Georgia Collaborative Divorce and Family Law Blog

Customizing your divorce through collaboration instead of fighting in court

KDKA reports on the benefits of collaborative divorce and the growing number of couples seeking divorce with dignity.

Sonni Abatta reports (excerpt):
It’s divorce without the judge.

The collaborative divorce takes that third party out of the process and keeps control strictly in the hands of the couple.
****
Many more divorcing couples are discovering this option as they look for peaceful and sometimes quicker ways to divorce.

“It’s basically self directed,” said collaborative lawyer Jackie Stevens. “The attorneys sit there as advisers. That’s their sole purpose.”
****
Tailoring their finances to their exact preferences is one benefit of going the collaborative way.
****
There are some things to keep in mind if you’re considering divorcing collaboratively:
1. If you can’t hash it out in collaboration, you’ll be sent back to court to litigate with a judge.
2. Hourly billing: It’s the same as if you were in court. But since you determine the pace of your case, theoretically, cost savings can be a reality.
3. The process works best for amicable couples.

SOURCE FOR POST: Domestic Diversions Blog

How Collaborative Practice Benefits Children

Other than perhaps the death of a parent, divorce is often the single most traumatic event in a child's life. In America 60% of all marriages end in divorce and a third of those divorces involve bitter conflict. One million children in our country are involved in divorce each year. These children are twice as likely as children from intact homes to develop behavior problems, psychiatric illness and addictions. Children of divorce are 50% more likely to divorce than children from intact homes, perpetuating the cycle and driving statistics up each year.

As typically practiced in America, divorce rips asunder the very foundation of a child's world. It shatters the family structure, destroys communication between the parents, and irrevocably changes the child's relationship with each parent. Children suffer not only their own fears and misery over the loss of the family but, too often, are used as pawns by one parent to hurt the other. Out of anger or emotional need, one parent may seek to monopolize the child's time and affection to the exclusion of the other parent. There are no winners in a divorce. Everyone loses, but the children lose most of all.

Divorce professionals and researchers alike have concluded that how a couple conducts themselves during a divorce has far greater impact on their children than the separation itself. Weary of acrimonious divorce battles that dragged on in court and the expense and emotional damage they cause, attorneys and clients sought a more constructive way of divorcing. The sad reality is that divorce involves far too many complex personal and family issues to be adequately addressed and appropriately resolved by an already overwhelmed judiciary. People wanted to maintain control over their lives, not have decisions that would have such a major impact on their future dictated by an uninvested third party through the courts.

Collaborative Practice (also called Collaborative Law and Collaborative Divorce) became the answer. Founded in 1990 by Minnesota attorney Stuart G. Webb, collaborative practice focuses on the fact that divorce is not just a painful ending but can also be a new beginning. Stressing cooperation over confrontation and resolution over revenge, collaborative divorce is quickly transforming how couples dissolve their marriages, divide their assets, and reinvent their post-divorce parenting relationships. "Collaborative practice promotes respect, places the needs of the children first and keeps control of the process with the spouses," explains the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP) website (www.CollaborativePractice.com).

An alternative to traditional litigious divorce and child custody proceedings, collaborative law is a commitment to a principled, negotiated settlement that focuses on client empowerment. It harnesses the problem-solving skills of both attorneys and their clients to arrive at creative settlements that address the needs of each parent and their children without the threat or use of court action. The collaborative law method provides the tools, resources, and professional assistance in a specialized and structured framework to achieve effective outcomes for families in transition. Interest in collaborative law is growing and is now practiced in the U.S., Canada, United Kingdom, New Zealand and Switzerland.

What is Collaborative Divorce?

As defined by the IACP: "Collaborative Law, Collaborative Process, and Collaborative Divorce are terms often used interchangeably. However, they are all components of Collaborative Practice, which has these key elements:

1. the voluntary and free exchange of information,
2. the pledge not to litigate and the withdrawal of both attorneys - and in most cases all of the other professionals on the team - should either party initiate litigation in spite of this pledge, and
3. the commitment to resolutions that respect the parties' shared goals.

"Collaborative Law describes the legal component of Collaborative Practice, made up of the parties and their attorneys. Collaborative Process means the key elements of the process itself."

Collaborative divorce (From Wikipedia)

Overview and History

Collaborative law

(also called collaborative practice, collaborative divorce, and collaborative family law) was originally a divorce procedure in which the two parties agreed that they would not go to court, or threaten to do so. It has expanded significantly since then. This approach to conflict resolution was created in 1990 by a Minnesota family lawyer named Stu Webb, who saw that traditional litigation was not always helpful to parties and their families, and often was damaging. Since 1990, the collaborative law movement has spread rapidly to most of the United States, Europe, Canada and Australia. Per the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals, more than 10,000 lawyers have been trained in collaborative law in the United States, with collaborative practitioners in at least 46 states. In some localities, collaborative law has become the predominant method for resolving divorces.

In a collaborative divorce, the parties strive to reach a fair settlement through a series of meetings (sometimes called joint sessions) between the two parties and their lawyers, and sometimes other neutral experts. The primary focus of the four-way meetings or joint sessions is to identify the priorities, goals, needs and interests of the parties, and help them progress towards and create a settlement that is consistent with their priorities, goals, needs, and interests. The parties make their own decisions based on their own standards. Some have critiqued this aspect of collaborative law (and mediation), believing that court processes are better suited towards protecting rights than voluntary dispute resolution processes.

There is a parallel between collaborative law and mediation, in that both are facilitative processes. However, in collaborative law, the parties are fully informed about the law and the consequences of various options, and their advocates facilitate the negotiations. In mediation, the mediator is a neutral third party who doesn't represent or advise either side. A comparison chart between collaborative law and litigation is available here: [1].

Participation Agreement

The key document in a collaborative case is the participation agreement. It is a contract signed by the participants, which sets forth the rules for the process. The parties and lawyers agree that:

The lawyers will not litigate the case. If the process fails, and litigation is the only recourse, the original attorneys must withdraw and the parties must retain new lawyers (the "disqualification" provision);

Neither party will take advantage of mistakes by the other side;

The parties will freely disclose all pertinent information and will not hide any material facts;

What is said in the settlement meetings remains confidential;

All experts will be neutral, and hired jointly by both parties; and

Everyone will behave courteously and in good faith.

The disqualification provision is a key element to a collaborative case. It ensures that the lawyers' interests are aligned with the clients' interests of reaching settlement by eliminating any incentive to take the case to trial. It also ensures that clients and lawyers work more diligently towards a negotiated resolution, because there is a relatively high cost to ending the process prematurely. Collaborative law practitioners believe that when court is no longer a good option, non-court methods of reaching settlement are more likely to be pursued. Additionally, when court is not an option, it is believed that many collaborative law attorneys will retool to learn the additional skills that may be needed to resolve disputes without resorting to a third party decision maker.

Some lawyers who are not trained in the collaborative process believe that the disqualification clause is an unnecessary disadvantage, because all parties are required to appoint new lawyers if the collaborative process ends without settlement.

Collaborative Law in Georgia: Child Specialists, Coaches and the Development of the Parenting Plan

Around the country and indeed the world the Collaborative Divorce process embraces many different  approaches.  In some areas of the country an attorney alone comprises the “team.”  In many others, the prevailing model calls for a full team: two attorneys, two coaches, one financial neutral and one child specialist.  In most of Georgia the goal is to utilize such a “full team.”  But one  area of creative difference between and among Georgia collaborative professionals has to do with the respective roles of the child specialist and the coaches in the preparation of the parenting plan.

The model that the authors subscribe to assigns unique roles to the child specialist and the coaches.  Specifically, the child specialist evaluates the children’s functioning and needs in the context of the pending divorce.  In addition, the child specialist assists the children in developing coping strategies as well as making sure their voices are heard where decisions affecting them are made.  Once the child specialist has completed the initial evaluations, and often after a follow-up or two, he or she meets with the parents and the coaches to discuss the findings and to articulate the child’s special needs, desires, emotional status, etc.  This allows the parents to hear what the children need and want  while simultaneously allowing the coaches to hear the same information. This process fosters a much fuller understanding of that information.  It is then for the coaches to reinforce what the child specialist has said since they have heard exactly the same information as the clients. 

In this model the coaches work with the clients to develop the parenting plan taking into consideration the feedback from the child specialist.  We think it is essential that the coaches develop the parenting plan, since they have a detailed understanding of the family system and the minutia of the clients’ lives. Having the child specialist craft the parenting plan might appear appropriate from the children’s points of view but may not be capable of implementation unless it also works with the parents’ work and travel schedules, availability for transportation, etc.  The coaches, on the other hand are perfectly situated to incorporate the feedback from the child specialist, together with all of the other information they have about the lifestyles of the two parents.  It is the coaches’ responsibility to find the proper fit between the best interests of the children and those of the parents.

This model also allows the child specialist to continue working with the children on their adjustment to the divorce without getting caught up in the parents’ struggles.  The child specialist stays focused on the special needs of those members of the divorcing family who might otherwise not be able to make themselves heard. 

The coaches can maintain their focus on the details of the parenting plan and work with each of the parents on the issues, conflicts and struggles that often emerge when couples talk about final decision making, conflict resolution, schedules, and areas of parental responsibility, etc.  Working directly with the parents, coaches are in the best position to exert positive influences on them to come up with a detailed, well-crafted parenting plan – now legally required under this year’s HB 369 as of January 1, 2008– that will be realistic and work in the real world.

After all, the wording of a parenting plan may look great, but if it can’t be implemented over the long haul it isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

SOURCE: Howard Drutman, Ph.D. & Marsha Schechtman, LCSW of Atlanta North Psychotherapy Center

Around the country and indeed the world the Collaborative Divorce process embraces many different  approaches.  In some areas of the country an attorney alone comprises the “team.”  In many others, the prevailing model calls for a full team: two attorneys, two coaches, one financial neutral and one child specialist.  In most of Georgia the goal is to utilize such a “full team.”  But one  area of creative difference between and among Georgia collaborative professionals has to do with the respective roles of the child specialist and the coaches in the preparation of the parenting plan.

The model that the authors subscribe to assigns unique roles to the child specialist and the coaches.  Specifically, the child specialist evaluates the children’s functioning and needs in the context of the pending divorce.  In addition, the child specialist assists the children in developing coping strategies as well as making sure their voices are heard where decisions affecting them are made.  Once the child specialist has completed the initial evaluations, and often after a follow-up or two, he or she meets with the parents and the coaches to discuss the findings and to articulate the child’s special needs, desires, emotional status, etc.  This allows the parents to hear what the children need and want  while simultaneously allowing the coaches to hear the same information. This process fosters a much fuller understanding of that information.  It is then for the coaches to reinforce what the child specialist has said since they have heard exactly the same information as the clients. 

In this model the coaches work with the clients to develop the parenting plan taking into consideration the feedback from the child specialist.  We think it is essential that the coaches develop the parenting plan, since they have a detailed understanding of the family system and the minutia of the clients’ lives. Having the child specialist craft the parenting plan might appear appropriate from the children’s points of view but may not be capable of implementation unless it also works with the parents’ work and travel schedules, availability for transportation, etc.  The coaches, on the other hand are perfectly situated to incorporate the feedback from the child specialist, together with all of the other information they have about the lifestyles of the two parents.  It is the coaches’ responsibility to find the proper fit between the best interests of the children and those of the parents.

This model also allows the child specialist to continue working with the children on their adjustment to the divorce without getting caught up in the parents’ struggles.  The child specialist stays focused on the special needs of those members of the divorcing family who might otherwise not be able to make themselves heard. 

The coaches can maintain their focus on the details of the parenting plan and work with each of the parents on the issues, conflicts and struggles that often emerge when couples talk about final decision making, conflict resolution, schedules, and areas of parental responsibility, etc.  Working directly with the parents, coaches are in the best position to exert positive influences on them to come up with a detailed, well-crafted parenting plan – now legally required under this year’s HB 369 as of January 1, 2008– that will be realistic and work in the real world.

After all, the wording of a parenting plan may look great, but if it can’t be implemented over the long haul it isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

SOURCE: Howard Drutman, Ph.D. & Marsha Schechtman, LCSW of Atlanta North Psychotherapy Center

COLLABORATIVE DIVORCE: A Team Approach to Divorce

The following is an article by Pauline H. Tesler about Collaborative Divorce:

Ms. Tesler is an author, a trainer, a specialist in family law certified by the California State Bar Board of Legal Specialization, a Fellow in the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, and a recipient of the first ABA Dispute Resolution Section’s Lawyer as Problem Solver Award.

Psychologist Abraham Maslow said, “If your only tool is a hammer, all problems tend to resemble nails” – a maxim that goes far to explain why the conventional tools and techniques we lawyers have traditionally had available to us for handling divorces so rarely produce satisfied clients.  Many family lawyers initially thought that mediation, which took root in the family law field during the eighties, might bridge the gap between the obvious needs of divorcing families and the poorly-matched tools and resources available to them in court-based legal conflict resolution.  That hope did not bear fruit.  Mediation works well for some, but not all or even most divorcing couples.  As mediator and mediation theorist Bernard Mayer has observed, the strictly neutral role of a mediator does not always serve clients well, because alongside a desire to reach a contained settlement, clients at the same time have a need for support and advocacy that a neutral mediator cannot provide.

In mediation, one neutral conducts the conflict resolution process, with the spouses negotiating directly, face to face.  The mediator, who must maintain neutrality, cannot counsel individual parties or do much to level an unequal bargaining table or to address obstructive or non-constructive participation by a party.  Individual legal counsel may or may not be present during the mediation, but in either case, the lawyers do not participate directly in negotiations. Instead, they advise clients privately about the law, the issues, and the proposed resolutions.  This creates an inherently unstable structure in which the lawyers are not fully aligned with the goal of settlement and, indeed, may advise clients to terminate the mediation process and litigate instead.

Collaborative Divorce Introduced
Collaborative divorce (also called collaborative law, collaborative family law, and collaborative practice) has become highly visible in the field of family law in the United States and Canada since its introduction in the early nineties, and now is spreading rapidly in Europe, in Australia, and in New Zealand.  The remarkable speed of its acceptance among family lawyers can be attributed to the fact that it works toward the same goals that mediation seeks: contained, civilized, constructive, self-determined, interest-based conflict resolution, but without the inherent weaknesses that render mediation difficult for many divorcing couples. 

In contrast to mediation, the negotiations in collaborative divorce take place in direct meetings conducted with clients present and at the forefront, and with collaborative counsel by their sides.  The negotiations are guided and managed by the same two lawyers who provide the legal counsel, advocacy, and support that divorcing clients so often need.  These lawyers are allies and advocates, not neutrals.  Significantly, both lawyers and both clients sign a binding contract that precludes those two collaborative lawyers from ever threatening litigation or taking the matter to court.  If the collaborative process terminates, both collaborative lawyers must bow out and hand the matter over to new litigation counsel. 

The Nuts and Bolts
The nuts and bolts of collaborative law are as follows:

• Each party is represented by a specially trained collaborative lawyer.
• These two collaborative lawyers are bound by the same professional ethical mandates that all lawyers must honor.
• The lawyers are retained pursuant to a “limited purpose retention.”  The sole purpose for which the lawyers are hired is to help their clients reach a reasonable, acceptable settlement of all issues, without litigating or threatening to litigate.
• The clients retain their right to terminate the collaborative divorce process and to take their issues to court, but the collaborative lawyers and other collaborative professionals cannot go with them.                   
• Information is shared fully and freely, on request.  Hence, suspicion and paranoia drop dramatically from what is normally experienced in litigation.

• All negotiations take place directly, face to face, in “fourway” settlement meetings.  The lawyers do not bargain as agents in the absence of their clients.  Interest-based negotiations are the preferred mode, not positional bargaining. 
• In addition to a collaborative lawyer, each party is encouraged to have a divorce coach to help the party constructively articulate emotions and key issues. 
• Instead of being kept in the dark and out of the loop, the clients’ children have a voice as well.  When couples choose a fully-staffed interdisciplinary collaborative divorce team, a neutral child development specialist is included.  This professional listens to the children’s chief concerns and helps the family to address them in a separate meeting with the coaches.
• Finally, a neutral financial consultant helps parties and lawyers gather the financial data, analyzes the family resources, and helps the couple to understand the size of the pie, offering creative solutions for consideration that can be far beyond a court’s power to order.2Plus there are no hidden finances or surprises and as a result many couples under stand their money situation better than before.   Instead of playing the litigation game of “hide the ball,” this consultant ensures that all financial questions are answered and all necessary information is brought to the table so that sound solutions can be devised.  With the financial consultant’s help, many couples do not just reach divorce agreements—they also understand their money situation far better than ever before.
• These professional helpers all work together to help a couple focus  not just on reaching a “quick fix” settlement agreement, but on laying a foundation for optimum communications and problem solving during the period of rapid changes a couple can expect after the legal divorce judgment has been entered.   They remain available as needed to help couples adjust their parenting plans in light of actual experience during the months and even years following entry of judgment.

The following is an article by Pauline H. Tesler about Collaborative Divorce:

Ms. Tesler is an author, a trainer, a specialist in family law certified by the California State Bar Board of Legal Specialization, a Fellow in the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, and a recipient of the first ABA Dispute Resolution Section’s Lawyer as Problem Solver Award.

Psychologist Abraham Maslow said, “If your only tool is a hammer, all problems tend to resemble nails” – a maxim that goes far to explain why the conventional tools and techniques we lawyers have traditionally had available to us for handling divorces so rarely produce satisfied clients.  Many family lawyers initially thought that mediation, which took root in the family law field during the eighties, might bridge the gap between the obvious needs of divorcing families and the poorly-matched tools and resources available to them in court-based legal conflict resolution.  That hope did not bear fruit.  Mediation works well for some, but not all or even most divorcing couples.  As mediator and mediation theorist Bernard Mayer has observed, the strictly neutral role of a mediator does not always serve clients well, because alongside a desire to reach a contained settlement, clients at the same time have a need for support and advocacy that a neutral mediator cannot provide.

In mediation, one neutral conducts the conflict resolution process, with the spouses negotiating directly, face to face.  The mediator, who must maintain neutrality, cannot counsel individual parties or do much to level an unequal bargaining table or to address obstructive or non-constructive participation by a party.  Individual legal counsel may or may not be present during the mediation, but in either case, the lawyers do not participate directly in negotiations. Instead, they advise clients privately about the law, the issues, and the proposed resolutions.  This creates an inherently unstable structure in which the lawyers are not fully aligned with the goal of settlement and, indeed, may advise clients to terminate the mediation process and litigate instead.

Collaborative Divorce Introduced
Collaborative divorce (also called collaborative law, collaborative family law, and collaborative practice) has become highly visible in the field of family law in the United States and Canada since its introduction in the early nineties, and now is spreading rapidly in Europe, in Australia, and in New Zealand.  The remarkable speed of its acceptance among family lawyers can be attributed to the fact that it works toward the same goals that mediation seeks: contained, civilized, constructive, self-determined, interest-based conflict resolution, but without the inherent weaknesses that render mediation difficult for many divorcing couples. 

In contrast to mediation, the negotiations in collaborative divorce take place in direct meetings conducted with clients present and at the forefront, and with collaborative counsel by their sides.  The negotiations are guided and managed by the same two lawyers who provide the legal counsel, advocacy, and support that divorcing clients so often need.  These lawyers are allies and advocates, not neutrals.  Significantly, both lawyers and both clients sign a binding contract that precludes those two collaborative lawyers from ever threatening litigation or taking the matter to court.  If the collaborative process terminates, both collaborative lawyers must bow out and hand the matter over to new litigation counsel. 

The Nuts and Bolts
The nuts and bolts of collaborative law are as follows:

• Each party is represented by a specially trained collaborative lawyer.
• These two collaborative lawyers are bound by the same professional ethical mandates that all lawyers must honor.
• The lawyers are retained pursuant to a “limited purpose retention.”  The sole purpose for which the lawyers are hired is to help their clients reach a reasonable, acceptable settlement of all issues, without litigating or threatening to litigate.
• The clients retain their right to terminate the collaborative divorce process and to take their issues to court, but the collaborative lawyers and other collaborative professionals cannot go with them.                   
• Information is shared fully and freely, on request.  Hence, suspicion and paranoia drop dramatically from what is normally experienced in litigation.

• All negotiations take place directly, face to face, in “fourway” settlement meetings.  The lawyers do not bargain as agents in the absence of their clients.  Interest-based negotiations are the preferred mode, not positional bargaining. 
• In addition to a collaborative lawyer, each party is encouraged to have a divorce coach to help the party constructively articulate emotions and key issues. 
• Instead of being kept in the dark and out of the loop, the clients’ children have a voice as well.  When couples choose a fully-staffed interdisciplinary collaborative divorce team, a neutral child development specialist is included.  This professional listens to the children’s chief concerns and helps the family to address them in a separate meeting with the coaches.
• Finally, a neutral financial consultant helps parties and lawyers gather the financial data, analyzes the family resources, and helps the couple to understand the size of the pie, offering creative solutions for consideration that can be far beyond a court’s power to order.2Plus there are no hidden finances or surprises and as a result many couples under stand their money situation better than before.   Instead of playing the litigation game of “hide the ball,” this consultant ensures that all financial questions are answered and all necessary information is brought to the table so that sound solutions can be devised.  With the financial consultant’s help, many couples do not just reach divorce agreements—they also understand their money situation far better than ever before.
• These professional helpers all work together to help a couple focus  not just on reaching a “quick fix” settlement agreement, but on laying a foundation for optimum communications and problem solving during the period of rapid changes a couple can expect after the legal divorce judgment has been entered.   They remain available as needed to help couples adjust their parenting plans in light of actual experience during the months and even years following entry of judgment.

Is the Collaborative Process Right For Me?

Couples whose marriages are in trouble face many difficult decisions, all of which have the potential for serious consequences.

Some of these may be:

·         Is this marriage worth saving?

·         Will the children be harmed?

·         What will be the ramifications of our divorce?

·         How deeply will it alter our life?

You may also feel:

·         Ambivalent about ending the relationship

·         You are the most hurt, misunderstood, damaged, or least powerful person in the relationship

·         Your partner is using the myriad of divorce counter plays as a way to stay married

·         Intimidated by your partner in addressing and resolving complex and difficult issues

·         We would have a great divorce if it weren't for the other party

·         The divorce is your last chance to destroy the other party

SOURCE: Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia

SOURCE FOR POST: Georgia Family Law Blog

Why should I choose the collaborative process?

To preserve family relationships is a simple answer to the question of “Why”.

According to clients who have engaged in the collaborative process, they have said the following:

“I would recommend the collaborative process for anyone that wants to maintain a loving environment for their children. You can get divorced, but your kids can still have a family”.

“Through the collaborative process we learned to work together in ways that will continue to benefit us and our children and with the help of the financial expert, we even saved money”.

“The collaborative process gave me the opportunity to control my own destiny“.

“My children were not forgotten in the divorce. This process insured they had a voice”.

“The partnership between the legal, financial and mental health professionals worked wonderfully for our entire family”.

SOURCE: Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia

SOURCE FOR POST: Georgia Family Law Blog

To preserve family relationships is a simple answer to the question of “Why”.

According to clients who have engaged in the collaborative process, they have said the following:

“I would recommend the collaborative process for anyone that wants to maintain a loving environment for their children. You can get divorced, but your kids can still have a family”.

“Through the collaborative process we learned to work together in ways that will continue to benefit us and our children and with the help of the financial expert, we even saved money”.

“The collaborative process gave me the opportunity to control my own destiny“.

“My children were not forgotten in the divorce. This process insured they had a voice”.

“The partnership between the legal, financial and mental health professionals worked wonderfully for our entire family”.

SOURCE: Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia

SOURCE FOR POST: Georgia Family Law Blog

Measuring the True Cost of Divorce

I have posted a number of articles on my Georgia Family Law Blog site on the topic of Collaborative Divorce Law. The following, about the intangible values in resolving a divorce case in a more respectful manner, is from an article by Bruce Derman, Ph.D., of The Coalition for Collaborative Divorce, from its site, NoCourtDivorce.com:

There are many things that go into the price of a divorce besides money and property. See if any of the following are costly for you by filling in the value of each item. At the end total the amounts and you will begin to see the true cost of your divorce.

What is it worth to truly celebrate your child's wedding together?	$_______
What is it worth to be able to co-parent your children?	$_______
What is it worth for your child to not end up in therapy as a result of your divorce?	$_______
What is it worth for your children not to be emotionally scarred from your divorce?	$_______
What is it worth to have your ex support your visions for your children?	$_______
What is it worth to be able to look in your adult son or daughters eyes knowing you ended their most important relationship with dignity and integrity?	$_______
What is it worth to be able to have your children grow up in a safe, respectful, non-abusive atmosphere?	$_______
What is it worth for your child to not have to take care of your emotionally following your divorce?	$_______
What is it worth to not drag your ex into your next relationship?	$_______
What is it worth to resolve your long-term concerns for your family?	$_______
What is it worth to not live under the threat of going back to court constantly?	$_______
What is it worth to support your highest self and not your lowest?	$_______
What is it worth to not have to continually obsess on the unsatisfactory experiences that occurred in your divorce?	$_______
What is it worth to feel that the decisions involved tin ending your marriage were not yours?	$_______
What is it worth to live your life from love, not hate?	$_______
TOTAL COST OF DIVORCE	$_______

Why Should I Choose the Collaborative Process Instead of Traditional Litigation?

Lower Cost
The collaborative process is generally less costly and time-consuming than litigation.

Client Involvement
The client is a vital part of the settlement team and have a greater sense of involvement in the decision making which affects their lives.

Supportive Approach
Each client is supported by their lawyer and coach in a manner that still allows the attorneys to work collaboratively with one another in resolving issues.

Less Stress
The process is much less fear and anxiety producing than utilizing Court proceedings or the threat of such proceedings. Everyone can focus on settlement without the imminent threat of "going to Court".

Win-Win Climate
The Collaborative process creates a positive climate that produces a more satisfactory outcome for both parties. The possibility actually exists for participants to create a climate that facilitates "win-win" settlements.

Speed
The speed of the collaborative process is governed by the parties rather than court calendars.

Creativity
The collaborative process encourages creative solutions in resolving issues.

Clients in Charge
The non-adversarial nature of the collaborative process shifts decision making into the hands of the clients where it belongs, rather than into the hands of a third party (the court).

SOURCE: Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia

SOURCE FOR POST: Georgia Family Law Blog

Lower Cost
The collaborative process is generally less costly and time-consuming than litigation.

Client Involvement
The client is a vital part of the settlement team and have a greater sense of involvement in the decision making which affects their lives.

Supportive Approach
Each client is supported by their lawyer and coach in a manner that still allows the attorneys to work collaboratively with one another in resolving issues.

Less Stress
The process is much less fear and anxiety producing than utilizing Court proceedings or the threat of such proceedings. Everyone can focus on settlement without the imminent threat of "going to Court".

Win-Win Climate
The Collaborative process creates a positive climate that produces a more satisfactory outcome for both parties. The possibility actually exists for participants to create a climate that facilitates "win-win" settlements.

Speed
The speed of the collaborative process is governed by the parties rather than court calendars.

Creativity
The collaborative process encourages creative solutions in resolving issues.

Clients in Charge
The non-adversarial nature of the collaborative process shifts decision making into the hands of the clients where it belongs, rather than into the hands of a third party (the court).

SOURCE: Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia

SOURCE FOR POST: Georgia Family Law Blog

Collaborative Divorce - Frequently Asked Questions

There has been a paradigm shift among some divorce and family law attorneys and related professionals (therapists and financial experts) to a form of practuce which is more respectful of the parties, and which promotes a cooperative relationship between the parties in their future dealings with each other, especially in cases involving children. I am a member of the Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia and the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals. I will post additional material in future paosts, but the following are some frequently asked questions and answers about the collaborative method of family law practice from the Georgia organization's website:

Q: What is the Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia?

A: In order to successfully negotiate the treacherous and painful path of divorce, collaborative advisors are needed- advisors who have expertise in specific areas of the divorce process, and who will guide families along the path so that at the end of the journey everyone remains whole. We are an alliance of divorce professionals from various disciplines who have expertise in specific areas of the divorce process. We recognize that the divorce process as it currently exists is divisive, adversarial, costly, and emotionally destructive to all family members. Our cooperative divorce approach can eliminate litigation, minimize divisiveness, reduce the adversarial component, decrease cost, and soften the emotional impact to families.

A: Collaborative family law focuses on all involved parties reaching a mutually agreed upon settlement of their disputes. The process results in valuable benefits. It creates a cooperative environment where communication remains open, which provides a setting where you can work with your spouse to meet your children's needs -- regardless of their ages. That helps set a tone for open communication and reduced conflict in the future.

It establishes a team instead of adversaries. Your lawyer supports you; your spouse's lawyer supports your spouse. But you all work together and, in doing so, retain control of the process.

In matters requiring expert opinions, both parties can jointly hire one independent consultant. That helps shorten the duration of the case and reduce the overall expense.

You and your spouse shape the agreements together -- which means you both are more likely to keep them. That diminishes the parental conflict the adversarial system generates and helps protect children from facing the anguish and divided loyalties that result.

You can schedule meetings without waiting for court dates. That means you generally spend less time and, as a result, less money to reach closure. It also means you reduce the fear and anxiety associated with court proceedings.

Your issues stay within the collaborative law setting. That gives you more privacy and greater confidentiality -- and less stress during an already stressful time.

Collaborative family law focuses on all involved parties reaching a mutually agreed upon settlement of their disputes. The process results in valuable benefits.

It creates a cooperative environment where communication remains open, which provides a setting where you can work with your spouse to meet your children's needs -- regardless of their ages. That helps set a tone for open communication and reduced conflict in the future.

It establishes a team instead of adversaries. Your lawyer supports you; your spouse's lawyer supports your spouse. But you all work together and, in doing so, retain control of the process.

In matters requiring expert opinions, both parties can jointly hire one independent consultant. That helps shorten the duration of the case and reduce the overall expense.

You and your spouse shape the agreements together -- which means you both are more likely to keep them. That diminishes the parental conflict the adversarial system generates and helps protect children from facing the anguish and divided loyalties that result.

You can schedule meetings without waiting for court dates. That means you generally spend less time and, as a result, less money to reach closure. It also means you reduce the fear and anxiety associated with court proceedings.

Your issues stay within the collaborative law setting. That gives you more privacy and greater confidentiality -- and less stress during an already stressful time.

Q: What Are the Benefits of Collaborative Family Law?