Divorce is not easy—but it does not have to be ugly. And in those situations where the marital dissolution has been amicable, the newly single adults and their children complete the process with their dignity intact, their privacy protected, and they are able to move forward with a sense of resolution and cooperation.
To help more families achieve this outcome, a growing number of family law attorneys, mental health professionals, and financial advisors are embracing and being trained in a process known as collaborative divorce. As awareness of the process grows, increasing numbers of divorcing couples are seeking it out.
“Collaborative divorce is a way to divorce without fighting it out in court; it allows for a great deal of privacy as you can work through your issues only with the people who need to know, and the results can be significantly better,” explained Elizabeth A. Edwards, a family law attorney for more than 20 years who lives and works in Wilton. “The goal is to protect all parties, but especially children, from the negativity created by court battles and to maintain some family integrity. It helps people be their best when circumstances might bring out the worst.
“There is a growing understanding that if a divorcing couple has children, they will remain in each other’s lives, there will be graduations and weddings and other family events that bring them back together, and it is ultimately better for everyone if the couple can be civil to one and other, which they can be if the divorce is not adversarial.”
 Photo By: Peter Baker |
Acknowledging that there will always be situations in which litigation will be necessary or mediation may be the best approach, Edwards said that the collaborative approach is “another tool in the toolbox” and can be particularly effective in situations where both parties are in agreement that a marriage should end, but have considerable conflicts regarding how to get there.
“Collaborative divorce empowers the individuals by actively involving them in the process, rather than have them turning to an attorney and saying, ‘here’s my problem, solve it’ and having the attorneys duke it out,” she continued. “Collaborative divorce is client-centered and client-controlled; it is supportive of all parties involved. The parties solve their own problems with guidance from professionals who are arrayed around them—be they legal, mental health, child advocates, financial advisors, whoever is needed to provide support and guidance—and allows them to end the marriage with a sense of dignity.”
Although it may sound like using a team of professionals would be much more expensive than just using attorneys, it generally ends up costing about the same, if not significantly less, and so many of the physical costs of an adversarial situation are avoided.
The concept began in the 1980s with Stu Webb, a family practice lawyer in Minnesota who felt that there had to be a better way for people to get divorced, and developed models for doing so, Edwards explained, adding, “It spread from there to California, where it has been growing for the last 15 years, and is now entering mainstream practice in the Northeast.”
How is collaborative divorce different from mediation? “It is in the same family,” she said, “but in mediation both clients work with one lawyer to try to get an agreement accomplished, while in the collaborative process each client has his or her own attorney, and other trained specialists as needed. While the lawyers continue to represent the best interests of their clients, they work together as a team rather than take an adversarial stance.
 Photo By: Peter Baker |
“The key is that the parties agree not to litigate, but to resolve all issues in an atmosphere of cooperation, honesty, and integrity,” Edwards elaborated, “and both the clients and their attorneys sign a contract of agreement. The goal is to minimize the negative emotional and economic consequences of protracted litigation on the participants and their families. By avoiding litigation, the parties are not subject to the court calendar; they work at their own pace. This process can be used by any two parties who agree to its terms.”
Only if someone is not committed to the process does it run into problems; if either client breaks the agreement, the attorneys withdraw and the couple has to start all over in a more traditional, and often adversarial, manner.
Many issues of conflict are not legal issues, Edwards pointed out, and can be more quickly, effectively, and inexpensively resolved by specialists who may have tools available to them that lawyers do not. Major areas of conflict tend to involve custody and/or finances
For example, a couple wanting to end their marriage has two children, average assets, and a house. The assets are not an issue; they agreed to a 50/50 split. The big problem is they both want custody of the children, and each has his/her own agenda. If lawyers handle it, they look at the legal issues, what the court would probably do, which is not necessarily in the best interest of the specific parties involved. But there are a lot of emotional issues going on…so the attorneys refer the couple to mental health professionals who focus on those issues. The mental health professionals can usually work through an issue in a couple of sessions, and the parties return to the negotiating table. The process is repeated as necessary.