| Team Divorce: The Interdisciplinary Approach to Collaborative Law |
|
|
|
| Written by Administrator | |
|
In any collaborative divorce, the parties enter into an agreement not to go to court and instead to freely and voluntarily disclose information and endeavor to reach an agreement. The parties agreement also provides that their lawyers, divorce coaches and child and financial specialists, if either is made part of the collaborative process, cannot testify or participate in litigation if the parties terminate the collaborative process. The collaborative process is confidential and all team members sign an agreement to that effect. However, where other professionals are involved, the agreement waives privilege to the extent that the professionals may exchange, amongst themselves, information gathered from their meetings with the parties to further understanding of the parties and their children’s needs. Those who support the interdisciplinary approach believe that the inclusion of specialists aids the divorce process and can also be a cost-effective alternative to litigation. For instance, a divorce coach, as a trained therapist, can help the parties move past fear, anger and even retribution and focus on decision making and goal setting, reducing the number of hours the lawyers spend first listening to their clients vent and then finally moving on to discuss the legal issues. The outcome for couples using divorce coaches is a de-escalation of the conflict, which often facilitates an agreement concerning parenting and custody. Under the traditional divorce approach, a custody dispute leads to an evaluation of the parents and children, a costly process which provides the spouses with no new skills and often renders the parties more divisive. On the asset side of things, a neutral financial specialist can provide valuation information for both parties without the need for retaining two separate experts to provide contrasting opinions. But those who oppose or remain skeptical of the interdisciplinary approach raise the concern that the lack of confidentiality between clients and divorce coaches or child specialists may hinder open and honest communication. It is important to note here that a divorce coach does not operate in the role of a therapist, as discussed in a previous article. Neverthless, there is a concern that parties will hesitate to speak freely when they know that their thoughts can be discussed with the other professionals. Despite the questions concerning which collaborative approach works best, there is a growing trend in favor of divorce without litigation. The collaborative model capitalizes on the notion that divorce litigation costs much and fixes little, as most divorce cases which proceed to trial often wind up in further litigation down the road. It appears clear that some form of alternative dispute resolution is better for the parties and the family. The greatest advantage offered by the interdisciplinary model is that it allows divorcing couples to control the process by choosing to include those professionals who may be able to assist with their particular needs. Time will tell whether the interdisciplinary approach works, but most individuals agree that moving away from conflict and towards resolution is an important first step.
Lori Barkus, P.A.
|
