Collaborative Divorce: An Attorney's View

I came across this post from a collaborative divorce attorney: "Why I absolutely love Collaborative Divorce" and found it very interesting.

The reasons that Mr. Weber cites in his blog post are some of the same reasons I've heard from divorce attorneys who are Nebraska Collaborative Professionals. In addition to the damage it does to the spouses and children, adversarial divorce can be difficult for the divorce attorney too. While there is the thrill of "victory" when one spouse prevails, on the other side of that equation is a divorce attorney whose client "lost" in the gamble of what the presiding judge will decide on issues in contention.

Mr. Weber also cites another potential weakness of mediation as an alternative method of dispute resolution in settling a divorce:
The limitations of mediation, however, are that the parties don’t often have the support of advising attorneys in the room. As a neutral mediator, I am unable to advise what is in a party’s best interests. I can’t protect the interests of my clients. I always recommend that clients seek independent legal advice, but it is hard sometimes, if the attorney is not in the room. 

An interesting point. Many mediators are not attorneys, so they may not feel this conflict. But the advantage of collaborative divorce is that you're attempting to reach a settlement together (instead of letting the judge decide the outcome), but with the guidance of an attorney who will keep your best interests in mind.