Can you get what is fair in your divorce?
Many people start by telling their attorneys that they want what is “fair” in the divorce only to be told that this is not realistic. “Fair is what happens in St. Paul for 11 days before Labor Day” is the common expression aimed at averting divorcing people from striving for a fair settlement.
I understand those concerns about “fair”. Divorce can be so emotional that nothing presented as a settlement offer will be regarded as “fair” and settlement discussions can therefore drag on forever. Indeed, if you are faced with a divorce that you do not want, the notion that any proposal is “fair” can seem offensive or even inflammatory. Also, in settlement negations, “fair” is often used as an accusation. “I have offered something fair. Why won’t you accept this?” Of course, in a divorce a husband and wife are likely to have different understandings of fair. Describing your offer as “fair” as compared to your spouse’s offer, (which by implication must be unfair), is likely to feel insulting to your spouse and will not be productive.
Despite all of this, I think it may be a mistake to discard notions of fairness altogether. Indeed, while we all have different ideas about what truly
is fair, it is important, sometimes even crucial, that certain things
seem fair, at least to a degree. A divorce settlement that one or both parties strongly believe is unfair is likely to unravel or create problems if it is not addressed. Indeed, the success and durability of a divorce agreement may depend a great deal on whether the agreement is viewed as fair by the parties.
To get an agreement that is durable in the future, it may be important to pay some attention to what you
and your spouse perceive as fair. At the same time, in order to get past the gridlock that arguing about fairness can create, it is equally important to be flexible in our ideas of fairness and to work toward getting a better understanding of what lies underneath the feeling of unfairness. If the sense of unfairness has more to do with an unmet emotional need, (which is common in divorce), it may be helpful to seek the assistance of counselors or coaches to help you think of how those needs can be addressed. Similarly, if there is a tangible part of the divorce agreement that feels fundamentally unfair to both spouses for legal or financial reasons, it may be necessary to go deeper into their understanding of the finances or the law to help address some of these fundamental concerns.
The great challenge in the divorce world is that, generally, you are dealing with areas of scarcity and loss and narrow definitions of fair can almost never be met. However, for people who are willing to practice some measure of empathy and to work to try to view the fairness through the lens of the other spouse, notions of fairness can be a powerful tool toward finding resolution. For more information on how this can be done, and for professionals with skill in addressing these issues go to
www.collaborativelaw.org or www.divorcechoice.com.
What can an orange possibly help us with in our collaborative divorce or any divorce process for that matter? You may have heard about interest based negotiations vs. position based negotiations. When I am working as a financial neutral or mediator with divorcing couples, I use an orange to demonstrate these two different approaches.
I place an orange on the table and then say to the couple; here we have one orange for the two of you. How are you going to decide who gets the orange? Most people will say cut it in half. While this certainly works, it may not be the best approach. Here is why.
I then tell them each why they want the orange. One wants it to eat because they are hungry. The other wants the orange peel for baking. Now if we were to cut it in half as most people will say they both only get half of what they need. It is only when they state why the orange is important to them that an agreement can be reached.
When negotiating divorce issues think of the orange and remember to talk about your interests instead of locking into a position. The quicker you get to the interests you will be that much closer to an agreement. Not only is emotion and conflict minimized you also get more of what you need/want. Think orange. 
Understanding the difference between interests and positions could make all of the difference in helping you negotiate a better outcome in your divorce.
Position-Based Bargaining: Most people have a tendency to negotiate by arguing in favor of their positions. In divorce, this type of “position-based” bargaining can actually make it more difficult to get what you want. Once you and your spouse become locked into positions, the need to defend those positions can lead to a lengthy and expensive divorce. Often position based negotiations come to an end only after both parties have reached a point of physical and emotional exhaustion only to reach a “meet in the middle” agreement. One of the many problems with meeting in “the middle” is that the best solutions may have existed outside of either position. Creative negotiation that avoid positions and focus on interests can lead to outcomes that are better for both parties.
Interest-Based Bargaining: In divorce, couples start by determining their interests and look for true “win/win” scenarios. In order to appreciate how interest-based bargaining works, it is important to understand the difference between positions and interests.
Positions are narrow; “win/lose” proposals can only be satisfied in one way. For example, statements such as “I want Sole custody” or “I need $5,000 per month in support” or “I must have the house” represent positions that require the other person to “lose” in order for you to win. On the other hand, “interests” (sometimes called goals) focus on big picture desires that can be satisfied in many ways. Statements such as “I want our children to be kept out of the conflict” or “I want financial stability for both homes” or “I want us to be able to communicate better in our co-parenting” are requests to have an important interest met.
One of the advantages of focusing on big-picture interests is that you and your spouse are likely to have many of these interests in common. Therefore, although working on the details of how these interests can be met will still require some problem solving skills (and some bargaining) the negotiation becomes easier because you are both working toward these important common goals.
Interest-based bargaining is a skill that needs to be developed over time. Divorce negotiations are usually improved when the professionals involved have significant training and experience in this method so that they can teach these skills to their clients. Most mediators and Collaborative professionals have training and experience in interest based bargaining. To locate a professional who understands this method to interview and to learn more about interest based divorce negotiation go to 
Co-parenting can be challenging even in the most amicable divorces, but there are some personalities disorders that make co-parenting downright difficult. Among these include, but are not limited to: bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, and narcissistic personality disorder. We are going to focus on narcissists in this post. Narcissists have a magnified sense of self-importance and lack they empathy for others. Narcissists insist on getting their way regardless of how it may affect others, even their own children. They may make promises to the children in order to gain compliance from the child, then refuse to honor the promises. They can be arrogant, self-centered, manipulative, demanding, and vain. As co-parents, these individuals often feel superior to their former spouse. It is challenging to reason with a narcissist, or attempt to try to get them to see the situation from someone else’s point of view, which makes co-parenting together a great feat.
Sound familiar? Most importantly you must know that your ex’s personality disorder does not need to define your divorce. One of the best things that you can do in this situation is file a parenting plan with the courts. A parenting plan will outline anything from daily routines to holiday schedules. When dealing with a narcissist the more information you have laid out in writing, the more black and white it becomes. A parenting plan with help to maintain firm boundaries with your ex.
When co-parenting with a narcissist you may need to keep your expectations low. You cannot expect the narcissist to tackle parenting with the same parental instincts that you have. What seems like second nature to you, may never cross a narcissist’s radar. Because a narcissist places no value on their children’s feelings, there will likely be emotional messes to clean up. Get your children (and you) into therapy and make it a regular and “normal” part of their lives.
Take comfort in knowing that you are not alone. There are support groups out there, both online and in person, that are aimed specifically towards coping with a narcissistic ex. Divorce is never easy on children. Coping with a narcissistic parent makes a stressful situation even more difficult, but not impossible. Educate yourself on co-parenting through these challenging times, and also commit to self-care to provide some reprieve. 
Almost all divorces end up in a negotiated settlement. (In most states, less than 5% of all divorces actually go to trial.) Therefore, the most important thing for couples to consider, before they start down the path toward divorce, is how to negotiate the best possible resolution to your divorce.
When I ask most clients what they want from a divorce process, they almost always talk about two things:
1.) They want a divorce that is amicable.
This makes sense. Most wise people would want an amicable divorce; either for the sake of their children, the protection of their finances, preserving their own mental health, or all three. No sane person would choose to have a messy divorce if they can avoid it.
2.) They want to feel protected.
At the same time, almost everyone wants to feel some sense of protection. They are entering into important agreements that will impact their lives and, perhaps, the lives of the children for many years. They do not want to sign an agreement that they will resent or regret.
These two negotiating goals do not need to conflict with each other.
The biggest mistake that people can make is thinking that these two goals are in conflict with each other. They want an amicable divorce but they think the need to hire an aggressive lawyer to protect their needs. Or, alternatively, they think that all lawyers will be aggressive so they avoid getting legal counsel and end up with a settlement that they regret.
Contrary to common belief, it is possible for divorcing clients to have the “best of both worlds”. This is the very reason that 