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.
Showing posts with label Mediation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mediation. Show all posts
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)