Collaborative Divorce vs. Litigation vs. Mediation

One of the easiest ways to understand collaborative divorce is to compare it to other types of divorce resolution methods.

Collaborative divorce uses a team approach — which will be explored next. Each party is represented by his or her own attorney, but the focus is on reaching a settlement together, without court involvement.

Litigation also involves two attorneys, but the process is often adversarial. While more than 90 percent of divorces are settled outside of a court trail, the threat of having a judge make the decision for the couple can sometimes face a decision on an issue that may not be in one — or both — parties’ interest.

For example, a father may not seek additional parenting time in a visitation plan because the wife knows that if the case went to trail, the judge wouldn’t likely order the additional time. Or a wife may not seek alimony in order to pursue training for a higher-paid career because she is currently employed full-time, but in a lower-paying position than she might be qualified for, with some additional schooling.

Both of these are issues that could be addressed successfully in a collaborative divorce, because an honest discussion of motivations and outcomes often reveals shades of grey for what appear to be black-and-white issues.

Mediation shares a common interest with collaborative divorce in that couples seek agreement on their issues while working with a trained third party. The mediator meets with both parties, without their lawyers present. Mediators must be registered with the court and meet initial training and continuing education requirements. Mediators are often therapists or attorneys, but some are laypeople with an interest in conflict resolution.