ABOUT COLLABORATIVE FAMILY LAW

1. What is collaborative law?

• Collaborative law is a relatively new alternative for achieving a fair settlement in a separation or divorce. In collaborative law, both parties retain separate, specially trained lawyers, whose only job is to help them settle the case. If the process does not succeed, the lawyers must withdraw and cannot go on to represent their clients against the other party in court. All participants agree to work together respectfully, honestly, and in good faith to try to find “win-win” solutions to both parties' legitimate needs. Four creative minds work together to devise individualized settlement scenarios. Neither party can seek court intervention during the collaborative law process.

2. Is collaborative law the best choice for me?

• Collaborative law isn't for every client or even for every lawyer; but it is worth considering if some or all of these are true for you.

• You want a civilized resolution of the issue

• You would like to keep open the possibility of friendship with your spouse down the road.

• You and your spouse have a circle of friends or extended family in common that you both want to remain connected to.

• You and your spouse will be raising your children together and you want the best co-parenting relationship possible.

• You want to protect your children from the harm that can be associated with litigated divorce proceedings.

• You have ethical or spiritual beliefs that place a high value on taking personal responsibility for handling conflicts with integrity.

• You value privacy in your personal affairs and do not want details of your problems to be available in the public court record.

• You value control and autonomous decision making and do not want to hand over decisions about restructuring your financial and/or child rearing arrangement to a judge who knows nothing about you.

• You recognize the restricted range of outcomes and “rough justice” generally available in the public court system, and want a more creative and individualized range of choices available to you and your spouse.

• You understand that conflict resolution with integrity involves not only achieving your own goals, but finding a way to achieve the reasonable goals of the other person.

• You and your spouse agree to commit your intelligence and energy toward constructive problem solving rather than toward recriminations or revenge. In other words, you want to focus on the future rather than to fix blame for the past.

3. How does collaborative law differ from the conventional route to separation or divorce?

• In Collaborative law, there are strong incentives to reach a settlement. All participants in the process work respectfully and creatively to meet the legitimate needs of both sides. No tactics or threats are used to gain an advantage. Simply said, if you work to meet the needs of the other party, he/she will work to meet your needs. This is what we mean by a “win-win” situation.

• The quality of a settlement reached where there can be no court proceedings or even the threat of court, is substantially different from a settlement negotiated under conditions of tension and anxiety. An agreement made under pressure can later lead to second thoughts and regrets. Rarely does anyone claim to have come out ahead in a conventional divorce settlement.

• Nothing could contrast more with this process than a collaboratively reached settlement. The collaborative model is quicker, less expensive, more creative, less stressful and generally more satisfying, because both sides are committed to making the plan work.

4. How much will the collaborative law cost me?

• Collaborative lawyers generally charge for their services by the hour as do conventional matrimonial lawyers. Rates will vary from law firm to law firm. However, what can be said with confidence, is that this form of settlement is consistently efficient and economical as compared to the traditional court-based alternative. A rule of thumb is that collaborative law representation will cost between one-half and one-third as much as being represented in the conventional court based model.