Posted on

Emily and Daniel were in love. Their love story had once been the envy of the neighborhood—a whirlwind romance that blossomed into a marriage filled with laughter, shared dreams, and whispered secrets. But as the years went by, cracks appeared in their fairy tale. After years of therapy, divorce was agreed upon as the next step.

At a local coffee shop, Emily consulted with Susan, an attorney who specialized in collaborative divorce, a path less traveled but one that promised healing rather than heartache.

“Emily,” Susan began, “I know this is tough. But have you considered a collaborative divorce?”

Emily sipped her latte, her eyes tracing the steam rising from the cup. “What’s that?”

Susan leaned in, her voice soft. “It’s a different approach. Instead of battling it out in court, we assemble a team—a dream team, if you will.”

Emily raised an eyebrow. “A dream team?”

“Yes,” Susan said. “Picture this: You, Daniel, and your respective attorneys. But that’s not all. We also bring in a neutral facilitator—a wise soul who guides conversations and ensures emotions don’t derail the process. And a financial expert—they’re like wizards with spreadsheets, helping us untangle the financial knots.”

Emily’s curiosity piqued. “And what’s the goal?”

“To find common ground,” Susan replied. “We sit around a table, not a courtroom. We talk, we listen, and we create solutions together. No winners or losers—just a fair resolution.”

Meanwhile, across town, Daniel met with his attorney, Ethan, who had an established divorce litigation practice. The fluorescent lights buzzed overhead, casting shadows on the carpet.

“Daniel,” Ethan said, adjusting his tie, “we’re going to court. It’s the way things are done.  We serve her, file the papers and start the process of hearings.”

“But what about Emily?” Daniel asked. “We used to love each other. Can’t we find a better way?”

Ethan sighed. “This is how it works with divorce.  We’ll request documents, hold depositions as needed, and present evidence. It’s a battle my friend.”

Daniel remembered the nights he’d held Emily as she cried. He wanted closure, not combat. Maybe Susan’s dream team was worth exploring.

Back at the coffee shop, Susan continued her pitch. “Emily, collaborative divorce is cost-effective. No endless court appearances, no billable hours stacking up. Plus, it’s faster.”

“But what if Daniel refuses?” Emily asked.

Susan smiled. “We’ll encourage him. And if he agrees, we’ll craft a customized settlement—one that considers your needs and the kids’ well-being.”

Back in Ethan’s office, Ethan faced Daniel. “We’ll fight for your rights, Daniel.”

Daniel glanced at Ethan’s stern face. He thought of Emily, their shared memories, and the pain they both carried. Maybe there was another way.

Emily and Daniel stood at the crossroads, their hearts heavy with choices.

The Collaborative Path:

  • A team of allies.
  • Solutions born from dialogue.
  • Healing over hurting.

The Traditional Path:

  • Adversaries in court.
  • Evidence and arguments.
  • Winners and losers.

As the sun dipped below the horizon, Emily and Daniel made their decision. They chose the dream team—the path of collaboration. And in that choice, they found not just a divorce, but a chance to rewrite their story.

When life hands you a divorce, consider the roads less traveled. Sometimes, the dream team can turn heartbreak into hope.

Disclaimer: The characters and events in this story are fictional. Any resemblance to real persons or situations is purely coincidental.

Note: This story is a creative representation of collaborative and traditional divorce. Seek legal advice from a professional attorney for personalized guidance.

This story was created in part with the use of artificial intelligence and in part by attorney Angela Heart.

Angela Heart | Attorney
Angela is a collaborative family law attorney at Heart Law, LLC. Her mission is to enable and empower divorcing couples to have a smooth transition that is family focused during a life changing event. To find more information about Heart Law go to www.heartlaw.net.

Heart Law, LLC
651-337-1333 | angela@heartlaw.net
www.heartlaw.net

 

 

Posted on

According to the authors of Influencer: The New Science of Leading Change (Joseph Grenny et al, 2013), there are 6 sources of influence: personal motivation, personal ability, social motivation, social ability, structural motivation, and structural ability.

I will explore these sources of influence as they relate to vital behaviors for co-parenting with less stress and more peace.

  1. Personal Motivation – Why does someone want to do something? Does it make them feel better? Many people experience overwhelming stress in high conflict co-parenting. This kind of chronic stress impacts health, work, and relationships. It definitely feels better to have less stress in one’s life!
  2. Personal Ability – Can they do it? Do they have to the skills? Communication and conflict resolution skills taught in our monthly co-parenting webinars can make communication less triggering between parents and provide new ways to successfully defuse conflict. We encourage parents to focus on working together to raise whole, healthy, happy children. Being in one’s own integrity with regard to respecting the child’s other parent and honoring one’s word to respect the parenting time schedule (which includes being proactive to communicate when a commitment can’t be met – running late at a meeting at work, or weather / or traffic interfere) helps parenting time transitions go more smoothly.
  3. Social Motivation – What are your peers doing? Are they fighting with their children’s other parent or are they getting along? In many northern European countries, it is the cultural norm that parents share parenting after separation or divorce. There is also a higher percentage of people having children who were never married. Though if they split up, they still commit to raising their children together.
  4. Social Ability is the way we enable these vital behaviors. In the area of co-parenting, this is where peer to peer groups can be so valuable. When people see other parents successfully navigating daily co-parenting, they are motivated to do what these others are doing. Children do not want to be caught in the middle of their parents’ conflict. That actually feels terrible for children. Some get aggressive and bully others because they themselves are hurting. Some become withdrawn and drop out of activities they used to enjoy with friends. Others turn their hurt inward and get into cutting, or experience eating disorders. It’s important that court-ordered therapy to address the child’s situation also include the parents so that family dynamics can be addressed and tools provided to the parents to improve communication and resolve conflicts.
  5. Structural Motivation – CLI is working to share collaborative practices across Minnesota so that more families can benefit from having less costly, less difficult separations. Collaborative services are available in all areas to support families – family law, mediation, finance, therapy, and on-going support through parent coaching to enable Dads & Moms to co-parent with less stress and more peace. This collaborative approach reduces post-divorce conflict.
  6. Structural Ability – Do you have the tools to SUCCEED with co-parenting?a. First and foremost, sign a Commitment to Co-parenting at the time of separation/divorce. As parents, it’s in your hands – you and the other parent of your children – to move beyond the bitterness of your separation or divorce and find the courage to mutually support your children in maintaining healthy, loving relationships with BOTH parents and the children’s entire extended family.

Here’s some sample language you can use:
Commitment to Care – I am committed to the long-term well-being of our children. I understand that continued conflict with my ex-spouse/partner is destructive. I will agree to reasonable boundaries and interact with our children’s other parent in a respectful business-like manner so that we can BOTH continue to love our children and remain actively involved in their lives. While our intimate, romantic relationship has ended, co-parenting is forever.

If there isn’t a commitment by both parents, what’s getting in the way? Recognize mental health issues, substance abuse, and domestic violence. Provide treatment and support during recovery.

Otherwise look at social motivation – What are your peers doing? It’s time to create a NEW cultural norm of Shared Parenting! The best way to have the court order Shared Parenting is to have been sharing parenting all along since the day the children were born.

b. Another vital behavior for successful co-parenting is that information is shared. BOTH parents receive communications about schedules, appointments, practices, and events from schools, doctors, therapists, youth directors, and sports coaches. Know a provider or organization that isn’t set up to easily share information with both parents? Let CLI know if you would like to participate in our outreach across Minnesota.

Peaceful co-parenting is possible and our kids are worth it!

 

Adina Lebowitz, MA is a family mediator, parenting educator, and wellness coach. Her primary goal is to help families find less stress and more peace in their co-parenting. She supports parents as they are adjusting to a new separation or divorce, and continues to support them as co-parents whether they are facing day to day parenting challenges, or dealing with the impacts of stress on their lives. She is available to mediate bigger issues that impact their parenting plans like a move, job change, new relationship, or a child’s health challenge.

EHTC Family Mediation | Elan Health Twin Cities LLC
Phone: 612-499-8418
Email: adina@elanhealthtc.org
Website: https://www.elanhealthtc.org/mediation
Facebook: Co-parenting with Less Stress and More Peace https://www.facebook.com/groups/coparentingmorepeace

Posted on

In collaborative dissolution cases, this is a common objection when meeting for the first time with clients.  Another variation is, “I can be a terrific co-parent, just not with my spouse.”  I am often stymied by this reaction.  Of course, I know nothing about the other spouse except the views of my potential client.

My initial response is to acquiesce and to reject the collaborative approach.  But depending on the circumstances, both spouses bear the risk of escalating litigation.

A better approach is to persuade the spouse in my office of the advantages of the collaborative model, especially if the couple has trouble communicating.  They may have misperceived the resistance of the other spouse.  I consider the context.  The couple has typically been working toward a break-up for a long time.  They have often taken strong positions based upon strained communications.  I encourage the spouse to review the open communications features described in the Participation Agreement.

For example, in four-way meetings with clients and attorneys, both spouses can be safely heard without the risk that their words could later be regretted.  In addition, the spouses themselves can set the pace of the process rather than be bound by judicial deadlines.  This may be persuasive in cases where one spouse is more eager to end the marriage.  Resolution is often facilitated when some issues are allowed to “percolate.”

Another advantage of the collaborative process is cost savings.  Initially, this seemed to me to be counter-intuitive given the potential number of team members and meetings.  But when the alternative is communicating exclusively through the attorneys, these meetings are a bargain.

If a client in my office expresses a favorable view toward the collaborative process, another approach is to communicate directly in writing with the “stubborn” spouse.  The correspondence always contains the caveat that I represent only their spouse and I recommend they obtain their own attorney.  I include a general discussion recommending the collaborative model and provide IACP literature and brochures.

The letter accurately states that the vast majority of all divorces are resolved through settlement.  A major advantage with the collaborative process is the emphasis on preserving future relationships (especially where minor children are involved).

In discussing the problem of the stubborn spouse, one of my colleagues gave me permission to share the following experience.

He consulted with a woman who was knowledgeable and favorably inclined towards a collaborative divorce.  But she was adamant that her husband was too stubborn and controlling to ever agree to anything she suggested.  Nevertheless, she agreed that he could send her husband a letter recommending the collaborative process.  The letter was down-to-earth and explained the practical benefits of enhanced communications and interest-based negotiations.

To his client’s surprise, her husband agreed to give it a try and requested a referral to another collaborative lawyer.  As it turned out, the collaborative process proved successful.

The take-away for both collaborative professionals and clients is to continue exploring this option even when confronted with resistance from a stubborn spouse.  The process of reaching agreement is facilitated when couples can meet on their own terms.  Also, clients are often attracted to the collegial format.  If a resistant spouse is on the fence, share with them Father Frances Fleming’s sage advice, “Love your enemies.  It drives them nuts.”

About the Author

Gregory R. Solum, Attorney at Law
My goal is to guide my clients to their destination in a manner that is transparent, fluid and valuable. General Practice of Civil, Family, Probate and Appellate Law since 1980/ Mediator (including Family Court) since 1995/ Collaborative Team Divorce since 2000/ University of Minnesota Law School Instructor 1991-2009. www.solumlaw.com

Posted on

Frustrated with the world of politics today? Unless you are reading this from your hospital bed, having just awakened from a long coma, I am going to guess the answer is yes. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, it’s likely that you have about had it with all of the acrimony and with the arguments being made by “the other side”. Probably the one thing we can all agree on is that everyone on “the other side” is quite disagreeable, both in their opinions and their manner of expressing their views.

If you have bravely ventured out into the world of political discourse in an attempt to influence “the other side”, whether at a gathering of friends or family, or on some social media site, there is a pretty good chance you came away even more frustrated after the experience. Any naïve thoughts you may have had about the other person changing their mind likely hit a brick wall that, by the end of the exchange, had become, if anything, even stronger in its resistance. If “the other side” argued back at you there is a pretty good chance that your brick wall got fortified as well. You and “the other side” achieved the very opposite of what you both wanted to achieve, and you both were left in a state of frustration.

As a divorce lawyer, I am struck by how similar all of this is to how most couples behave when they are in conflict.  I am hoping there is something about watching these political arguments that may create a true learning opportunity for these couples.  The reality that I just described; the dynamic that most arguments lead to chaos, frustration, and a deepening of divisions is an important insight. And what better time to learn it than when you are going through a divorce.

Trust me, as someone who has “been through” numerous divorces, the maddening events that are playing out on the political stage, bear an amazing resemblance to conversations I have regularly observed in my office during the past three decades. Two people, seized with emotions, bent on getting another person to agree with them, stay awake at night thinking of great arguments to persuade their spouse that they are right, or worse, thinking of “good” attorneys who can do that for them.

If you are in the middle of it (either politics or divorce), you are likely so caught up in your frustration with “the other side” that you have little insight about what you are doing that is actually making your life worse. However, if you are able to stand back, if only for a moment, both with the political arena and arguments with divorcing couple, it is fairly easy to see that all we are doing is pouring gas on a raging fire.  Once you come to that realization, you may find yourself wondering what the alternative might be. Our inner voice immediately retorts that “we can’t just give in”, thinking, from the standpoint of our ego, that fight or flight are the only true options. Is there a third option?

There is. It has different names, but the most common phrase that negotiators use is “interest-based bargaining.” I will skip that jargon and simply call this alternative “dialogue” for the moment. Dialogue, in the sense I am using it, is one of those ideas that is simple but not easy. It starts with the idea of letting go of arguments and changing minds and focusing instead on seeking common ground or at least a basis for common understanding. What I have observed, at least with divorcing couples, is that if we can reframe the discussion away from “arguments to change minds” and on to dialogues aimed at achieving common understanding, it is possible to achieve common goals.  This type of dialogue is a central tenet of something called Collaborative Divorce.  To learn more about Collaborative Divorce, go to www.collaborativelaw.org.  In the meantime, watch what is happening on the political stage and see if there might be some valuable life lessons that will help us become a better nation, and better families.

About the Author
Ron Ousky, JD, is a Collaborative Attorney and mediator who has dedicated his practice to making sure that families facing conflict understand their options.  He believes that families facing divorce are in a unique situation to make a better life for their families and he is dedicated to helping them find the resources to build a better future.  For more information about his practice go to www.ousky.com