In this episode of Trial Lawyer Talk, Scott has an in-depth discussion about Psychodrama and its techniques with his guest Mary Jo Amatruda.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Transcript for Episode 37, with Mary Jo Amatruda

Scott Glovsky:

Welcome to Trial Lawyer Talk. I’m Scott Glovsky and I’m your host for this podcast where we speak with some of the best trial lawyers in the country. Our podcast is about having great lawyers tell great stories about cases that had a profound impact on them. Today we’re very fortunate, because we’re speaking to Mary Jo Amatruda who’s a wonderful psychodramatist, and today’s episode really focuses a lot on her experience with psychodrama. So, it’s a little bit out of the ordinary for us, but we’re very lucky to have Mary Jo, and she’s a real gem. So, let’s get started.

I’m very happy to and thankful and comforted to be sitting with an amazing psychodramatist, an amazing human being, and an amazing trial consultant who’s helped me as well as hundreds if not thousands of other lawyers around the country, Mary Jo Amatruda. Mary Jo, thank you so much for being with us.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

No, thank you for asking me.

Scott Glovsky:

Mary Jo, can you tell us a story about psychodrama? Because we’ve heard the term, but most people don’t know what it means and don’t have a sense of it.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Right. Well, you know, when I think about psychodrama, I think about how I got into psychodrama was in the 1980s, when I started a family life theater group with adolescents as the actors. They learned very early on how to role reverse, how to get into roles. One of the most startling moments was this was all improvised.

Scott Glovsky:

And tell us what a role reversal is.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Okay. It’s when if you and I are talking and we change roles, so you become me and I become you. So, these teenagers learned how to play roles. They played adults, they played children, they played therapists, they played lawyers. They did that by having people come and talk to them who were in those roles, and they would take on those roles. It was quite miraculous. I had 12 teenagers at a time, and we had valedictorians of their class and kids who had been in prison and had been out, and single parents, and just, it was a wonderful mix. They were together at least for a year. They made a commitment. But anyway, one of the things they performed improvisationally. We would work on the structure of the scene and the characters, and then they would do it.

At one point, there was a scene they were doing about incest. At the end of the performance, they sit down. We cut it short, each scene and the audience asks them questions. I asked the girl who was the victim if she could create a statue that represented their family, how they looked. It was so powerful, because she was so much into the role that she created an altar, and she was the sacrificial victim.

Scott Glovsky:

Tell us what you mean when you say altar.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

She created a sacrifice altar, you know? Just on stage using some chairs, but actually she created that altar out of her family. She put herself on the slab as the sacrificial animal. It was so powerful because I realized then that when we get into roles, whether they’re our roles or someone else’s, how we can do that. We can morph into that role and really understand another person’s experience and perspective. For this teenage girl to be able to do that, which was so brilliant and such a great demonstration of how an incest victim would feel — and she was not, this was not psychodrama, this wasn’t their own situation — was very powerful. From that program that I ran, I became a psychodramatist, got training and all.

For me, I’ll tell you a story, because it was very important for me and showed me the power of psychodrama, which, you know, it’s used for therapy, it can be used in teaching. It can be used in different vehicles, developing communication skills and skill development. You know, often it’s used with interns and residents, medical students, where they get a chance to be in the role of the patient and try out different ways of presenting themselves to the patients. So, it has a multitude of methods, but we typically think of it as a therapy.

I was born during World War II, and my father was not … I think he was sent abroad when my mother was three months pregnant. When he came back, my mother said he was a very different man. I obviously didn’t know him before. We had a very difficult relationship. He was a difficult person when I was growing up. I didn’t feel loved by him, but he did love me, but I didn’t feel it. I did a drama about him. It was a drama where I think the director asked me what a favorite place was in my life, and we set a scene at the beach. I lived a lot in my imagination as a child. I loved these rocks, and I just used to play house in the rocks. I decided where the living room was, and where the kitchen and the bedroom was in the rocks. I see those rocks sometimes as an adult, and they really bring that all back.

But I remember one day in the rocks finding a starfish, which aren’t really around on Long Island Sound anymore, which is where this took place. But it was there, and I invited my father to come and play with me on those rocks. I don’t have any memory of him ever playing with me, but in that psychodrama, I got to have him play with me. It really shifted my relationship with my father, which is kind of amazing thinking, you know, years of therapy hadn’t really done that. But it was this amazing experience together, and my inviting him into my space and his wanting to be there with me, so that when I went back home, I actually said to him … And we didn’t have deep conversations. As adults, he was a much more mellow person, but still, he would seem very tightly wound.

But I said to him, “Dad, you know, I did this drama and I realized that … ” and I don’t know how I realized it from that, what I just explained, but I said that, “When you came back from the war that you were really happy to see me.” It was the first time that I realized that it was probably a motivation in him staying alive during the war. Before he died, which was about three years ago, he said to me, “I’ll always remember you in the driveway when I came home from the war.” I was two. He said, “I always remember you.” I found in his dresser a lock of my hair as a young child. So, it was a process of kind of accepting my father’s love in the way it was shown, which was really important to me, obviously, before he died and as I face my own mortality.

Scott Glovsky:

I’m sorry for your pain.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

I’m not.

Scott Glovsky:

Say more about that.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

I really think that it helps me to connect with people, and to know that my life hasn’t been all, like, glorious and fine. I’m not unreachable, but I’m reachable by myself to myself. Therefore, hopefully, other people can feel that I reach them.

Scott Glovsky:

Tell us more about how psychodrama relates to emotionally connecting with another person.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

We just had a group, and I shared a story which is when I was in psychodrama training and I was with a lot of therapists in the group. I thought that I would not want to reveal any of my dark sides, any of my insecurities because then they would never want to refer anyone to me. As I was listening to the other participants who were very open, I realized that those were the people I trusted. So, for me, the openness, you know, started to happen then. I see what happens in my groups, that I’d always tell people that whenever we share a little piece of ourselves, some emotional truth of ourselves, it’s like exposing a magnet that then other magnets have a chance to adhere to them, other people’s magnets. So, it’s a process of exposing those magnets. That’s what I see a group work as. Then as that happens, it’s like magic to see that, how the emotional vulnerability of people, the openness, the willingness to take risks begins to create a web, a crucible. That’s how the work takes place.

Scott Glovsky:

Wow. How does this relate to storytelling?

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Well, it’s interesting that you ask, because as you know I give tours at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. I’ve been there for many years. As the training for that has evolved, it’s very much now about storytelling, because when people look at a work of art, they’re not going to probably remember it. But if you attach a story to it, the story that the artist wants to tell us, it becomes real. It becomes alive and becomes memorable. Somehow, hopefully, as we tell them these stories it attaches to some magnet in them and helps them to remember it. I think about as I’ve gotten to know lawyers and realize that the lawyers, their goal is to tell the story they want to tell in court, and to get their witnesses to do that, too.

I’ve been looking at art that way, that art presents something in a way that the artist … There’s a story that that artist wants to tell, but they want to tell that story that they want to tell, and there are a million other stories, too. But it’s just an interesting way, this whole storytelling of how it can permeate so many aspects of our lives.

Scott Glovsky:

When you’re working with witnesses before they’re going to tell their stories, what is it that you’re really doing with them?

Mary Jo Amatruda:

I go into working with a witness, taking something that Zerka Moreno talks about, which she tells us … Her husband was the person who developed psychodrama. She became his voice in communicating about psychodrama to the world. She always talks about the fact that what we’re there for is to help the protagonist, or the person who’s going to tell the story, tell their story. It may be totally different from your story about the same event, but we’re not there to critique it. We’re just here to listen, and to help them facilitate their telling their story. I feel that way with the witnesses, that each witness has a story to tell. It probably won’t be the same exact story as another person telling the same event, but I try to keep that openness and to build a sense of trust with the witness so that they’ll feel comfortable telling the story that they hold.

Scott Glovsky:

Tell us more about listening.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Listening is not just listening with our ears, you know? It’s certainly listening, and we talk a lot about that here at the college about being totally present, totally focused, and letting go of any solutions or critiques or judgements about what the person is saying. But beyond that, I think listening really involves feeling. When we are with someone, it’s almost like attuning with your body. We pick up messages physically, viscerally, as well as with our ears. Certainly I use my eyes too, because as people are talking I’m very aware of their body language and what parts of their body might be expressing that their words are not expressing.

Scott Glovsky:

Wow. I find that even as I’m sitting here talking with you, that it’s hard for me to truly listen. I’m thinking about my next question, or is the interview going well? There’s almost a relinquishment of control to truly listen.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Yes.

Scott Glovsky:

Tell me about that.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

It’s trusting. It’s trusting, and I don’t know … I was going to say trusting the process, but I couldn’t even begin to tell you what that is. But it is trusting. It’s just trusting and knowing that you’re going to find your way. Maybe it’s age, but as I’m getting older, I’m much more in the moment and not worried about … You know, as a psychodramatist, I am thinking I have to be able to move the drama forward. I have to make interventions, and whereas if a talk therapist is making speaking interventions, as a psychodramatist we’re making interventions in action. So, to think of what’s the next thing I’m going to do that’s going to help this person move forward in the story they’re telling, and hopefully deepen it? Because many times in psychodrama, people are telling the story and they’re acting it out, but it’s at the level at which they understand it. So, how do we kind of get them to go deeper?

I’ll give you an example. Someone was doing a drama and it was about a relationship with her husband and feeling totally burdened, because everything was getting dumped on her. I saw a big, metal waste paper basket in the room, so I handed it to her. As he was telling her things, the group caught on right away. We began piling stuff into this waste paper basket that she was holding. Somebody even got some weights and put them in. Then we got to see her walking through some different parts of her life, but carrying this. So, it became very physical for her. It deepened her understanding of what was happening in her life, and also helped her to really experience what she was actually dealing with, and what she was feeling, and what she was enduring.

Scott Glovsky:

A lot of lawyers try cases and deal with juries, and trying to persuade juries, and take care of the juries. Could you share with us the concept of taking care of the group in a psychodrama, your approach to that? That might have some implications for how lawyers think about juries.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Right. Well, of course the first thing is laying, which I think is something you do, but it’s getting people to connect with each other in the group to find out … So, you’re building, as I said, that net, that crucible of “What do we have in common? Where am I connecting? I’m not out here floating by myself.” It’s the ballast, right? Then, as the drama or the story begins to open up I’m constantly watching, because in a sense a psychodrama group has the protagonist, who’s the storyteller. It’s got the direct, and that’s like your client. It’s got the protagonist and the director, who’s like the judge. No, I’m sorry. The director’s the lawyer. The protagonist is the client. You got all these other people in the group that are like your jurors. You’ve got the courtroom, which is like the stage, although we don’t always have a stage per se in psychodrama.

But you’re watching your jury, you’re watching your auxiliaries. What’s going on with them? How can I see somebody drifting off? How can I incorporate that person and help them to feel more connected? There may also be a person who’s really beginning to be emotionally affected by the story. So, often I will help people at the beginning of a drama, if I know it’s going to involve some trauma, tell people to take care of themselves. I would imagine in some jurors, juries have to experience some trauma themselves. They get to see it, or they hear these stories and probably see things that are very traumatizing to them. I don’t know how a lawyer takes care of a jury in that case, but I take of it by acknowledging that this can happen, and what people might be experiencing, and how they might be able to take care of themselves in the course of it.

Now, in psychodrama, you start with a group that’s beginning to warm up to each other, and getting to know each other. Then, you have the drama, in which case the protagonist is really isolated from the group. They’re sort of into their own world. Then at the end in psychodrama, you have what’s called a sharing time, where the rest of the group members share with that protagonist things they connected with. It’s a way of incorporating the protagonist back into the group, not making them feel like an outcast in the group but actually as a member of the group. So, all of these are ways that, you know, you kind of intuitively take care of your group and yourself.

Scott Glovsky:

That’s fascinating. Now, I’ve heard an expression that Don Clarkson uses, and I won’t get it exactly right, but it’s something to the effect of, “The place that seems so dangerous is where safety lies.” As a director in a psychodrama, and conversely as a lawyer in a lawsuit, can you share with us that idea, that concept?

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Well, I may not understand it in the same way that Don meant it, but for me what I see happening in psychodrama is that the place that seems dangerous is in revealing the secrets that one might be holding onto. They could be secrets about things that have been one to us, or things that we’ve done to other people. Usually, those secrets may be secrets because, you know, the family rules of, “You don’t tell anybody,” or it may be because we ourselves hold onto those secrets because we’re afraid if somebody knows them, they’ll hate us. So, there a lot of shame usually attached to secrets. So, revealing those in a group can feel enormously dangerous, especially, you know, a lot of people have not shared certain things ever.

We see that in psychodrama where people feel safe and warm, and there’s an urgency about sharing that secret. It almost becomes like their heart is breaking through their chest. I mean, it’s just so scary, frightening. But they have no choice, they can’t go back. Once that is revealed, and they work on that issue, and get feedback from others, and hear that they’re not the only ones who may have that secret or another secret, that’s where safety lies.

Scott Glovsky:

It’s amazing to me that when myself as the protagonist, the storyteller in a psychodrama, shared about my childhood neglect that I felt open, and vulnerable, and emotional. I was shaking after the drama. But then when the group shared their experiences, the way they connected with my story of other abuse or neglect or pain, then all of a sudden I didn’t feel all alone, that this great secret that I had that was revealed was met with understanding, and comfort, and love. I mean, I imagine this must happen often in psychodrama, and what’s really going on?

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Well, I think when we’re alone, whether it be just not physically alone but emotionally alone, we feel it’s scary. We have much more fear about the world at large, we have a lot more anxiety when we feel alone, because think of it: in utero, we’re merged with our mothers. Then, depending on what happens after we’re born, you know, we undergo this separation upon separation to separation, but our quest in our life is always to go back to that symbiotic relationship with someone. It’s what we search for, because that’s where we feel calm. That’s where we feel at home. So, it’s like going back, in a sense, to the womb, but it’s like we’re searching for that. As much as we move away, what we really long for is that. That’s what happens in psychodrama when we share our story and hear that we’re not alone. It’s like, feeling kind of the magnet found its mate.

Scott Glovsky:

So, I know as we sit here today in a room called The Chicken Coop in the middle of a ranch in Wyoming, today’s the last day that you’re going to be here with us, teaching and helping. At least, that’s the plan as I understand it.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

So, at the end of September when I come back for graduation, that will be my last time here at the Trial Lawyer’s College.

Scott Glovsky:

So, what’s going on inside Mary Jo, knowing that in September will be the last day that you come to this ranch to work and help the lawyers that are here?

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Well, every time I leave, I feel a sense of grief because when I’m here, I always work in the milk barn. It’s wonderful to feel that connection and that love. You can almost palpitate it. It’s like vibrating through the room, and it just feels so good. There’s nowhere else in my life, and I have a 49-year old … I have a great family, but that kind of co-unconscious vibrating, that kind of … It’s beyond rational, but it’s there. So, whenever I leave my group at the end, I am so bereft. I feel so sad and lonely. So, I’m not sure. I’m sure I will have that, which would be anyway, but also a happy feeling in knowing I had this opportunity, which is really very unique for a psychodramatist. To be a part of a milieu of a whole community, because we work alone and it’s a lonely role, as I’m sure being a lawyer can be.

So, being able to be here with other psychodramatists and with lawyers who really embrace this methodology by and large, and are so thankful for what we’re able to give them, and of course we get as much they give, it’s been amazing. It really is, and yet, you know, I have to keep reminding myself that I made this decision based on a life choice for how … You know, I’m 73, and I kept thinking, “I don’t know how much longer I’m going to be really active in my life.” Hopefully, my parents were in their late 90s when they died, so I might be around for a long time. But I really want to have more of the energy and time for family, old friends whom I just don’t often get to see and I miss, but I don’t make … Maybe it’s a fantasy that I’ll do that, but I just really want to have time for those personal things. So, this is the choice. Yeah, it’s hard, because this is personally rewarding as well as professionally. It’s not just a job.

Scott Glovsky:

Well, I’m certainly saddened that I won’t see you as often, although hopefully I’ll find other ways and I will to see you often. There’s a lot of wisdom in what parents tell children. What did you tell or do you tell your kids? Are there certain advice or sayings that you have?

Mary Jo Amatruda:

You know, I’m thinking about what’s happening right now in terms of leaving the college. I think I may have told you this, but this to me, a life lesson about knowing when it’s time to leave, or when it’s time to say goodbye. You know I’m, like, loyal to a fault, so I would stay in situations, they might be friendship relationships, work, volunteer, whatever, even though it wasn’t where I really wanted to be, and it was done but I would stay. I always needed an excuse to leave. Like, if we moved that was an excuse, well, to leave my job. I would always be relieved, so that rather than making the decision myself … I hope even by doing this, of leaving … It’s time, you know? I loved it. It’s been rewarding, but it’s time to leave. So, knowing for myself when it’s time to say goodbye, and hopefully I can pass that on to my children as well, so they’ll never feel handcuffed to something or someone when it’s time to leave.

Scott Glovsky:

So, you’re taking care of yourself?

Mary Jo Amatruda:

Definitely, yeah.

Scott Glovsky:

Well, Mary Jo, I want to think you from the bottom of my heart for the help that you’ve given me, for the help that you’ve given to students all around the country, and the help that you’ve given to our clients, to people whose lives you’ve changed. I’m really very thankful that you took this time to share with us your wisdom, and saddened at the same time looking across the table from you, knowing I probably won’t look across this table from you again. I just want to say thank you.

Mary Jo Amatruda:

It’s always warm to see your face.

Scott Glovsky:

Thank you for joining us today for Trial Lawyer Talk. If you like the show, I’d really appreciate if you could give us a good review on iTunes, and I’d love to get your feedback. You can reach me at www.scottglovsky.com. That’s S-C-O-T-T G-L-O-V-S-K-Y.com. I’d love to hear your feedback. You can also check out the book that I published called Fighting Health Insurance Denials: A Primer for Lawyers. That’s on Amazon. I put the book together based on 20 years of suing health insurance companies for denying medical care to people, and it provides a general outline of how to fight health insurance denials. Have a great week and we’ll talk to you in the next episode.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download