Collaborative Law is supposedly, the new trend for couples facing divorce. For those of you, who are not familiar with this process, please permit me to explain. The theory is that the husband and wife, who are facing divorce, have their own attorneys. The couple and their attorneys work toward a cooperative agreement, prior to going through the brutally heavy and expensive doors of divorce court.
I give my accolades to Stuart Webb of Minneapolis, who initiated this process in the 1990. Mr. Webb, in my opinion, is one of the few attorneys who actually cares about the clients and abhors the combat that takes place in divorce court. He tried to offer an alternative which, in a perfect world, would be encouraging.
In the Collaborative Law process, the husband and wife, together with their attorneys, select experts if needed, to assist in various aspects of the settlement. These experts might be psychologists, financial advisers, accountants, etc. The goal is to negotiate a settlement and satisfy the needs of each, as well as any children involved, more quickly. The hope is that the couple will spend less money and avoid being ravaged by the divorce system.
One of the many problems of the Collaborative Law concept, in my opinion is that, if the couple is unable to reach an agreement, their troubles are just beginning. Why? Well, for obvious reasons, this process requires that the couple cannot use same attorneys, to go with them to divorce court. They must begin at square one and the money spent on the Collaborative Law process is virtually flushed.
There are many advocates of this legal divorce option. Those who are in favor of this alternative prefer a means by which a divorcing couple can avoid a costly court fight. Here is the rub. How many attorneys REALLY want to involve themselves in a scenario where they will earn less money? Allegedly, there are groups of attorneys across the United States, who contend, that they favor this concept. For the most part, I don’t buy it. I do know several ethical and honest attorneys who truly care about the welfare of their clients but they don’t help them gratis and why should they?
I also have come in contact with far too many lawyers who seem to thrive on the bloody skirmish that occurs in divorce court. These manipulative and greedy attorneys are not unlike man eating sharks, during a feeding frenzy. They slash at the preexisting wounds of the husband and wife. With each strike at their opponent, they taste victory. They triumph, in their minds, is because they have multiplied their billable hours. The heart breaking part is that it is at the cost of the couple and their children. I am not speaking of a monetary cost although obviously, that is an enormous part. I am speaking about how these attorneys maim any chance that the couple will ever be able to have an amicable relationship after the final decree is reached. The wounds that are inflicted do not heal!
