Collaborative divorce
|
|
Collaborative divorce is a divorce procedure where two clients agree that they will not go to court, or threaten to do so. The parties strive to reach a fair settlement through a series of four-way meetings (two clients, two attorneys). This new approach to conflict resolution started in the early 1990s by a family attorney named Stu Webb, who had become aware that traditional litigation was not always helpful to families. The collaborative law movement has spread to over 26 states, Europe, Canada and Australia. You can find the website for the national collaborative group at collaborativepractice.com. Pauline Tesler, a family attorney from California, wrote the first collaborative law book called Collaborative Law, an ABA publication.
The key document in a collaborative case is called the participation agreement, which is the agreement all parties agree to sign stating the rules for the process. They agree to such terms as: the lawyers withdraw if the process fails, neither will take advantage of mistakes by the other side, what is said in 4-way meetings remains confidential, everyone will act courteously and honestly.
When appropriate the group may bring in outside consultants to work in a team-style to help resolve the conflict. In family cases, this might include sharing a business evaluator, rather than each hiring his or her own expert.
Since its inception, collaborative law has spread to other fields of law outside of family law. Practitioners are now applying it to business, probate, employment and personal injury cases.
Early studies are just becoming completed as to its effectiveness. Anecdotely, lawyers and clients are reporting that it can be quicker, cheaper and less painful than a typical divorce. One of the most important features of collaborative divorce is a pledge signed by each lawyer to withdraw if any or both of the parties decide to go to court. Since both of the laywers will lose the case if an agreement is not reached, they have an extra incentive to help their clients to cooperate and find solutions that honor the concerns of both parties.
Collaborative divorce may not be a good option in certain situations. If there is abuse,threats or violence in the home, drug or alcohol addiction, mental health disorders, dishonesty, traditional litigation may be more appropriate. Collaborative law differs from mediation in that in collaborative cases each client has a lawyer. In mediation the mediator is a neutral third party who doesn't represent either side.