If you put two smart, equally powerful people together to solve a problem with no clear right or wrong answer, they will likely come up with at least two possible solutions, and will often disagree on which solution is the best. The conundrum then becomes, which solution will be chosen? Who gets to choose? What is the basis for making this particular choice? Must one solution win and the other lose? Now imagine that the two people trying to solve the problem are getting divorced. The problem solving process now is emotionally as well as cognitively challenging.
Collaborative Practice is founded on the idea that two smart and equally powerful people getting a divorce should be given the opportunity to create their own resolutions outside of court. But often the problems that need to be solved in a divorce do not have clear right or wrong answers. In an emotionally charged situation, it’s easy for even the most thoughtful people to become positional and fall into a win-lose mindset, which exacerbates conflict and adds to the emotional and financial expense of the divorce process.
Instead of encouraging clients to engage in positional thinking, Collaborative professionals use a process called interest-based negotiation which aims at creating win-win rather than win-lose solutions. Interest-based negotiation explores the interests, needs or values underlying positions. At this deeper level, people can often gain new insights into self and other that help them become more flexible problem solvers.
I have Collaborative clients who agreed I could share their story of how interest-based negotiation helped them reach a very creative resolution regarding parenting time.
These parents had agreed that a co-equal parenting time schedule would work well for their children. Based on their children’s ages, they were considering a developmentally appropriate 2-2-5-5 parenting time arrangement, in which one parent would be on duty every Monday and Tuesday night, the other parent every Wednesday and Thursday night, and weekends would alternate. But neither parent was really satisfied with this outcome. This co-equal resolution did not feel like a win-win solution; instead, both felt they were losing something important and thus couldn’t agree to this schedule. We needed to go deeper for resolution.
Below the surface of the co-equal schedule proposal, some of each parent’s core interests were not being addressed. Dad felt sadness at giving up two Friday game nights with the kids each month. Mom was unhappy about losing two Sunday worship services with the kids each month. These were special family times for each parent. As parents shared these concerns with each other, they reached an agreement that Dad could continue to have every Friday evening for game night, but would bring the kids to Mom’s house later on her parenting time weekends. Mom could bring the kids to church on the Sunday evenings they were scheduled to have weekends with Dad, and bring them to his house after church. These resourceful parents succeeded at reaching a unique and creative solution that would work for their family in the context of the broader parenting time arrangement. And best of all, the primary beneficiaries are their children.
If you put two smart, equally powerful people together to solve a problem with no clear right or wrong answer, they will likely come up with at least two possible solutions, and will often disagree on which solution is the best. The conundrum then becomes, which solution will be chosen? Who gets to choose? What is the basis for making this particular choice? Must one solution win and the other lose? Now imagine that the two people trying to solve the problem are getting divorced. The problem solving process now is emotionally as well as cognitively challenging.
Collaborative Practice is founded on the idea that two smart and equally powerful people getting a divorce should be given the opportunity to create their own resolutions outside of court. But often the problems that need to be solved in a divorce do not have clear right or wrong answers. In an emotionally charged situation, it’s easy for even the most thoughtful people to become positional and fall into a win-lose mindset, which exacerbates conflict and adds to the emotional and financial expense of the divorce process.
Instead of encouraging clients to engage in positional thinking, Collaborative professionals use a process called interest-based negotiation which aims at creating win-win rather than win-lose solutions. Interest-based negotiation explores the interests, needs or values underlying positions. At this deeper level, people can often gain new insights into self and other that help them become more flexible problem solvers.
I have Collaborative clients who agreed I could share their story of how interest-based negotiation helped them reach a very creative resolution regarding parenting time.
These parents had agreed that a co-equal parenting time schedule would work well for their children. Based on their children’s ages, they were considering a developmentally appropriate 2-2-5-5 parenting time arrangement, in which one parent would be on duty every Monday and Tuesday night, the other parent every Wednesday and Thursday night, and weekends would alternate. But neither parent was really satisfied with this outcome. This co-equal resolution did not feel like a win-win solution; instead, both felt they were losing something important and thus couldn’t agree to this schedule. We needed to go deeper for resolution.
Below the surface of the co-equal schedule proposal, some of each parent’s core interests were not being addressed. Dad felt sadness at giving up two Friday game nights with the kids each month. Mom was unhappy about losing two Sunday worship services with the kids each month. These were special family times for each parent. As parents shared these concerns with each other, they reached an agreement that Dad could continue to have every Friday evening for game night, but would bring the kids to Mom’s house later on her parenting time weekends. Mom could bring the kids to church on the Sunday evenings they were scheduled to have weekends with Dad, and bring them to his house after church. These resourceful parents succeeded at reaching a unique and creative solution that would work for their family in the context of the broader parenting time arrangement. And best of all, the primary beneficiaries are their children.





Unmarried and have children? You may be interested to know that “Collaborative Divorce” is not just for divorce. Learn how the collaborative process can help you.
First, it may be relieving to know that you are not alone. There are some interesting recent statistics related to marriage and children. Nearly half of children in America are born outside of marriage. And, for women under 30, most children are born outside of marriage.
Whether you are married or not, if you separate from the other parent, you’ll need to figure out custody, parenting time and financial support issues related to your children. These are legal issues that should be finalized in a court order, either by agreement reached in the collaborative process or mediation, or by a court decision after a trial.
There is a great online resource related to unmarried parents (useful to both unmarried mothers and unmarried fathers),
The “Rule of Relationship” is one of the most powerful forces in our lives. Often we are not even aware of its existence. In a divorce, it can be more powerful than the rule of law.
Here is how it works. Let’s assume you and your spouse are separated but you do not have any legal document regulating your separation or parenting. You have informally agreed to share weekends with the children and you pick the children up from your spouse’s home of Friday, promising to return them by 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. What if you decide not to return the children at that time? You will not have broken any law since there is no divorce or court order. Yet the consequences of your decision may be even more severe than any punishment a court could order as you have violated the “Rule of Relationship.” You may have damaged trust in a manner that could be very difficult to repair.
Maintaining some level of trust is crucial in almost all situations. It is tempting to think that, in a divorce, there is no trust. Indeed, your spouse may even have been unfaithful causing you to believe that all trust is lost. But, in reality, there is almost always some degree of trust that exists in any relationship. If you literally had no trust at all, you would not ever allow your spouse to even be in the presence of your children, since you need to trust them to provide for their well being and safety, for at least some portion of their week. Despite the broken promises that can give rise to a divorce, most people are able to find a way to retain some basic level of trust, out of necessity and concern for their children.
Trust is generally regulated by the “Rule of Relationship” and not by laws. Trust can only be created or lost through behavior. When it comes to regulating day to day behavior no court or government, no matter how well intended, can intervene on a daily basis to address these difficult situations. Parents are often left with their own laws, the Rule of Relationship,” to help them parent their children and regulate their lives. That is one of the reasons more and more parents are choosing out of court solutions, such as 