks, almost playing into his power trip, may actually open him up to sharing more information with you.

We humans are such strangely paradoxical creatures sometimes. :) Good luck and I wish you and your family the best.

Such a communication should probably come from someone other than OP since he's on bad terms following the assault. Thoughts?

Try reading the linked blog post again, and hold up your proposed question against each of Dave Bailey’s suggestions.

Isn't that what negotiation is about, when dealing with someone who won't effectively communicate their thoughts? Speculating the wants/needs of that person and addressing them directly? This isn't something I'm making up, I've just read it in "Never Split the Difference". The book was written to address situations just like OPs.

The example sentence structure was meant to be paraphrased. I was hoping for critique on the subject matter not the grammar. I feel uncomfortable turning OP's anecdote into a hypothetical anyway so I'll back off.

That's corpo-marketing style. The angle is to coerce the other in a corner and he'll see it coming from a thousand mile and react badly to it.

> "We understand that we need you to be the man of the family,

That's exactly the problem and what OP don't want/need. They want to communicate with the medical and legal staff. They don't need him to be the man of the family, they need him to approach this as a family. They need him to let them be family and they need him to be family.

You have a theory, but even if you are a good people reader, and even if you are mostly right, you are very likely to be wrong in many small but important ways. I'm sure you can recall instances where someone was right about you in general but wrong in small ways that really mattered to you.

Even if you have a guess, ask instead.

No, negotiation is the process that happens when you and the other party have decided you want to work out a mutually acceptable agreement. The other person in this situation has not decided to do that, and so the trick is how to get the him to that point. I think Zelphyr's approach would be a lot more likely than yours to have that effect.

I'd say this part is even more difficult than the stuff in the post, and requires serious empathy.

The most powerful and influential communicators/connectors I've encountered in my life essentially only ever do this. I suppose the nuance is that they treat every person as an individual, so (on a semi-subconscious level) spend their first interactions profiling the individual so they understand their motives. I liken it to boxers learning their opponent's range and rhythm (only less combative).

I suppose what might be patronizing though is projecting thoughts onto a stranger from afar (like on this thread) though presenting some projections as an example of one possible thought pattern that may need to be handled can be useful IMO.

Directly saying "I appreciate that you have stepped up to be strong for all of us. Can we help?" seems better.

OP is the son-in-law. The man who has power of attorney over OP's father-in-law is the son. Unless I am misunderstanding your post. It would absolutely be an odd mistake to make if wrong though.

Why is your wife not having this conversation?

The family (not my wife) asked me to talk to my brother-in-law about this because nobody else could get through to him.

I totally agree I’m not the right person to get in the middle. There’s just nobody else willing or able to.

edit: Thinking about it, I think the only thing I'd be able to say in that situation is something like this, just be supporting, not judgmental, not trying to convince him about anything: "Hey man. I'm really sorry this is happening. I know that things are hard right now. If there's anything I can do to help you or the situation, let me know, and I'll do it. How are you yourself? Do you need to talk with anyone about how you're feeling? Let me know if I can help, I'll be right here, OK?"

I am a stranger on the net but your first priority is your wife and your relationship with her. Be very cautious with demands from the family even if well meaning. Protect yourself and your relationship with your wife.

If you had just said, "forget it, it won't work," and not tried, the outcome for your wife would be the same, but everyone else would also be mad that you didn't try.

This is probably a central part of the problem: you're the worst person to have the conversation, and you were brought in because everyone else failed, so he was primed against the subject matter. You started in a hole you had no hope of digging out of.

This is a very tough situation and I don't think it was any lack of skill on your part that made you unable to get through to your brother-in-law this time. I don't think the world's champion hostage negotiator could have done it on the first try.

I'm a little unclear on one aspect, though. You say your goal is to get your brother-in-law to allow your wife to talk to medical staff. But the family not your wife is asking you to talk to him? Yet they're not asking for anyone else, other than your wife, to be able to talk to medical staff? If there are aunts and uncles, presumably some of them are siblings of your father-in-law, as closely related as his children and with as much right to be involved in medical discussions as your wife has. Yet they're not trying to get themselves involved in the process? Only your wife?

(Also, as I commented elsewhere in the thread, if I were in your position, I would not want to take this on unless I was sure my wife was OK with it. I can totally see that she might just not want to have the discussion herself because of her history with her brother; I just would want to be sure that she was OK with what was being done.)

A technicality: Not sure in the USA, but over here that's not correct. Relation is measured in grades being those the basic parent-child "distance". So you're related in the first grade to your parents or children, but in the second grade to your siblings (1 grade distance from you to your parents, another one from your parents to them) so, unless the father in law has a living parent, no one is more closely related to him than his children.

So for lack of a better way of understanding, I would just ask a lawyer.

Definitely. The husband of my sister trying to insert himself - it felt so wrong at the gut/instinct level. I just felt at the gut/instinct level that he has no voice - no "standing" - in that situation. While it was expected and predictable feeling, its actual strength was a bit surprising. Note that in general I have nothing against the guy, and we're good with the sister.

GP> I spent over 2 hours with him trying to talk it through.

You just wouldn't get it with me. I'd just have no reason to waste all that time and energy with somebody who have "no standing" in the situation.

GP> I never insulted or condescended him. My goal of the conversation was to allow his sister (both are the patients children) to participate in conversations with the medical staff.

did you really think that your supposedly nice conversational skills would be more powerful and effective than a lifelong relationship, whatever complicated it may be, between the brother and the sister? Talking about insult and condescension ...

How exactly was he granted power of attorney? Was your father-in-law capable of signing a power of attorney when he was initially hospitalized, or had he signed a POA or healthcare proxy beforehand? If the latter, did it assign multiple agents and specify any restrictions on how they make decisions? For example, was the brother-in-law listed a successor to someone else in the agreement or are they co-agents? Getting a copy of the agreement will take very little billable time for any attorney. Given that time is probably a factor, and from how entrenched the attitude you've described is by now, it's unlikely that you or the family will be able to talk your brother-in-law into backing down in any reasonable timeframe. Your first step is to get a copy of the power of attorney agreement and go from there.

Speaking to an attorney might seem like an aggressive step in such a precarious situation, with the potential for long-term consequences for the family dynamic. On the other hand, as difficult as it might be to hear, you're probably already at that point. Were your father-in-law to pass away without the rest of the family even being able to hear what's happening from a medical standpoint, painful as it may be to contemplate, it's highly unlikely that anyone in the family is going to be willing to forgive your brother-in-law for it. Appearing to go around him to get a copy of the agreement might be seen as a betrayal, but it's probably going to be less problematic in the long run than the status quo.

I've seen families that have been permanently torn apart during end-of-life decision-making. Be that as it may, some manage to heal. Eventually. I hope that yours will be one of the ones that does so.

There has to be some sort of provision for dealing with situations like this, because this is far from the worst possible outcome. (e.g. "Great, $social_worker, you've now granted power of attorney to the person who lives with dad because dad was the only person able to get him to remain in treatment and on his medications, but who hates the rest of the family.")

An important part of the nvc practice is to give up attachment to outcome. Making a true request means that there will be no negative consequences if the answer is “No”. It is possible that your wife’s brother was triggered partly because you insisted (if you did), maybe he needed autonomy, solitude, to feel that he matters, to grieve, to rest.

I teach NVC and often use a small yellow book called Communication Fundamentals by Jean Morrison.

Only one website seems to have it, but shipping only to Australia :(

Any ideas how to get it??

http://www.groktheworld.com/communication-fundamentals-2nd-e...

Looks like they ship just about anywhere.

I love this little book, because it focuses on the basics without getting heady.

When I teach I use it for drills.

Get it and:

- start rewording in giraffe, esp. harsh internal dialogue

- then start using “everyday” language to say the same things

- remember that intention and alignment come become technique. Without them technique becomes a minus, not a plus.

I'd recommend the book Never Split the Difference which was written by a former hostage negotiator. From what I learned from that book, anchoring his emotions and asking How questions might have helped you. Why questions are accusatory and put people on the defensive, often leading to escalation.

In my experience with grieving people, which is also extensive, don't try and take over, often people try to manage their grief by managing the situation. Taking that away from him takes away his coping mechanism. I don't know your family and I can't speak for your situation, but if it were me, I wouldn't try and inject myself. I would keep this absolutely as simple as possible:

"Hey, we're here for you. Thank you for stepping up and managing all this, I know it's almost impossible to keep track of what's going on with doctors coming and going constantly. What can we do to help?"

It might be that there's nothing you can do right now to get him to see things through your eyes. Maybe all you can do at the moment is work on self-kindness, forgiveness and patience on your own and prepare for how to mend the relationship in the future. I have seen these rifts in my own family never heal, so I hope that they will in your family.

I will work on myself to forgive and hopefully we can be a family again in the future.

Thank you for taking the time.

I agree that it’s best now to back off. There’s nothing else I can do. It hurts me to see my wife in additional pain because she’s not allowed to talk to the medical staff herself. She has medical training and is likely to understand the medical “Mumbo Jumbo” better than anyone else in the family.

She doesn’t want to do it because her brother would freak out?

Under severe stress, several of them reverted to basically their childhood personalities and relationships with each-other. It surfaced a bunch of half-century-old petty resentments and roles, which was quite surprising for me as an observer who was born 25+ years after their childhood.

Try to cut your brother in law some slack. He’s having a hard time.

Check out Crucial Conversations (https://www.amazon.com/Crucial-Conversations-Talking-Stakes-...). It's a framework that I've found immensely helpful.

If interested, I do recommend you read the book, but you can still get something out of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFaXx3pgaxM (it's a summary masquerading as a review).

“This decision is so difficult, let us share this burden with you. If we have to make a decision to remove life support, you shouldn’t have to make that decision alone. If we decide the massive costs of long term life support which may drain the estate, we should make that decision together.

Dad would trust that we as a family would come together and make these tough decisions together.”

People go through various stages of mourning so sometime just time helps.

Remember that the family’s job is to be your Dad’s voice. What would he want?

Events like this bring out the worst in everybody. These are just a few strategies that have worked for me in the past. Good luck.

It has quite practical advice as well as a framework helping one navigate.

When I read that I thought the word power was important. The OPs brother-in-law is probably feeling a lot of things, one of which may well be "powerless" in the face of what is happening with his father. I'm not sure what involving the court is going to do in this case - for the patient or the interpersonal issues.

"Ben, I know this whole thing is very hard on you, but let me say I think you're doing a great job. No matter what anyone says, you're here for your father. That means a lot and I am sure your father would be proud of you for that. Not only that, but when the hospital asked you to step up and take on an important responsibility (power of attorney), you did it without hesitation. You're a loyal son and a gentleman.

"How are you getting along? Have you ever experienced something like this before? [Wait for the answer and talk about it. Let him talk about his experiences for a while and choose to go in more depth about a particular experience.] What was it like to go through that? Did everyone turn out OK?

"Listen, Ben, I'm here for you. I want you to keep the power of attorney because you've demonstrated your loyalty. Can we work together to figure out what it means to have power of attorney? I'm not too experienced with it, but I know attorneys in general have certain responsibilities to communicate with their clients and I'm sure something like that applies here. You've taken on a responsibility to communicate what's going on and I want to help you fulfill that responsibility.

"I know your family has been hard on you, Ben, so I want to help you by communicating with them for you so you can focus on the more important things. Again, I'm with you every step of the way, so let's figure this out together. We're going to get through this."

As you work with him, always be on his team. Never his superior nor subordinate, but always his peer. Navigate together.

My understanding is that it is somewhat normative for children of the recently deceased to get into confrontations.

Your state that "the power went to his head" and he is "irrational". That is pretty judgemental! But looking at your story from the outside, he is the son with the dying father and you are an in-law trying to wrestle control of the situation and get access to medical information and perhaps influence critical decisions.

No amount of conversation skill is going to make you closer related than the son.

Don't take it personally, the failure here isn't yours.

I don't understand this. IANAL, but recently had to figure some of this stuff out. PoA is granted per the wishes of the grantor. If your FIL is incapacitated, who granted the PoA?

I think your wife is certainly within her rights to see the actual PoA.

I am not advocating lawyering up or pushing hard for clarity.

I am saying that it might be worthwhile to figure out what's what, explore options. Plan for the worst, hope for the best. Like who and how decides about DNR, end-of-life, etc.

Further, it's good practice. Talk to your kids, next-of-kin, whoever. Figure this stuff out ahead of time. For everyone's peace of mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_attorney

My family has a long tradition of planning ahead for this stuff. Even so, we recently scrambled to update my mom's paperwork to better reflect the current situation. Just in case. Having that clarity helped. Prevented a bad situation from getting worse and got us all back to rowing together.

For comparison, my SIL's family hasn't done anything, won't talk about it, and last year was a total shitshow. Also, my sweetie's family hasn't done anything, won't talk about it, the inevitable happened, and now it's a shitshow.

--

Ask about any available resources, social workers, counseling. They can help navigate this stuff.

People change slowly.

You set forth the idea, you make your case quickly (e.g. the '40 word' guideline in this article) and you don't apply pressure. You can make clear the gravity of the situation if needed, but coercion, rhetoric, etc. will just work against you when people feel defensive. If you need someone to come closer to your point of view, you need to make room for them to do so.

Giving space like this is hard, and it often seems like nothing is changing, but this approach is a lot more powerful than you might think.

Obviously you don't have the luxury of time, but the reality is that you can't force the issue. 2 hours sounds miserable, for both of you, and it's only adding to his agitation. He may very well be making terrible mistakes, but they're his to make.

I'll tell you this: there's a reason he doesn't want your wife there. I bet you he feels undermined, antagonized, or otherwise unsupported by her (justified or otherwise), and wants to focus on the difficult decisions ahead.

I've found this book very helpful at facilitating communication and it might be of help: https://www.amazon.com/Say-What-You-Mean-Communication/dp/16...

I had a similar experience in my last divorce, doing every possible thing to make the negotiations non-confrontational, win/win, etc. My wife's stance was "I get everything", and no amount of kindness, reasoning, or patience could move her. (As you might imagine, the result was a trail of destruction, for me and her both.)

I take some solace in this Buster Scruggs quote: "Misanthrope? I don’t hate my fellow man, even when he’s tiresome and surly and tries to cheat at poker. I figure that’s just a human material, and him that finds in it cause for anger and dismay is just a fool for expecting better."

Just my 2c

All I can say, is for anyone reading this, if you do not have a will, medical power of attorney, and medical advance directive set up - do it now. Spare your loved ones this kind of confusion and hurt.

After you create these, make sure to tell your loved ones what your expectations are. You need to pick someone to have medical power of attorney who will defend your wishes. You also need to file your directive with your local hospitals and care providers.

This may be a difficult conversation, but not having it can cause many more problems.

It is written by a psychiatrist who trains FBI hostage negotiators. Which is about as targeted as you can for hard conversations under difficult circumstances.

"Because we were unavailable, my younger brother-in-law was given Power of Attorney."

If what you say is true, then get a lawyer and request that the court transfer POA to you or your wife, whomever was specified in his papers or in the law by default. Now that you _are_ available, the court may transfer POA to you.

Let this be a reminder to those reading that, when you assign POA you might also wish to designate whom you DO NOT wish to be assigned POA, in case the first-listed assignees are not available, resign, or later removed somehow.

Too bad you didn't let him assault you: that would have made it much easier. You could have charged him with assault and used it as evidence in the POA hearing or simply as leverage to force him to yield.

Alternatively, if you can find grounds, you can question the original POA document and have it nullified.

All in all it sounds as if, in addition to having irritable in-laws (who doesn't?), you simply didn't get your way and are angry about it. So either lawyer up or learn how to deal with "No.".

Sometimes its best not to further aggravate family arguments. This situation is currently recoverable, filing charges will forever change the relationship.

Sometimes its best not to further aggravate family arguments. This situation is currently recoverable, filing charges will forever change the relationship.

In most such situations it may resolve the matter to the benefit of a wiser or more socialized party, does little additional harm and merely cements and documents a longstanding situation that has little or no chance of being changed. It also provides documentation and a basis for future litigation if necessary.

Deescalation is not emotionally satisfying but it does work.

"Deescalation is not emotionally satisfying but it does [sometimes] work."

FTFY

but you may not agree.

JohnSully, you are an optimist. As in

"this is the best of all possible worlds." -the early Candide in Voltaire's Candide

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_of_all_possible_worlds#Cr...

Like the older Candide I am a pessimist and my personal experience is that:

a)Roughly a third of people are either simply nuts (insane, partially schizophrenic, manic-depressive, etc.), have significant character flaws (greed, dishonesty, vice, short temper, addiction, etc.), hold far-fetched ideas that bar them from thinking clearly or are too dim-witted to do so. In any conflict or decision, they will never agree to most anything.

b) Half of people are amenable to reason but require a significant effort in both time and expense to gain agreement. No decision will ever take less than a week.

c) A final one-sixth of persons will see a presented beneficial resolution for both parties _and_ will act thereupon almost immediately.

I’m encouraged to hear you’ve used NVC, since I have learned it, too, but it’s also educational to see in certain situations even that can have its limits.

It's a hard conversation that most people desperately try to avoid but if you haven't already set it up (especially if you're married or have kids) you should set a goal to do that this year. There are lots of simple guides online to help you put something in place or you can hire a professional to guide you if you have a more complicated personal situation.

Obviously, time is short, but there are two "trunk" books to be read when you're able: Difficult Conversations by Douglas Stone and Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher and William Ury, both of the Harvard Negotiation School. They are the gold standard and most other books on the topic are pale imitations. I used to believe that I was great at communication and bad at negotiation, but the opposite was true; DC has literally changed my life more than any other non-fiction book because the most important outcomes in our lives are the result of the most difficult conversations.

Your brother-in-law will eventually need to be forgiven for acting like a maniac, and you should anticipate that he will quickly transition into doubling down on the insanity because it seems less humiliating than admitting that he was acting like a tool.

Before the healing, however, you do have a problem to solve (or possibly, not). The first question is for you: is your brother-in-law making good decisions unilaterally? Is it possible that he's trying to protect his father from your wife? Don't be mad at me for asking. It could be possible that you should let him continue, as things are already stressful and perhaps having one person in charge is okay.

But let's assume that he's not making great decisions. What you need to figure out pronto is that when someone is upset, it's almost never what they say they are upset about. If your wife is pissed at you for missing dinner again, chances are that (unless you have an eating disorder) she's not worried that you're hungry. She feels disrespected, lonely and insecure about her marriage. So, if your brother-in-law says he's upset about X, the single most productive thing you can do is engage in creative empathy and figure out what he's most likely upset about. He's likely terrified of being abandoned by his dad, or perhaps is having a crisis of unresolved things that could never be said. He could be feeling powerless. The fact that he's the youngest might be manifesting as insecurity. (After all, why did you mention his age as relevant?) Perhaps he is terrified of death and seeing his father in this state is forcing him to confront his own death. I don't know what his deal is; just that it's almost certainly not what it seems to be.

As for the negotiation, here are some helpful suggestions straight from Getting to Yes: first, be prepared. It doesn't hurt to write down some of the following and maybe even practice it. Second, start every negotiation with a negotiation about the negotiation; "do you have a minute? I need to talk to you about what's happening". Third, be aware of what you want and what he wants, but also be mindful of what he is willing to accept as a compromise in combination with what you are willing to accept as a compromise. Fourth, you will both win better outcomes if you negotiation from your interests rather than a position. Why do you want what you think you want and is there another way we could possibly satisfy both of our interests?

It's critical to convey that someone does not have to lose in order for you both to win. (See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdA2wecb4k0 for a further summary.)

A power move is to bring in a trusted but removed third-party expert to help with a difficult negotiation. It's important that this person is impartial and not arguing for either side or else the brother-in-law will rightfully feel attacked.

Finally, don't be so hard on yourself. I am proud of you for attempting to be productive using whatever techniques you have in a time of stress. Best of luck.

Clearly I don't actually believe that, but it's helpful to start understanding the dynamic by internalizing the other guy's point of view.

In this situation the right approach is to walk away, you can't and shouldn't try to get between someone and their father in a moment of crisis. His sister has standing, you don't. She has to step up and deal with it, or not, at her discretion.

You mean his brother-in-law and family right? Can we stop framing sex between loving couples as violence or somehow unrelated to family.