Wouldn’t it be great if families could complete their divorce in a conference room rather than a courtroom? That’s the thinking behind the Collaborative Process and what makes the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota so helpful to divorce professionals and divorcing families. Because of TV shows and just our general culture of “fighting” for our rights, we often think that we have to spend endless amounts of money and fight in court to get a divorce, but that simply isn’t true. In the Collaborative Process, we help families reach agreements without ever setting foot in a courtroom. The Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota (CLI) trains professionals in areas of law, finances, relationships and mental health to work with families outside of court to reach durable and understandable divorce agreements that work for their families. Law school is focused on training attorneys for inside the courtroom. That’s why we need CLI to train attorneys and other divorce professionals to help clients outside the courtroom. This is a major paradigm shift for the legal profession, but it shouldn’t be so surprising that this is the help and advice that families need and want. Because, let’s be honest, who really wants to go to court?
If you want a respectful, affordable and uncontested divorce without breaking the bank, you’ll want to consider a Collaborative Divorce. Do you have a reasonable level of trust and ability to work together with your spous if you have the help of professionals? Does your family makes $60,000 or less per year? If so, then you should apply for the Sliding Scale Fee Program of the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota. One of the most frustrating topics when thinking about divorce is “How much will this cost?” Thankfully, when you come to agreements in our Sliding Scale Fee Collaborative Divorce program you will almost certainly pay a fraction of what you would pay with any other professionals charging full price for their divorce services. Collaborative Divorce saves you money. How is that? First, we apply best practices to help you make the most of the time each professional spends working on your case. We think of this as using the right tool for each step of your divorce. Each of you will have your own attorney for legal adivce and advocacy, but you will do most of your work with specialized mediators to make efficient progress. This makes the process less polarizing and more focused on finding win-win solutions that meet both spouse’s needs as best as possible under the circumstances. Since our professionals don’t have to worry about fighting in court on your case, they can focus on helping you find the best solutions. They don’t waste time drafting time-consuming, hurtful and wasteful affidavits and other documents for contested court hearings for clients who are fighting. Second, in the Collaborative Divorce Sliding Scale Fee Program each professional works at a significantly reduced hourly rate. If your family makes $60,000 or less per year, then our Sliding Fee Scale provides that each professional will help you at a significantly reduced hourly rate (often a fraction of their normal hourly rates). For example, outside of the Sliding Scale Fee program, an attorney in the Minneapolis area will typically charge around $250-$350 per hour. In our program, the highest hourly rate is only $60 per hour. Our attorneys and mediators do not go to court in this program. They are here to help you get everything done in your divorce without setting foot in a courtroom. That frees them up to provide an exceptional Collaborative Divorce process to clients. There isn’t any other program like this in Minnesota. What makes this program different? There are only a few sliding scale fee attorney programs and they only provide one attorney on a sliding scale fee. There are no other programs that provide each spouse with a sliding scale fee attorney and specialized mediators to work with the couple on financial and parenting schedule issues, all in one package. In summary, this Sliding Scale Fee program provides a team of professionals so that we can apply the right professional for each step in the uncontested divorce process. Who is this program designed for? We can help couples who have income within our sliding fee scale and who are willing to pay a reduced hourly rate. This is not a pro bono program with free attorneys. It is significantly less expensive but it is not free. Also, you will need to be willing and able to communicate with your spouse and work together with mediators to resolve your financial and parenting time issues in your divorce, with the help of your own attorneys who will be assigned as part of this program. Who will you be working with? You will be working with attorneys, mediators and other professionals who are members of the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota who volunteer to take part in this program and accept a lower hourly rate for these cases. What’s the first step? What should I do next? The first step is for one spouse to submit a Sliding Scale Fees Intake Form (found on the Sliding Scale Fee page of our website). Then the Sliding Scale Fee Committee will reach out to you within a few days to help decide if your case is a good fit for the program and what you can do next to move the process forward.
Ask anyone who has ever gone through a divorce whether they have recommendations for how the process could have gone better and I bet they would have a list of ideas. They would likely identify a need for their legal counsel to have communicated more frequently with them and to have helped more to educate them about their options at each step of the process. They would likely say they worried that their legal counsel had a perverse incentive to provide more services (more hours of billable work) seemingly regardless of the effectiveness of those services because they billed by the hour and the client didn’t see or understand much of the work that the attorney was doing. Many professions, including law and medicine, are rethinking the most basic aspects of the services they provide and how they provide them and are defining new ways of doing things. I was reminded of this when reading an article in the New York Times titled When Medicine is Futile, which addressed the issue of whether medical providers are sometimes (or even as a matter of standard office policy) over-treating patients during end-of-life medical care. The article brought up the issue of whether medical providers—in the name of patient protection and patient care—may actually be working against the patient’s best interests (even affirmatively harming patients) by administering an inappropriately excessive—and futile—list of medical interventions. The article references a new report by the Institute of Medicine titled Dying in America: Improving Quality and Honoring Individual Preferences Near the End of Life (2014). Some of the recommendations for improved care include increased provider-patient communication, education of medical providers in alternatives such as palliative care, increased patient planning and decision making, and different payment structures that may better align with patient care quality more than just the quantity of the services provided. The gist of the recommendations to improve patient care relate mostly to increased communication, increased education of providers and patients about alternative options, and creating systemic incentives to reward quality patient care over simply providing a high quantity of billable services. Similar to a hospital emergency room, courtrooms offer intensive and expensive services. In the court system, attorneys rack up immense billable hours based on providing clients with a large quantity of paperwork to submit to the court. In the courtroom, attorney-client communication, client education about their options for resolution and client power to make their own decisions can be lacking. The legal system, like the medical system, is going through a paradigm shift where legal service providers are rethinking even the most basic aspects of the services they provide and how they provide them and are finding new ways of doing things. Collaborative Practice providers implement best practices similar to those recommended for the medical profession referenced in the report mentioned above, only in the area of legal representation instead of medical care. In the Collaborative process, there is an increased focus on the quality, rather than just the quantity, of legal services. This change in focus is inherent in the agreement of the clients and attorneys that they will not go to court to resolve their conflict as part of the Collaborative process. In the Collaborative model, clients meet with a team of professionals to share information, learn about alternatives that might not have been considered, and evaluate their options in an open discussion. This provides clients with increased knowledge about their options, increased communication with professionals, and true decision-making authority.
People who are facing divorce after many years of marriage, or just later in life, face unique challenges. They are less connected by the need to provide daily care and financial support for their children. They also may be facing other life changes such as upcoming retirement or increasing health concerns (and costs!) as they age. Sometimes this has been called The Graying of Divorce. According to Mayoclinic.org, “Empty nest syndrome isn’t a clinical diagnosis. Instead, empty nest syndrome is a phenomenon in which parents experience feelings of sadness and loss when the last child leaves home.” It is a life transition where spouses can take a step back and look at how their lives are progressing. As part of this process of reflection, they may say to themselves: “I’ve put up with this long enough!” Alternatively, it might be a time when couples take advantage of having more time to explore new interests and activities to share together. A process that can be helpful to those considering divorce or separation is called Discernment Counseling. Discernment Counseling is different than regular couples counseling because–instead of just focusing on helping the marriage relationship–it focuses on deciding whether the marriage should be worked on or whether divorce or separation should be pursued. The University of Minnesota has a Discernment Counseling project has a helpful website that you may want to visit if you want to learn more about Discernment Counseling. If divorce is the path chosen, Collaborative Divorce is often a perfect option as it can help increase communication and mutual respect to the benefit of both spouses (and grown children!). A neutral financial professional can analyze retirement cash flow and budgets, including tax implications of withdrawing retirement funds. Empty Nest divorces have their own unique challenges. They also are an opportune time to be able to enter a process that the older divorcing couple can be proud of in creating a respectful transition to separate living and ending of their marriage.
Why are less and less couples getting married? Is it because their parent’s marriages failed? Is it because they don’t see any benefit to marriage? Is it because every wedding appears to be a $20,000 extravagant country club affair? Maybe, as was written in a recent New York Times article, “…marriage has gone from being a way that people pulled their lives together to something they agree to once they have already done that independently.” There are several problems with this way of thinking. One is that children don’t wait for marriage. More and more children are born outside of marriage. This is a problem if the parents separate without ever marrying, because then (at least in Minnesota) the father has no enforceable legal rights to parenting time until he spends a significant amount of time and money to get a judge to order that he can have parenting time with the child. This is true regardless of whether the father has raised the child jointly with the mother since the child’s birth. This is a bad deal for both the father and the child as it typically significantly interrupts their relationship and causes unwarranted stress on the child. Another reason is that marriage is a financial life jacket in terms of protections for the lower earning spouse and a fair division of the assets accumulated during the marriage. This is one reason same-sex couples had been yearning for the protection of marriage until it became the law in Minnesota in 2013. Same-sex couples were not entitled to a fair division of the house or their partner’s retirement account, without access to the institution of marriage. Because it is risky financially to accumulate assets together before marriage and because marriage helps protect the father-child relationship for the benefit of child, it is risky business to delay marriage if you are having a child together or are otherwise in a committed relationship.
Remember that old rhyme from childhood, “First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes a baby in a baby carriage”? Some things are just part of life and are simply inevitable. People will fall in love. People will join together in relationships. These are all positive, great things. Unfortunately, people—whether gay or straight—all have struggles in life and relationships. Inevitably, when Minnesota granted same-sex couples the right to marry, it was inevitable that same-sex divorces would happen, just as opposite-sex divorces happen. Gay couples who married before marriage was legal in Minnesota—whether they became married in another state or, because Minnesota borders with Canada, often in another country—may now face the need to obtain a divorce. If a gay couple separates and does not intend to share their lives together going forward, they should strongly consider finalizing their separation by obtaining a legal divorce in Minnesota. I have run into Minnesota gay couples who had no idea that they are now legally married. This viewpoint may be especially common for those couples who married in Canada years ago and then separated long before marriage was legal in Minnesota. For better or worse (pun intended), those couples continue to be married and need to divorce in order to clear up the division of their marital assets and debts. If they have children in common by adoption they need to determine their rights and responsibilities as to those children. Even if there is a non-joint child, which is common in same-sex marriages, the “non-parent” may be able to establish legally enforceable rights to visitation because of their significant connection with that child. Again, this is even though they are not legally “their” child. Because marriage creates an interest in real property (houses, etc.), the residence that the couple lived in or any other land and any mortgages (and any other debts) need to be addressed in the divorce. Before same-sex marriage was legal in Minnesota, it was difficult for same-sex couples to form legally enforceable rights and responsibilities related to a committed relationship. Perhaps that is why some same-sex couples have a hard time believing that they now must use the legal system to fully end their marriage relationship. By the way, I understand that Brangelina (Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, for those who don’t follow popular culture!) had declared they wouldn’t get married until same sex couples everywhere could get married…but apparently they couldn’t wait, because they were recently married. Well, my theory is that they had to wait until Minnesota made same-sex marriage legal (it just took a year to plan the wedding)! Without getting divorced, a gay couple may find out later, to their surprise, that one of the pair is making a claim to part of the other’s retirement account or is holding up the sale or transfer of property that was owned during the marriage, because simply living separately doesn’t resolve all these issues. I expect that many same-sex couples will be unpleasantly surprised later in life that when they hear that they have to share their retirement with a partner from long ago that they never intended to share their retirement account with. Or, an inheritance may be held up–or never received as expected by a son or daughter–because of a claim for all or a share of the estate of a deceased same-sex spouse. These are topics that are addressed well in the Collaborative Process because they can be approached from a perspective of respect and honoring of the love that the couple previously shared, while laying a foundation for future separate lives. Now that same-sex marriage is legal Minnesota, same-sex couples may likely find that the Collaborative Divorce process provides the proper legal, financial and other professional supports needed for disentangling the various legal rights and responsibilities incident to ending their legal marriage.
This article sprouted from a series of brainstorming meetings that I recently had with fellow Collaborative Attorney Bruce Peck. We decided to meet for coffee from time to time to discuss and share ideas for writing about any alternative topic that may come to mind that would be different from the usual topic of divorce. One reason people seek a divorce (in Minnesota, what we call Dissolution of Marriage) is because they start to think that they cannot trust their spouse financially. So they feel that unless they divorce their spouse, they will face a mountain of debt because of the careless way their spouse handles money. If you are feeling that way, you may be experiencing something like the following circumstances. Do you view your spouse as untrustworthy with money? Is your spouse spending too much money? Does your spouse gamble too much? Do you worry that your spouse will take on significant debt without your knowledge or consent? Does your spouse make terrible financial decisions? These financial concerns often lead to divorce because one spouse feels that the financial issues in their marriage are out of control and they cannot go on that way and have no other choice. One spouse feels that they can’t take on the financial risks involved in staying married and that divorce is the only option to save themselves from financial ruin. In these circumstances, divorce is not the only potential option you should consider. One alternative to divorce is a “legal separation”. In Minnesota, a legal separation may be granted by a court when the court determines that “one or both parties need a legal separation.” Arguably, avoiding financial ruin is a good reason to need a legal separation. This is because a “legal separation is a court determination of the rights and responsibilities of a husband and wife arising out of the marital relationship.” Further, a “decree of legal separation does not terminate the marital status of the parties.” In other words, a legal separation is everything a divorce is, without calling it a divorce and without actually divorcing the couple. People who have a legal separation in Minnesota are actually still married to each other. So, if you want to stay married, but determine all the rights and responsibilities of you and your spouse in a court order, just like in a divorce but without divorcing, then you might be interested in a legal separation instead of a divorce. In my experience, legal separations in Minnesota are quite rare. Usually, if a couple wants to separate their financial lives by determining their rights and responsibilities, they also want to be free to marry someone else if they decide to do that in the future. That rules out legal separation because if you are still married, you can’t get married to someone else. Even if a spouse has no intention of ever marrying again, they typically do not want to be married to their current spouse. With a legal separation, a person is still married and so they cannot marry someone else. I suspect that the only reason that there is such a thing as legal separation in Minnesota is that there have historically been people whose religious beliefs prevented them from even considering divorce. While many people still have an aversion to divorcing, I haven’t run across many people recently who still hold divorce as completely inconsistent with their religious views. The only two reasons that I can think of to get a legal separation are 1) you want to get a divorce, but your religious beliefs don’t allow you to divorce, or 2) you want to stay married as long as you can separate your financed from your spouse so that financial issues don’t come in between you and your spouse. There are some possible negative consequences and limitations of a legal separation. One is that your health insurance eligibility may be affected. Another may be the issue of how your change in marital status may affect your taxes. Another is that any joint accounts you have with your spouse are likely still at risk. There are additional issues to consider related to bankruptcy and debt collection. This is not meant to be an exhaustive treatment of all the positive and negative aspects of legal separation, but this gives you a sense for the potential issues to consider in making your decision. In order to choose legal separation over divorce, you should consult with a bankruptcy attorney, a family law attorney and a tax accountant and think through your options thoroughly before making a decision. The Collaborative process is ideal for helping couples talk through and make these decisions with the help of legal (and other professional) advice readily available to both spouses. An alternative to legal separation, without going through with a divorce, is to complete a postnuptial agreement. This is like a prenuptial agreement (which is commonly referred to as a “prenup”), but a postnuptial agreement is signed after the couple is married (rather than before marriage). It is an agreement about the financial rights and responsibilities of the couple if they ever separate. This is a whole separate topic and is too large for this article. I’ll write more on the topic of postnuptial agreements in another blog post soon!
Many years ago when I had recently moved and was looking for a new dentist, I simply looked through the phone book and found a dentist that was located nearby and set up an appointment. Later, when I arrived at the dentist’s office for my appointment, the receptionist asked how I had heard of them and I responded, “I just found you in the phone book”. She said “Oh, that’s too bad. That’s a risky way to find a good dentist.” I often remember that memory when potential clients come to my office in Northfield, Minnesota to have a free initial consultation. I think, “Did they just find me in the phone book?” I ask potential clients how they have heard of me and they often respond that they were referred by their therapist or their attorney (who may not practice Family Law or Mediation). Sometimes they say that they found me in the phone book or through my website or they simply say they found me “online”. I think to myself, “That’s too bad. That’s a risky way to find a good attorney or mediator.” I don’t actually say that to them, but that’s what I’m thinking. If I were in their shoes and was looking for an attorney, I would ask a therapist or other local attorneys for their recommendations. Often these professionals have personal relationships with various attorneys in the community and even if they don’t have a specific recommendation they would know who would be able to point you in the right direction. When looking for an attorney, be aware that legal “ranking” of attorneys is a dark art. When I get emails or letters asking me to “rank” other attorneys, I simply delete the email or recycle the letter. I don’t trust these ranking systems and neither should you. I would look for professionals who focus their practice in Family Law. Like any other profession, people get really good at what they do often. So, I figure it’s more likely that an attorney who does a lot of Family Law will be more likely to be effective and efficient in that area of law. I would look for someone who has training, and who keeps up their continuing education requirements, in mediation. I say this because mediation training helps people see all sides of a disagreement and helps give professionals the tools to effectively diffuse conflict and work towards constructive solutions. You want effective conflict resolution to be a focus of every professional in your case. Beware of attorneys that tell you that you “deserve” a certain outcome or that assures you that a court would view your case a certain way. I’ve been to court many times where the spouses attorney has promised their client that the judge would rule a certain way, only to have the judge decide the case in a totally different way. Then I wonder what those attorneys tell their clients afterward about why their guarantees were wrong in the end. I specifically tell clients that there are no guarantees when it comes to court. I do this because I’m in court for over 200 court hearings a year and, because of that extensive court experience, I know that I can’t fully predict what the judge will do. So, never trust an attorney who tells you that a certain judge always rules a certain way or assures you that a court will view your case a certain way. A good place to start looking for a Collaborative Professional is on the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota website. There you can search by geographic area and by profession. If your primary concern is about mental health or how to approach your partner about using the Collaborative process, you may want to search for and speak with a “Coach”. A Coach is a mental health professional who has training in the divorce process and mediation and can help you understand your options. If your primary concern is financial, you may want to search for an speak with a “Financial Professional”. They can help you understand how financial issues can be understood and resolved. If your primary concern is your children, you may want to search for a “Child Specialist”. They are trained mental health professionals who have special experience working with kids and families and they can help you understand how to speak with your children about what is happening and how you and your partner can be there for your children during this difficult time. If you are concerned about any or all of these issues you can always speak with an attorney about the legal issues involved and they can help you understand how these other professionals can help you.
As a Collaborative Attorney, this sort of thing makes me proud to be a Member of the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota (CLI). I’m really excited to share that this May, CLI is hosting a four-day, international symposium to explore love and forgiveness in Collaborative Practice. The event is titled “Divorce: What’s Love Got to do With it?” This event, to my knowledge, isn’t for people experiencing divorce. It’s for professionals who help people that are going through a divorce. Now, why you may ask is this important? Well, I think it’s really cool that a group of dedicated professionals is really thinking about how to make things better for divorcing families and families experiencing other life-events that we include under the label Family Law. A grant from The Fetzer Institute is making it possible. You’ll want to check out their website; it’s really cool. Here is a sample of their take on love and forgiveness in the world:
We believe in the transformative power of love, love that protects us in our vulnerability while also impelling us to tend to the needs of others. We believe that forgiveness can also be transformative, a process that further extends the healing power of love. We accept that these forces have power: power to heal, and power to transform even the most difficult, troubled situation into something that is generative, affirming, and life-giving. In a world that seems dominated by aggression and separation, we are part of a broad and deep yearning for something different.I recently submitted my application to be a part of the host committee and to help brainstorm after the symposium is all done as part of the implementation committee to figure out ways to incorporate love and forgiveness into Collaborative Practice on a local and practical level. To learn how love and forgiveness can play a part in your family, contact Arnold Law and Mediation or locate another Collaborative Professional.
Collaborative Attorney Carl Arnold had the opportunity to speak with experienced Neutral Child Specialist Deborah Clemmensen. Carl Arnold asked Deborah Clemmensen about her role as a Neutral Child Specialist and the conversation was recorded. The audio and the the transcript of the interview are available below. Interview with Deborah Clemmensen about the role of a Neutral Child Specialist. Begin transcript: My name is Carl Arnold, with Arnold Law and Mediation. I’m a Minnesota family law attorney and mediator and I’m here with Deborah Clemmensen. She’s a licensed psychologist and neutral child specialist. Carl: Hi Deborah. Deborah: Hi Carl. Carl: So, we’re here to talk with Deborah today about being a neutral child specialist and her services in that regard. Why don’t you tell us a little bit about your background in working with kids. Deborah: I’m happy to. I’ve been a licensed psychologist since the late ’70’s and I’ve worked in schools and community mental health centers…and for the last 11 years, I’ve provided neutral child specialist services to help families have a child-inclusive, respectful process to developing parenting plans when they’re going through a divorce or breakup. It’s a very satisfying type of work. Carl: Well, let’s get right to it and say what is a neutral child specialist? How do you define that and what do you do? Deborah: Good question and I’ll tell you how I explain it to new clients and sometimes to the kids that I work with. Neutral means that I never appear in court, that I have the capacity to work with people in problem solving and interest based negotiation without having to be in court or testifying or doing any of the things that are involved with the court process. Child specialist means that I have a chance to work with everyone in the family and find out the point of view of all the folks who, not elders and pets, of course, but all the points of view of children and parents to understand what would be the most developmentally appropriate resolution for parents moving forward after their divorce or breakup. Carl: What is the benefit of this service compared to other ways that a family may go through a divorce or separation process? Deborah: Well, I am just a part of the divorce. I’m the parenting plan part of a divorce, so I can help people to create a road map for how they’re going to move forward as co-parents without having to be in any sort of adversarial process. I think the neutrality is a big help. We can get right down to business and problem solve and think about the developmental needs of children in the family. I think having it be child-inclusive means that kids get some support during a very difficult time. Divorce or breakup is a crisis for a family and to be able to provide kids with an opportunity to share their point of view, someone who’s listening, and to know that that’s going to be part of problem solving that their parents will do. Their parents will hear what I’ve learned from the kids. I think it helps kids to feel a little bit safer moving forward so that strategic support is very important. And I think that having a neutral look at what are the ages and stages of the kids and what do they have to say about how this could work best for them moving forward is invaluable. I have learned a ton from the kids that I’m working with. Carl: What would be a typical step-by-step part of the process? How does it start? When does it start? What’s the first step and so on? Deborah: Good question. I believe that having a child specialist on board from the very beginning can be helpful because we anchor the work in the developmental needs of the kids and what’s best for the family system. I like to work with parents from the very beginning. Many parents come to me with the question of how do I talk to my children, how to we talk to our children about what’s going to be happening to our family. I love to help parents create developmentally appropriate “we” statements that they can share with the kids to start that journey. My process begins with a joint meeting with parents and it’s focused on their kids, getting developmental histories, understanding what the parents’ concerns are moving forward and from that point, it sort of branches off based on the ages and stages of the kids. If the kids are in preschool, we might have a joint family playroom meeting just so I get to know the kids, experience them firsthand and provide that kind of support. We may, at that meeting, talk about what’s happening in the family and give them some grounding. I tell parents to describe me as the helper advocate for kids. If kids are school aged and older, then I do have a structured process: two meetings, one with the siblings together and one with each child independently and we do structured activities to help keep them at the center and out of the middle, to understand how they perceive family roles and functions. What are their hopes? What are their fears? How can we best be responsive? From that point, I do a feedback with parents. At that juncture, parents can decide if they would like to continue to work with me as a neutral child specialist to develop a parenting plan, which allows them to continue to think of themselves as parents making decisions, rather than people in a custody battle. We don’t use those labels. We talk in a different language that’s more family friendly. Carl: So when people come to you, are they in the out-of-court processes like mediation or collaborative divorce or are they in court? How would you describe to people in what way do you relate to those processes? Deborah: That’s another really good question. I would say the majority of the work I do is with collaborative teams. Collaborative being a type of alternative dispute resolution process that’s all outside of the court but works with teams of professionals – two attorneys, a neutral coach, a neutral financial person and a neutral child specialist – to all bring our skills to a very systematic and efficient way to help parents and families through this process. Some of my cases, though, come from other routes. I’ve worked with mediators in a team to do a child inclusive process for the parenting plan and I’ve worked with non-collaborative attorneys who believe, along with their clients, that this part of the divorce or the breakup really belongs outside of court, that if it can be done in a neutral setting, that that will set the stage for more positive co-parenting moving forward. Carl: Where can people find out more information about your services for a neutral child specialist? Deborah: I have a website. It’s www.deborahclemmensen.com and I go through that process in some detail so parents are prepared for what to expect coming in. I also have a web page on the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota website. That’s www.collaborativelaw.org. On that website, there are lists of professionals. I’m not the only person doing neutral child specialist work, so if folks were looking for someone in a particular geographic location, that would be an excellent resource to find a neutral child specialist. Carl: Thanks a lot, Deborah. I appreciate having this conversation. Deborah: It’s totally been my pleasure, Carl, thank you. Carl: This has been Deborah Clemmensen, Licensed Psychologist and Neutral Child Specialist, and my name is Carl Arnold of Arnold Law and Mediation.