Posted on

“Can you refer me to a good family law attorney?” is a common question.  Thinking about this question, I often wonder what people mean when they say “good family law attorney?”  If you ask an attorney in a large firm, they often refer people to attorneys in large firms (their own if they have that practice group).  Large firm attorneys often know other large firm attorneys.  Does that mean they are “good”?  Ask yourself what “good” means to you, before you ask that question.

There are attorneys who do a lot of in-court litigation in family law.  Does that mean they are good?  It depends.  There are attorneys who do mainly out-of-court divorce work, like mediation, Collaborative divorce, or settlement focus.  Does that mean they are good?  Again, it depends.  Family law attorneys are supposed to talk to clients about all their process options.  Interestingly, some clients I have met with who have also met with other attorneys indicate that the other attorney only talked about the traditional court process, said little about mediation, and never spoke about the Collaborative process.  Attorneys who don’t talk about other options might do that for a variety of reasons.  Maybe they don’t practice Collaborative divorce and therefore can’t speak about it clearly or thoroughly.  Maybe they derive energy in the court process and see all divorce matters in the same light.  Maybe they are working in a system that does not reward settlement and fewer billable hours on a case-by-case basis.  Many attorneys start consultations like they are getting all the facts and can start making a legal analysis before they even understand what their potential client’s goals are.

When looking for a good family law attorney, pay attention to how they make you feel, if they are interested in you and what matters to you, or whether they seem to have a predisposition for “fighting”, “protecting”, “winning at the expense of”, or seem to be formulaic about process (i.e., “the first things we need to do is serve papers” or “go take half of the balance in the accounts and transfer it to your own account”, etc.)  There is a difference between having empathy for someone’s situation and feeding a fire and ultimately the conflict.  Are they curious?  Do they ask questions about your priorities, concerns, needs and fears?  Ask you what you want your process to look like or not look like?  Do they ask thoughtful questions about your children?  Do you notice that you feel relaxed and more at ease than you expected or do you feel tense and on edge?  Talking about their trial record may not be the best factor to base your decision on unless you already know that things will be challenging because your spouse is vengeful, litigious, righteous, abusive, inflexible, or other characteristics that mean it will be a fight.

Just because you are starting a divorce, does not mean that it needs to be a fight with someone winning and someone loosing.  A good attorney starts by listening, being curious and understanding what is most important to you.  And what is most important might not even be about specific legal outcomes.  Many people want their kids to come out of the divorce unscathed, want the ability to co-parent, be happy and not totally stressed out for the next  number of months or year during the process.  Or people want to have a better sense of cost rather than a blank check into the world of divorce court.  Many people want to know they will be ok emotionally, financially, and feel good about the settlement and not carry resentment about the outcomes and process.  Divorce is hard enough as it is and the process does not need to make it worse.  And who you choose to work with and how they approach their work can make a significant difference about how your divorce goes and how much it costs.

So, ask questions like:

  • What is your favorite part of your job or do you like your work?
  • Why do you practice family law?
  • How often do you go to trial or settle cases well in advance of trial (not on the court steps)?
  • How do you support client self-determination?
  • If you know who your spouse’s attorney is, ask if they know them and how they work together?
  • How do you handle conflict in your cases?
  • How many cases have you had in the last 2 years go to trial or pre-trial?

Look for:

  • Honesty and sincerity
  • Empathy and compassion
  • Good listening skills
  • Creative problem solving
  • Promptness
  • Curiosity
  • Word choice and language can tell a lot about an attorney

    So, once you know what qualities are important to you in your divorce process and your attorney, who is tending to the most important relational matter you will likely have, you may end up asking someone instead, “Do you know any family law attorneys who support effective co-parenting and minimizing conflict between spouses and understand that we are still a family system but in a different configuration?”  You may get a very different referral.  Ask the question about a good attorney that includes some qualifiers of what that means to you.  Or, find an attorney who practices Collaborative divorce, even if you end up not doing a formal Collaborative process.  They often believe in client self-determination and informed decision making and understand that you will still be a family system but in two homes.  And they tend to be responsive and timely in their work and value good working relationships with clients and the other attorney.  Take it from 20+ years of experience working with court focused attorneys and collaborative attorneys.  Check out this link to connect with collaborative professionals in Minnesota and find one that is right for you. https://collaborativelaw.org/find-a-professional-2/

About the Author

Louise Livesay-Al has been practicing family law, primarily in out-of-court process options, for over 20 years.  She worked for four years at the Minnesota Court of Appeals learning about family law and seeing the limits of the court system for families.  She works regularly with collaborative and non-collaborative attorneys and understands the benefits of working towards a mutually agreeable settlement for both people in the divorce and knows that kids usually fare better when parents reach a joint resolution rather than fighting it out.  Her firm, The Law Shop Minnesota, offers full representation, mediation, and a la carte services in family law, estate planning, and small business matters.  Check out www.thelawshopmn.com and click “Get Started” to schedule a Shop Evaluation to learn more and create a plan for your future.

Louise Livesay-Al
Collaborative Attorney and Mediator
The Law Shop Minnesota
E: support@thelawshopmn.com | P: 651-344-6100
www.thelawshopmn.com

 

 

 

Posted on

In divorce agreements, it is common to see language such as:

“Spouse A shall refinance the mortgage within 90 days and remove Spouse B from liability.”

On paper, that sounds simple.

In practice, it often fails.

As mortgage professionals working alongside collaborative attorneys and financial neutrals, we regularly see well-intended refinance provisions unravel — not because someone refuses to cooperate, but because the refinance was never financially viable under lending guidelines.

The Most Common Reasons Divorce Refinances Fail

  1. Debt-to-Income Ratios Don’t Support the Loan

Post-divorce budgets differ dramatically from pre-divorce budgets.

Even if the payment appears affordable on a cash-flow worksheet, mortgage underwriting follows strict debt-to-income ratios that may produce a different result.

  1. Self-Employed Income Is Calculated Differently

This is one of the most misunderstood areas in divorce planning.

Attorneys and financial professionals often evaluate income based on gross business revenue or owner draws.

Mortgage underwriting does not.

For self-employed borrowers, we use:

  • Net income after expenses
  • Add-backs (when allowable under guidelines)
  • Two-year averages (in most cases)

This can significantly reduce qualifying income compared to what appears on a tax return summary or financial affidavit.

A refinance that seems feasible using gross income may not qualify when evaluated using underwriter-calculated net income.

  1. Support Income Is Not Yet Usable

For conventional and VA financing, lenders typically require:

  • A documented history of receipt (often six months)
  • Consistency
  • Three years of continuance from loan closing

If deadlines are set before those requirements are satisfied, the refinance may be structurally impossible.

  1. Equity and Reserve Requirements

Buyout structures increase loan balances.
Loan-to-value limits may restrict options.

Additionally, many programs require post-closing reserves. Asset division during divorce can unintentionally eliminate the liquidity required for approval.

The Collaborative Opportunity

Refinance provisions fail not because of bad intent — but because mortgage feasibility wasn’t analyzed early enough.

A pre-settlement underwriting review allows the team to:

  • Set realistic timelines
  • Structure viable buyouts
  • Identify alternative options
  • Avoid post-decree surprises

Case Study

We had a client that was getting ready to sign the divorce decree…it was a collaborative case.  The client sent the decree to me prior to signing.  Upon review we noticed that the total income would not support the refinance.   In this case the divorce client was also getting support payments for a total of 10 years.  We were not far off…the solution was to front end load some of the support payments and reduce the overall term of the payout.  The attorneys and the client reviewed the suggestion and were able to make the numbers work and the client was able to get the home refinanced and complete the divorce.

Mortgage strategy integrated early strengthens the durability of the final agreement.

About the Author

Dave Jamison is a divorce mortgage strategist and co-owner of Rainbow Mortgage Inc., an independent mortgage brokerage licensed in Minnesota, Florida, and North Dakota. With more than 26 years in residential lending—including 13 years as an underwriter for Fortune 500 mortgage institutions—Dave brings deep, practical expertise to complex divorce-related real estate matters.

What sets Dave apart is his underwriting foundation. Rather than approaching cases from a sales perspective, he evaluates them through the lens of how loans are actually approved—income calculations, debt ratios, reserve requirements, and documentation standards. This allows him to assess feasibility early in the divorce process, helping prevent refinance provisions that later fail and ensuring agreements align with real-world lending guidelines.

Dave and his wife, Gale, founded Rainbow Mortgage Inc. in 1999, initially serving borrowers with complex financial situations. In 2004, he began specializing in divorce mortgage planning, applying his expertise to support attorneys, mediators, and financial neutrals. Since then, he has spent more than two decades helping collaborative teams structure realistic refinance timelines, evaluate buyout options, and avoid post-decree mortgage breakdowns.

He is particularly skilled in analyzing self-employed income, support income, and multi-property scenarios—areas where legal and financial assumptions often diverge from underwriting standards. Known for his calm, direct, and non-adversarial approach, Dave provides clear, objective guidance that supports durable agreements.

David Jamison
Rainbow Mortgage, Inc.
E: dave@rainbowmortgageinc.com | Ph: 952-405-2090
www.RainbowMortgageInc.com

 

 

 

Posted on

People sometimes tell me they’ve heard that collaborative divorce works better for the higher income spouse. The idea is that the person with more money will always have more influence, more control, and more options. If you earn less than your spouse, it can feel risky to choose a process that depends on cooperation.

I understand why that fear exists. Money shapes how we move through life. It can affect your confidence in negotiations. It can make you wonder if the other person can simply wait you out until you accept less than what is fair.

In my work, I have seen that a carefully managed collaborative divorce can protect a lower income spouse in ways the court process often does not.

Why This Concern Feels Real
In many marriages, one person earns significantly more than the other. When the marriage ends, the higher earner may have more savings, more credit, or more financial stability. They may feel less urgency to resolve things quickly. The lower earner may feel pressure to settle just to get financial relief.

These are valid worries. They do not disappear automatically in a collaborative case. But collaborative divorce was designed to address them directly.

How Collaborative Divorce Addresses Power Imbalances
The process starts with full financial transparency. Both spouses share all the information about income, expenses, assets, and debts. There is no hiding documents, no drawn-out discovery requests, and no costly legal fights just to get basic facts.

A neutral financial professional is part of the team. They work for both spouses and explain financial details in plain language. This means each person understands what different settlement options will mean for their future.

Collaborative teams can make interim financial agreements early on. If one spouse needs support for housing or daily expenses during the process, the team can create an agreement right away instead of waiting for a court hearing.

Because communication is at the heart of collaborative work, there may often be coaches involved. These professionals help keep discussions respectful and balanced. They make sure one voice does not dominate the conversation.

Why Litigating Attorneys May See This Differently
Attorneys who primarily work in litigation sometimes see collaborative divorce through a different lens. In court, the higher income spouse can be ordered to produce documents, attend hearings, and even pay temporary support early in the case. Judges have authority to make rulings and set deadlines. To a litigator, those built-in powers of the court can feel like stronger protection for the lower income spouse.

From that perspective, collaborative divorce may seem risky because there is no judge to issue immediate orders. Litigators worry that without the authority of the court, a higher income spouse could slow things down or refuse to cooperate.

These concerns are not unfounded. In a collaborative case, if one spouse refuses to participate in good faith, the process can break down. That is why collaborative professionals screen cases carefully. If there are signs that one person will withhold information or use the process to stall, collaborative may not be the right fit.

When Collaborative Practice Works Better
Using a collaborative process can give the lower income spouse more control over their future than litigation. Court processes can be slow and expensive. The higher income spouse can afford to keep paying legal fees, while the lower income spouse may feel pressured to accept a deal to stop the financial bleeding.

In Collaborative, both spouses commit to full disclosure, respectful communication, and problem-solving. The team addresses immediate needs quickly so that neither person is left in crisis. Instead of spending time and money on court battles, the focus stays on building an agreement that works for both people.

Collaborative divorce is not fair just because of the name. Fairness comes from the professionals involved and their willingness to slow down, explain every option, and make sure each person understands what they are agreeing to. The team’s role is to keep the process balanced so that neither income level decides the outcome.

Litigating attorneys and collaborative attorneys sometimes see fairness through different frameworks. Both want to protect their clients. Both see situations where the other process might fail. What matters most is choosing the process — and the professionals — who will make sure your needs are met and your voice is heard.

For a lower income spouse, collaborative practice can be a place to get stability, clarity, and a say in what comes next. With the right team and safeguards, it can be a path to a fair resolution without the costs and strain of a courtroom battle.

About the Author

Angela is a former President and board member of the Minnesota Collaborative Law Institute. She has a solo practice where she focuses primarily on collaborative law and out-of-court settlement processes.  Through her work, she aims to empower individuals to make informed decisions while reducing conflict, cost, and emotional stress.  She helps clients navigate complex transitions with clarity and compassion.

Angela is a former President and board member of the Minnesota Collaborative Law Institute. She has a solo practice where she focuses primarily on collaborative law and out-of-court settlement processes.  Through her work, she aims to empower individuals to make informed decisions while reducing conflict, cost, and emotional stress.  She helps clients navigate complex transitions with clarity and compassion.

Angela Heart, Family Law Attorney
Heart Law, LLC
E: Angela@heartlaw.net | Ph: 651-337-1333
Website: https://www.heartlaw.net/

 

 

Posted on

Judith Wallerstein, in her ground-breaking 25-year study of divorcing parents and their children, was perhaps the first social science researcher to notice it.   The injury to self which can happen in divorce is much deeper than what people were thinking throughout the 1970s.  It can happen on the deepest level of the human psyche.

            What she noted is that the divorce for most of her study population was a challenge on three levels:   1) to the world-view her couples had always assumed (in a sense, a ‘crisis of faith’); 2) to who they thought they were as human beings (a ‘crisis of identity’), and 3) even to the deepest part of their psyche – the central brain which is connected to adequate sleep, appetite, situational awareness (avoiding traffic accidents) and the immune system.   As she sometimes said, “It’s as if the body itself perceives the experience as an attack on its ability to survive”.

            And so, it’s no wonder that couples sometimes ask themselves as they start down the path of divorce:  “How much is this going to change my life?   Who will I be on the other side of this?”

            Fear of the unknown can sometimes feel worse than dealing with the day to day frustrations of a dysfunctional relationship.   At least the dysfunction is a known quantity – which can sometimes feel safer.

            But it’s possible to reinforce the strongest sense of self coming out of a divorce process, especially one which is Collaborative and focused on the needs of the family system as a whole.

            Here are three good ideas for making that happen:

  1. Self care.   This may seem obvious, but even when life is going well it can be hard to achieve.  Good exercise, good food, and good sleep need to be a special focus when going through a divorce process.   No one wants to be at their worst or weakest in making decisions which can shape the rest of their lives, or their children’s lives.
  2. Re-engaging with your values.  The personal strength that comes from self respect is drawn from the integrity of acting consistently with your deepest values.   It brings confidence and clear thought.  It may be as simple as reconnecting with a good faith community in your area.   It may mean finding a good therapist whose listening ear helps you to feel stronger and not weaker – someone who helps you to hear your own voice clearly.   It can also mean reconnecting with caring friends and family members who help you to feel stronger and more confident (not more fearful!).   Take the time to think about making this happen for yourself.
  3. Vision planning.   This is so difficult to do when we are stuck in a “fear place”.  But the truth is, if you can’t imagine a new and better future for yourself, who is going to do it for you?   It’s important to give yourself time to carve out some moments here and there where you give yourself permission to dream.   Ask yourself:   Where have I been before that made this easier?   Who was I with at the time?  What was I listening to?

So much good comes from finding self-respect.  Honoring your entire life – physical, mental, spiritual – it’s a critical piece of putting your feet forward, every step of the way.

Judy Johnson
Collaborative Team Divorce Attorney
Judith _ h _ johnson @ Hotmail.com | 952-405-2015
collaborativedivorceminnesota.com

With more than 47 years in private practice, Ms. Johnson has built a respected career dedicated to helping families navigate legal transitions with clarity, dignity, and care.

She began her career in a mid-sized Minneapolis law firm where she was immersed in a broad general practice, gaining experience in real estate, civil rights, professional license defense, personal injury, juvenile and family court, criminal law, and probate. This diverse foundation shaped her comprehensive understanding of how legal issues intersect—ultimately guiding her toward a focus on family law and alternative dispute resolution.

After many years practicing contested litigation, Ms. Johnson transitioned in 2005 to Collaborative Team Divorce. This shift reflected her growing conviction that families benefit most from a “family systems” approach—one that prioritizes healthy adjustment for parents and children as they transition into two homes. Since then, she has devoted her work to collaborative practice, helping clients reach thoughtful, durable agreements outside of court. She remains of counsel with Speeter and Johnson in downtown Minneapolis.

Posted on

Those of us who practice Collaborative Team Divorce sometimes get asked the question:   “What if my spouse isn’t willing or able to show me respect?   Why then should I respect them?   What’s the value of that?”

There is value to one partner offering respect as a deliberate choice of habit, on several levels:

  1. Business level trust is all that’s needed to support a Collaborative solution. Collaborative Practitioners are often taught to avoid the word “fair” as a relative term when it comes to solutions for couples and families facing divorce, and instead focus on the term “acceptable”.   All that is needed is a solution that is acceptable to each partner – so long as it meets the needs of both partners and the children, after taking all needs into consideration as well as potential ‘legal rights’.   Once a solution has the effect of a court order (meaning, a court-entered Judgment), that is a measure of safety and enforceability for the agreements which have been made.  The kind of intimate-level trust that was needed to support the marriage is not needed.
  2. “Trust but verify” is the basis for acceptable solutions. Good quality information is needed to craft the foundation for an acceptable solution.   Collaborative Financial Specialists are the professionals whose job it is to collect all the financial information which is needed, and to make it available to both partners and the Collaborative Team, including each spouse’s attorney.  The reason many professionals choose to practice Collaborative Team Divorce is that they get access to financial information more quickly, and more completely, than what is often uncovered in the back-and-forth, ‘cat and mouse’ strategies of formal legal discovery.   This is because Collaborative Team Practice is based upon mutual respect and staying away from tactics that trigger human defense mechanisms.   In addition, Collaborative Practice can use methods which are similar to contested litigation practice, such as exchanging Release of Information Forms directly to employers and plan providers, to make sure the data is all genuine – in the event there is any question about that.   If such steps are not needed, they don’t recommend the extra expense to use them.
  3. Children get the idea. In her 25-year study, Judith Wallerstein was sometimes quoted as reminding professionals and couples that children attach to both parents.   If even one parent is healthy enough to recognize and support the connection children have to both parents, that home is a safer and happier place for children to be.   Chances are, the healthier parent will over time gain more trust and a stronger connection to the children – they are drawn to the healthier parent.   This can be demonstrated simply, by asking the children such questions as:   “Did you know that your (X parent) plans to take you to their family’s cabin with your cousins this weekend?   Isn’t that great?   You know, your (X parent) and I may have had our problems, but they love you so much!”  This helps to make transitions between homes more successful, and the children know that – at least in the home of the healthier parent – they can be “whole people”, safe and connected to both parents.   They don’t have to deny half of who they are when they come home from school in the evening, and can look forward to feeling healthy and whole in the home of the healthier parent.  It makes a difference.

So if any part of you is thinking that acting like the only grown-up in a divorce process is a waste – think again.  Find a good process for your divorce proceeding, get to a solid “acceptable” agreement, and get that agreement entered by the Court as a judgment.   Then, focus on the future with the realization that the agreements made are enforceable, and the home you provide your children will be what they remember.

Judy Johnson
Collaborative Team Divorce Attorney
Judith _ h _ johnson @ Hotmail.com | 952-405-2015
collaborativedivorceminnesota.com

With more than 47 years in private practice, Ms. Johnson has built a respected career dedicated to helping families navigate legal transitions with clarity, dignity, and care.

She began her career in a mid-sized Minneapolis law firm where she was immersed in a broad general practice, gaining experience in real estate, civil rights, professional license defense, personal injury, juvenile and family court, criminal law, and probate. This diverse foundation shaped her comprehensive understanding of how legal issues intersect—ultimately guiding her toward a focus on family law and alternative dispute resolution.

After many years practicing contested litigation, Ms. Johnson transitioned in 2005 to Collaborative Team Divorce. This shift reflected her growing conviction that families benefit most from a “family systems” approach—one that prioritizes healthy adjustment for parents and children as they transition into two homes. Since then, she has devoted her work to collaborative practice, helping clients reach thoughtful, durable agreements outside of court. She remains of counsel with Speeter and Johnson in downtown Minneapolis.

Posted on

What happens to couples who threaten each other when it comes to divorce?

It’s an automatic response, which happens on a physiological level first.   What some brain researchers refer to as the “fight, flight or freeze” phenomenon is an automatic survival mechanism that surfaces in response to perceived danger.   The amygdala in the center of the brain detects threats and signals, which trigger a cascade of hormones like adrenaline and cortisol to prepare the body to fight back – or flee, or freeze or even mimic a “fawn” – blending quietly into camouflage wherever a hiding place can be found.   Heart rate and breathing speed up, and muscles tense to respond with immediate action.

As divorce researcher Judith Wallerstein once noted, stress like that over a short period of time is one thing; stress like that over a period of many months or years (which contested court divorces can often last) is another thing entirely – it becomes something which can cause permanent damage to both parents and children.

What else happens when these mechanisms are triggered?   Rational thought – the type of careful thought which could be used by couples to craft a successful future for the family – cannot be accessed because it has been blocked.

Human beings are more than machines, and we can’t control our automatic triggers.   But we can be smart enough to over-ride them.

How can couples manage those physiological responses and move forward into a hopeful and happy future?

The solution is an easy answer, but it takes hard work and the development of habits which will help lay a communication foundation for the future, as well as help children to last and thrive for a lifetime.  Developing habits of respect for one another take practice, and here is a short list that can be practiced by anyone:

  1. Don’t jump to conclusions.   Collaborative Attorneys, and Financial and Family Specialists see this so often.   Couples assume they know what each other will say, before the chance to say it has surfaced, or the reasoning behind it has been explained.  Each side needs the chance to be heard, and to say what won’t work for them – but that has to be followed up by suggestions that could work for everyone.
  2. Use descending tone.   In a Collaborative Divorce, it’s so important for a divorcing couple to each find their individual “voice” in speaking to their own needs, and the needs of their children.  When couples speak up for themselves, it’s always more effective than lawyers blathering on about what they believe their clients think and need.  But couples’ voices do not have to shout to be effective.  Statements can be simple, direct, pointed – but the energy behind the voice doesn’t need to wear anyone out or down.  And sometimes adding a simple “we” or “us” to the statement can become more effective – “it seems to me like we’ve always gotten stuck on that, but I really don’t want us to go there anymore”.
  3. Stay curious.   This is the hardest habit to develop when anyone is facing danger – and in divorce the dangers can be losing assets, getting stuck with mountains of debt from the cost of the process, and spending meaningful time with children.  Big stuff – huge, in fact.  But it is possible to keep an open mind.   The internal discussion can move from “I don’t see how this can ever work” to “I wonder if maybe we could get that solved” – that shift invites positive solutions into the discussion and makes all the difference in the world.

If you are contemplating divorce, can you develop habits of respect for one another?   It’s not easy, and in fact such habits tend to fly in the face of automatic physical impulses.   But in Collaborative Practice we see couples who do it, and do it well.   We want to see couples and families not only survive the process – we want to see them and their children thrive.  And we want to see them craft solutions created out of their own authentic voice.

Consider a start by changing your negative self-talk.   Ask yourself, “could we maybe create a better future for ourselves?”   That potential future won’t happen without staying curious and developing the habits needed to get there.

Judy Johnson
Collaborative Team Divorce Attorney
Judith _ h _ johnson @ Hotmail.com | 952-405-2015
collaborativedivorceminnesota.com

With more than 47 years in private practice, Ms. Johnson has built a respected career dedicated to helping families navigate legal transitions with clarity, dignity, and care.

She began her career in a mid-sized Minneapolis law firm where she was immersed in a broad general practice, gaining experience in real estate, civil rights, professional license defense, personal injury, juvenile and family court, criminal law, and probate. This diverse foundation shaped her comprehensive understanding of how legal issues intersect—ultimately guiding her toward a focus on family law and alternative dispute resolution.

After many years practicing contested litigation, Ms. Johnson transitioned in 2005 to Collaborative Team Divorce. This shift reflected her growing conviction that families benefit most from a “family systems” approach—one that prioritizes healthy adjustment for parents and children as they transition into two homes. Since then, she has devoted her work to collaborative practice, helping clients reach thoughtful, durable agreements outside of court. She remains of counsel with Speeter and Johnson in downtown Minneapolis.

Posted on

“Revenge is a dish best served cold” is a popular saying which perhaps originated with Pierre Choderlos de Laclos, the French author of Dangerous Liaisons.    Typically, that phrase has meant that revenge planned in patience, over time, yields superior results.   However, as popular author James Kimmel, Jr., has noted in a recent book (The Science of Revenge, Random House 2025), that’s not how the human brain perceives it.

Revenge can exude immediate satisfying results to the human brain, which act chemically to produce a pleasurable effect.  Over time, this pleasurable result can become an addiction.   Because of the way the human brain is hard-wired, the immediate reward from revenge can become harder and harder to walk away from, even when the adverse long-term results become apparent.  For people who have been impacted by severe trauma in their childhood, this addiction can be even harder to overcome.   However, any form of perceived “grievance” can trigger the felt need for revenge, and such thought patterns may even be imagined, or be triggered the experience of others, instead of arising from personal damage or insult.

The “stop” mechanism which can protect human beings from the adverse impact of revenge is the frontal cortex – the part of the brain that can reason and inform – but that connection is not always enough t0 prevent bad things from happening.

In a divorce proceeding, the adverse effects can come from the length and cost of the process, the impact on children, the loss of income and liquid assets – the list goes on.

In Collaborative Practice, around the world, practitioners use the phrase “Resolving Disputes Respectfully” to describe their work.   Why is this important?   Is it just about wanting to appear “nice” and likeable to the Collaborative Professional Team?   Or to family or friends?   What’s behind this?

The act of offering respect – whether you think it’s deserved or not – is a way of working through the triggering of automatic defense mechanisms in the human brain which block conscious rational thought.   Once the financial data has been collected, the Collaborative Financial Specialist starts to look at the analysis which will help the family to maximize after-tax income, and to create a sustainable cash flow plan moving forward.   By the time the Financial Specialist is ready to share the tax analysis behind this planning, the divorcing couple needs to move beyond any “fight, flight or freeze” thinking into the frontal cortex of their brains, to make the best decisions possible, which will stand the test of time and be a stable solution for the entire family.

So, it’s important to recognize that while the pleasure which might be felt in plotting revenge against a spouse who has rejected you may feel good, and be a normal and perfectly human reaction, it may not meet overall goals for the long-term future.   Showing “respect” in divorce is not about being a wimp or pushover.  It’s about being as smart as you can be, and getting the smartest result possible for everyone in the family.

It doesn’t do much good to focus on an unbalanced solution (“winning it all”) if that result creates an unstable situation which does not meet the needs of children in both homes, and in consequence, the needs of both parents as well.  In those unbalanced “solutions”, couples frequently end up back in court, again and again, in chronic conflict, which drains resources and genuinely creates an adverse impact on children, for whom even 2 or 3 years can feel like a lifetime of parental battles.

It’s up to the couples themselves to forsake the momentary bliss of revenge and instead focus on a long term solution for the future.  Revenge is a tempting choice – and a habit that can be hard to break even once terrible consequences hit home.

Judy Johnson
Collaborative Team Divorce Attorney
Judith _ h _ johnson @ Hotmail.com | 952-405-2015
collaborativedivorceminnesota.com

With more than 47 years in private practice, Ms. Johnson has built a respected career dedicated to helping families navigate legal transitions with clarity, dignity, and care.

She began her career in a mid-sized Minneapolis law firm where she was immersed in a broad general practice, gaining experience in real estate, civil rights, professional license defense, personal injury, juvenile and family court, criminal law, and probate. This diverse foundation shaped her comprehensive understanding of how legal issues intersect—ultimately guiding her toward a focus on family law and alternative dispute resolution.

After many years practicing contested litigation, Ms. Johnson transitioned in 2005 to Collaborative Team Divorce. This shift reflected her growing conviction that families benefit most from a “family systems” approach—one that prioritizes healthy adjustment for parents and children as they transition into two homes. Since then, she has devoted her work to collaborative practice, helping clients reach thoughtful, durable agreements outside of court. She remains of counsel with Speeter and Johnson in downtown Minneapolis.

Click here for details and to RSVP

CLI-MN Board and Member Retreat

Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2026
Location: Colab Suites | 7650 Edinborough Way, Edina, MN 55435
Training Room #330
Who: 2026 Board Members and all CLI Members
Menu: AM refreshments and buffet lunch
Time:
2026 Board Members Only | 9:00 AM – 12:00 PM
8:30 AM – 9:00 AM | Morning Refreshments
9:00 AM – 12:00 PM | CLI 2026 Board of Directors Planning Session

All CLI Membership Welcome | 12:00 PM – 4:00 PM
12:15 PM – 12:30pm Lunch served
12:30 PM – 4:00 PM | CLI Board and Members

No fee to attend
RSVP requested for planning and food & beverage counts

Janna Hefty | janna@harmonylegalmn.com
Katrina Viegas | kviegas@btolawyers.com
Sandy Beeson | cli@collaborativelaw.org

RETREAT SPONSOR
Annual CLI-MN Silver Partner 
Jennifer Morris | Realtor
952-937-8600 | JenniferMorris@EdinaRealty.com
www.edinarealty.com/jennifer-morris-realtor#

My team and I provide professional real estate services serving Minneapolis, St. Paul and the metro counties. Contact me for a complimentary market analysis of your home.

Click here for details and to RSVP

Date: September 11, 2025
Time: 9:00 AM-12Noon
Location: 3601 W. 76th St., Edina, MN 55435, Training Room #25
Who should attend: CLI members who have taken the NCE training within the last three to five years.
Continuing Education Credits: CE may or may not be available for this training.
No fee to attend, but registration is appreciated.
Description: The tune-up training session will be based on a survey of attendees to learn where they feel additional instruction would be most helpful.
Training Committee Chairs:
Louise Livesay-Al | louise@thelawshopmn.com
Rebecca Randen | rebecca@randenlaw.com

For questions on registration contact: Sandy Beeson: cli@collaborativelaw.org

 

Click here to register

Dates: Three full-days basic training + Tune-up in September.
Thursday, April 16, 2026 (Happy Hour end of day Thursday scheduled for attendees at location TBD)
Friday, April 17, 2026
Friday, April 24, 2026
Time: 8:30-4:30 (Detailed timing and agenda TBD)
Location:  7650 W 76th St, Training Room #330, Edina, MN 55435

*Attendees must attend all sessions in order to complete the training and satisfy CLI membership requirements.

Attendance Fees:
Members of CLI MN:
CLI MN members who have NOT taken this training before: $350
CLI MN members who have taken this training but would like a refresher: $150 (Please email cli@collaborativelaw.org for your registration code for this pricing.)
CLI MN Student members: $200.00
CLI MN Emeritus: $0
CLI MN Annual Partners: $350.00

Non-CLI MN members: $645
Not a member of CLI MN? (You will have the option of joining CLI MN at the selected member category rate and then attending the basic training for $350)
Student – Not a member of CLI: $200

**Discount Code: If you have a discount code to attend the training, you will enter it prior to checking out.

Continuing Education Credits: Pending approval of 18 Standard credits for: CLE, Board of Psychology, and LMFT. A certificate of attendance for self-filling of other credentials will also be provided.

Cancellation: Refunds for registration will be processed if notice of cancellation is received by April 10, 2026.

Note: If fewer than five registrants sign-up for the training, the training will be cancelled and paid registrants will be refunded. Deadline to register is April 10th.

Description:
Day I: Training on collaborative practice principles and fundamentals, the roles of the professionals on the interdisciplinary team, the paradigm shift, protocols of practice, the road map to resolution, and ethics.
Day II: A demonstration of the collaborative model, one involving a neutral coach/facilitator through performances of 13 vignettes depicting a full-team collaborative case from start to almost finish. The vignettes will give detailed insight into the roles of the neutral coach/facilitator, both attorneys, the neutral child specialist, and the neutral financial professional. The different clients in the vignettes present the team with challenging legal, relational, financial, and parenting issues. The performance will be instructive, practical, and hopefully, inspirational. Day 2 is informative for the experienced collaborative practitioner as well as the new collaborative practitioner.

Day III: Focuses on completing a case, advocacy, and ethics in the Collaborative process, what happens when you hit bumps in the road, talking to clients about this process, connecting with your profession and resources to build your practice.

Educational Level: Advanced

Tune-Up Training: September 17, 2026, 9:00 AM – Noon will be based on a survey of attendees to learn where they feel additional instruction would be most helpful. (This follow-up session may or may not be additional CE credits.)

Training Committee Chairs:
Louise Livesay-Al | louise@thelawshopmn.com
Rebecca Randen | rebecca@randenlaw.com
For questions on registration contact: Sandy Beeson: cli@collaborativelaw.org