conflict resolution Archives | Page 3 of 5 | Collaborative Law Institute

December 1, 2014

The secret to a constructive and respectful divorce is to start at the end and work backward. Ask yourself, “What do I want my life, my spouse’s life, and my children’s lives to look like when the divorce is all over? What is my vision for the future?”

In fact, the first task of clients who choose a collaborative divorce process is to answer these questions and to share their answers with each other. Here are some of their answers: Couple A

Children/Family We want our children and ourselves to feel that we are a family that loves and cares for each other.
Relational We want us to look back on this difficult time and be proud of how we handled ourselves and each other. We want both of us to be happy in the future.
Financial We want our final agreement to ensure equitable life styles and standards of living. We want our final agreement to provide financial security for both of us in retirement and in the event of the death of either of us. We want our final agreement to respect the financial decisions/intent of our respective families to leave us money.
Process We want a divorce process that supports a positive future. We want a divorce process in which we both feel heard and safe to discuss difficult issues. We want to be comfortable with our final agreement and to have a mechanism for implementing it. We want our divorce process to be cost effective and efficient. We want to minimize the emotional and financial stress of our divorce.

Couple B

Children For our son to have a solid, cohesive parenting team who loves him. For our son to be shielded from the negative aspects of the divorce.
Financial For both households to have financial stability and security. For us to be debt-free by using an intentionally controlled plan of action.
Relational/Emotional That we create a trusting relationship with each other and the potential for friendship. That we reduce the emotional and financial stress we feel as a result of our divorce.
Process That the collaborative process be as cost-effective as possible while obtaining the added value that our neutral professionals bring to the process.

Couple C

For our children not to feel divided.
For our children to feel comfortable with both of us.
For us to convey a sense of harmony to our children.
To have financial security for both of us.
To get along with each other after the divorce; to have mutual respect for each other; and to have a pleasant relationship.

By starting at the end, couples are reminded how much they still have in common despite the ending of their marriage. By starting at the end and working backward, the couple and their team of collaborative professionals can focus all their attention on crafting a settlement that accomplishes the couple’s vision. By starting at the end, the collaborative divorce process promotes healing and a peaceful transition through this important life event. If you or someone you know might benefit from using a collaborative process for their divorce, go to www.collaborativelaw.org and www.mndivorce.com to find out more about Collaborative Divorce.

September 17, 2014

As I listened to the appalling news out of Ferguson, MO, last week, I was especially struck by two things: First, a veteran police officer, a retired chief of a municipal department, shared an observation that his officers made during unrest in his city, that when they were deployed in riot gear, officers invariably discovered that the situation became riotous. But when they met protestors wearing only their regular uniforms, they were able to talk to them and defuse many situations. Secondly, early last week, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon put State Troopers under the command of Capt. Ronald S. Johnson, who grew up in the area, in charge of the police effort in Ferguson. Capt. Johnson, as pictured on the front page of the August 15th N.Y. Times, wore only his regular Summer uniform. He walked with protestors in the streets; he listened to them explain long-standing grievances. And the temperature in Ferguson cooled perceptibly–before additional tear gas and rubber bullets reignited passions. I am not a cop. But the retired police chief–and Capt. Johnson–and I–all know from long experience that you will find trouble if you go looking for it. Fortunately, my experiences as a divorce lawyer lack both rubber bullets and tear gas, but they are accompanied by strong emotions, usually expressed in the denigration of my client’s spouse. My client recites how dishonest, abusive, or uncaring the spouse is; how neglectful or clueless he or she is. It’s the opposite of the old lyric, “lookin’ for gold in a silver mine.” If those negative emotions bubble over, they’re invariably met with–SURPRISE!–the same feelings on the other side! And the case becomes even more contentious. The bigger waste, overall, is that the couple seems to believe that the family court system cares about this emotion. Apparently they believe that if the fight becomes bitter enough, someone will “win”. These folks could have been the inspiration for Elton John’s lyrics in “Honky Cat”: “It’s like trying to find gold in a silver mine. It’s like trying to drink whiskey from a bottle of wine.” Collaborative Process was conceived as a problem-solving exercise, based on a belief that husbands and wives might put their children’s welfare before their own. When I can get my client to take that leap of faith, s/he is often astounded to discover that, because they’re not spending the time fighting, both of them are able to make decisions that directly benefit the entire family. When my client starts out believing that their spouse also wants to complete the process and care for their children, they discover–SURPRISE!–that the spouses do. And when that happens, they’re more willing to listen to the variety of ways in which that could occur. Time and energy are now spent devising productive ways to reorganize their family. If you’re looking for peace by waging war, don’t expect to find it. If, on the other hand, you start out waging peace . . .

August 26, 2014

Starting a divorce can be difficult, particularly if your spouse believes the marriage can be saved. How you have this discussion may make a major difference in your life, particularly if you have children. In my thirty years of working with divorcing clients, I have found that avoiding mistakes at the very beginning of the process is crucial to the future of your family. The most common mistake is moving ahead without being fully prepared. Here is a quick guide to the type of preparation that I believe will make the most difference.

Make sure you clearly explore your reconciliation options. Before you start down the path toward divorce, make sure that you are doing the right thing. This is important for you, and your children and will help your spouse become more accepting of the divorce if that is what ultimately needs to happen. There are many new ways to explore the divorce decision, including discernment counseling which is designed to help you determine whether your marriage can be saved. To learn more, go to the Doherty Relationship Institute website
Make sure you understand the various options for how to divorce. There are many different ways to move ahead with divorce, including Collaborative Divorce and meditation. There are many good professionals who will explain all of the options, without charge. To learn more, go to www.collaboratiavelaw.org. or www.divorcechoice.com.
Once you have chosen a method of moving forward, carefully plan the way of telling your spouse about the divorce. If there is any danger of abuse, make sure you consult with experienced professionals to make sure that you are aware of the safest possible method. If there is no danger of physical abuse, but have significant concerns about possible verbal abuse, make sure that you are in a public place so that you can leave if things get uncomfortable. If possible, consider having a counselor, clergy member or mutually trusted friend or family member present during this important discussion.
Focus on the “Big Picture” and your long term goals. Sometimes divorce can create a “crisis mentality” that can cause people to lose perspective on what really matters. Focusing only on the issues that feel urgent can displace the need to focus on what is truly important such as the well-being of your children or your general health.

July 10, 2014

I recently attended a symposium about divorce entitled, “What’s Love Got to Do With It?” At first glance you might wonder whether we had anything to talk about. What do love and divorce have in common? Isn’t divorce the result of the loss of love? Sharing ideas with others interested in improving the divorce process reinforced my belief that love, forgiveness and compassion are the keys to divorcing well, and that divorce can indeed be a healing process. Divorce is an all-too-common event these days. We all have friends, family members, neighbors and co-workers who have experienced becoming unmarried. Some just barely survive and are stuck looking back at their divorce with regret and resentment. Years later they continue to bad-mouth their ex and blame their divorce for their ongoing unhappiness. Their inability to be present and available has long-term consequences for their children as well. Most of us also know people who not only survive, but thrive in their post-divorce lives. They are somehow able to accept the major changes in their day-to-day lives and move forward. By doing so, they are healthy role models for their children and fun to be around. What accounts for these vastly different outcomes? Personality certainly has something to do with it. Some humans are blessed with more optimistic outlooks than others. Seeing the glass half full reduces anxiety about the future. Life circumstances also play a role. Good health, steady employment, and a healthy balance sheet contribute to feeling better about what lies ahead. However, several decades of experience tells me that one factor trumps everything else in terms of one’s ability to recover from divorce … the ability to forgive. Anger, bitterness, blame and resentment are feelings associated with the loss of a loving relationship. Grieving the loss is necessary in order to get on with life. Tara Brach, a leading western teacher of Buddhist meditation, emotional healing and spiritual awakening, who was a symposium presenter, says, “Vengeance is a lazy form of grief.” Rather than being lazy and stuck, working through one’s grief with a therapist, clergy person, or trusted friend can lead to understanding and forgiveness. Acknowledgment and forgiveness of one’s own contributions to the divorce are essential, as is forgiveness of the other person. In the Collaborative divorce process, our professional team includes a neutral coach and a child specialist, both of whom assist the parties in reaching closure with regard to their marriage and defining their future co-parenting relationship. “When you forgive somebody who has wronged you, you’re spared the dismal corrosion of bitterness and wounded pride. For both parties, forgiveness means the freedom again to be at peace inside their own skins and to be glad in each others’ presence.” -Fredrick Buechner

July 1, 2014

I seem to be going through a “mourner phase,” these days. Last month, I attended four funerals. This month, a couple. Frequently, these events were labeled “a celebration of life.” Sometimes they were; other times, not so much. It’s not unusual for children or close relatives to speak at these events, describing the bond between themselves and the deceased, and how it was created. Often, the speaker can bring that person to life, figuratively speaking, with their words. The last thing in the world we ever expect to hear is that Joe was a mean, abusive so-and-so; he denigrated his wife, beat his kids, and has as much chance of getting into Heaven as Osama bin Laden. Admittedly, none of the services I attended included such a speaker. Although . . . One of them included an out-of-town relative who was a member of the clergy. His memories of the dead individual brought to mind a temperance revival meeting, and really turned into a rant about how this relative had saved the decedent’s soul at the last minute. To many in attendance, and this was NOT an evangelical group, it appeared the funeral in those moments had ceased to be a celebration of the dead man’s life and had instead become all about the relative. As I struggled with how inappropriate the funeral hijacking felt, my deja vu detector went off. It took me a while to realize why. As a divorce lawyer, I get to help officiate at the death of a marriage. In the best cases, when a couple sees the wisdom of planning their family’s future together, those divorces can include a large measure of honoring that marriage, even if it stops short of an outright celebration. The relationship that brought the children into the world can be buttressed and supported going forward. The good things can be retained. The bad parts . . . well, the bad parts are why they’re in my conference room. And then there are those who, oblivious of the relational aspects of the marriage that died, just want to go on and on, like the prodigal clergyman, and make the divorce all about them. Their “rights,” their money, their property, even “their” children. Losing sight of the Big Picture is an uncomfortable thing to witness, whether it accompanies the death of a person, or the death of a marriage. When couples keep that Big Picture in mind, they can create a fitting memorial to the marriage that used to be, and honor the family that still is.

May 13, 2014

I just read a Forbes magazine article about the four methods of divorce: Do it yourself Divorce; Mediation; Collaborative Divorce and Litigated Divorce and it reminded of how lucky we are to live in Minnesota. Collaborative Divorce started in Minnesota in 1990 and is now recognized throughout the world as one of the four options. Collaborative Divorce is now being practiced in 24 different countries, on four continents and may be the world’s fastest growing alternative. Last week, I spoke to two divorce attorneys from Capetown, South Africa who will be coming to Minnesota for the entire month of May to study this new, groundbreaking method. Collaborative divorce is growing so rapidly for a reason; it works. During my 30 years of practicing family law, I have handled thousands of divorces using every method available. Today, I spend most of my time doing Collaborative cases because it gives my clients better results for less money; particularly when there are children involved. While I applaud the Forbes article for helping raise awareness about Collaborative Divorce, I do need to suggest one correction. The author suggests that Collaborative may not work as well when there are complicated financial situations or significant assets. In fact, that is actually where Collaborative Divorce works best. I have handled many multi-million dollar Collaborative cases and those clients have generally obtained the best outcomes. Because Collaborative Divorce has a rule of full transparency and invites creative structuring of settlement, people with large amount of assets generally get even better outcomes. The rules of disclosure in a Collaborative case are more thorough than in other types of cases. The author of the article is correct in saying that Collaborative Divorce is not right for every case and that each person facing divorce should investigate each option before they choose. I completely agree with that advice and I would add one other critical element. In weighing each option, make sure that you speak with professionals who have substantial experience in each area. Getting information about Collaborative Divorce, or any divorce, from someone without training and experience in this area, can be reckless. To find an experience Collaborative attorney in your community who will fully explain Collaborative Divorce to you; go to www.collaborativelaw.org.

January 30, 2014

Divorce is a challenging and life-changing experience for all family members, and most divorcing parents worry about how their children will be affected in the short and long term. Because divorce is such a significant event for children, these concerns are understandable. As a neutral child specialist, when helping parents address their concerns, I encourage them to consider three guiding principles.

Guiding Principle #1: The crisis of divorce should never become a trauma for children.

Although divorce will almost always be painful and difficult for children, it is entirely possible for parents to keep it from becoming traumatic. Children can be traumatized when trapped in an environment of high conflict, danger, abandonment or abuse. None of these words should describe a child’s experience of divorce.

Guiding Principle #2: Children must be kept in the center and out of the middle of their parents’ conflict.

It is understandable that divorcing parents will experience conflict with each other. It takes mindfulness and empathy for parents to set the kind of clear boundaries that keep their children from being drawn into the conflict. Being in the middle always impacts children negatively. It is toxic to use children as confidantes, ask them to take sides against the other parent or disparage the other parent in their presence. The decision to take the high road and not put children in the middle is one that parents will never regret.

Guiding Principle #3: There is such a thing as a good divorce for families.

Judith Wallerstein’s longitudinal research on the impact of divorce on children painted a bleak picture of negative, long term developmental, social, academic, emotional and behavioral effects. Wallerstein studied families who divorced in 1971, a time when family law was typically adversarial and divorce was socially stigmatized. In 1994, Constance Ahrens wrote The Good Divorce: Keeping your Family Together when your Marriage is Falling Apart based on her own longitudinal study. Ahrens found that when divorced parents could reduce conflict, communicate effectively, and co-parent cooperatively, their children did not experience long term adverse effects.

These children continued to feel a reassuring sense of family, transformed from under one roof to under two. With the right kind of personal and professional support, parents can make a healthy transition from a divorced couple to effective co-parents. Making this transition successfully makes a huge difference in the quality of life for children.

Non-adversarial methods of divorce undoubtedly enhance parents’ ability to create child-centered outcomes. Since 1990, there has been a sea change in family law, including models of collaborative practice, mediation and cooperative divorce. When divorce must happen, choosing a child-centered divorce process is another decision that most parents will never regret. For more information on Collaborative Team Practice, please visit the website of the Collaborative Divorce Institute of Minnesota .

January 14, 2014

I just finished watching the documentary, Divorce Corp, and I have to admit that I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, as someone who has devoted his career to helping people understand that divorce should not occur in court, or even in the shadow of the courthouse, this movie may be a powerful tool in raising awareness of this very serious issue. On the other hand, as someone who feels dedicated to the truth and who feels a deep commitment to helping people fully understand their options in a fair and honorable manner, I bristled at some of the sensationalism and the broad generalizations made from some extreme examples. To the extent that the movie attempts to show that the problem with our family law system is that it is inundated with corrupt judges, greedy lawyers and dishonest custody evaluators, I need to state very clearly that I do not believe that to be true. Having worked in the family law system in Minnesota for more than 30 years, including two decades in court, I have found that the majority of judges, divorce lawyers and custody evaluators are honest people who care about children. Indeed, one of the reasons I strongly believe that the adversarial system does not work in resolving family issues, is that operating in the shadow of an adversarial system often damages families even when you have good people involved. There is much need for reform of our system and there is a strong need to raise awareness about the alternatives to court. I had hoped that the movie would help people understand the existing alternatives to court rather than focusing almost exclusively on proposing legislative changes. To the credit of the movie makers, they did feature excellent commentary from two very credible peacemakers that I have come to know quite well. Woody Mosten and David Hoffman, two law professors who are worldwide leaders in mediation and Collaborative Practice, gave the movie producers valuable insights on how we can help families find a better way. While very few of those insights made it into the movie, the producers did release a trailer that discussed the benefits of mediation and Collaborative Practice as alternatives to court. An article by David Hoffman also does a good job summarizing many of the shortcomings of the film. As for the rest of the movie, I am recommending that people see the movie and draw their own conclusions. Even if you disagree with some of the exaggerations and proposed solutions, as I clearly did, it will at least get us all thinking and talking about this important issue. If you happen to be someone who is facing divorce, you should not emerge from this moving believing you will have found any answers or even a real grip on the truth of our family law system. Rather, my hope is that the movie will cause you to respect the important question about how to proceed with divorce so that you will seek out reliable information about all of your options. To learn more about Collaborative Law and other options that I believe are not clearly understood, go to www.collaborativelaw.org and www.divorcechoice.com.

January 10, 2014

In a recent collaborative divorce case, we learned from the clients that a tax liability of about $60,000 would be owed if they did not get their divorce by the end of the year. It was only a few days before Christmas and past the informal deadline set by the court for submitting final documents for a 2013 divorce. Adding to the challenge, my client had just changed her mind about a key provision in the financial settlement. I had already prepared and circulated a draft of the agreement which had been reviewed by our clients and an expert who had helped them with planning and financial issues concerning their special needs child. Now it all seemed to be unraveling and I fought against the urge to find someone to blame and prove it wasn’t me (I bet these thoughts crossed the minds of the clients and others on the team). Instead, we got to work on the problems as a team. The attorneys met with the expert concerning the special needs child and reviewed her suggested changes, made phone calls to our clients for approval, and drafted the new changes into the agreement. The child specialist who had worked with the clients during the collaborative process reviewed the suggested changes and made adjustments in the parenting plan which would be part of the final legal document. We also had some preliminary conversations with our clients about the proposed change my client wanted in the financial settlement and shared our clients’ views. The proposed change concerned the timing of the sale of real estate and the neutral financial expert who had worked with us during the collaborative process had been contacted about this issue. We checked calendars with the clients and the financial neutral and scheduled a meeting–unfortunately, the husband’s attorney was not available at the only time which worked for the rest of the team and the clients. We agreed to meet and the attorney for the husband would be available during the meeting by phone and email. We also needed to get a judge assigned to our case. The Joint Petition, which had been prepared in the beginning of the collaborative process, was filed with the court, which got us an assigned judge. The attorneys discussed strategy and we agreed that the husband’s attorney would take the lead in the calls requesting an expedited court process. There were a number of complications, including the fact that the judge was leaving on vacation that day. I listened in on the calls and was happy to hear that the judge’s clerk, after consulting with the judge, agreed to email the agreement to the judge once it was filed and the judge agreed to review it while on vacation. We still needed a final agreement on the financial settlement. At the meeting the next day, the financial neutral took the lead and discussed the consequences of the proposed change, which would also affect the funding for education for their children. Options were considered and discussed. I was present at the meeting but had agreed on a ground rule with the other attorney that I would refer to her all questions of substance from her client. As we developed the terms of the final agreement, the substance was shared with that attorney in phone calls and emails. I prepared the final draft of the agreement with the new terms, the clients and attorneys (one by email) signed, and it was filed with the court that day after an all morning meeting. The judge signed the final document and the clients were divorced in 2013. The key reasons for our success in working through the challenges: 1) The clients and professionals focused on solving the problems rather than assigning blame for the problems. 2) Clients and professionals relied on the strengths and expertise of different members of the team. 3) Trust among professionals allowed for flexibility and candor in the process. 4) Clients kept uppermost in mind the big picture goals for the family as a whole.

January 9, 2014

Most divorce attorneys charge between $200 and $350 per hour. That fact could become a real obstacle in your divorce (and can even drive you a little crazy), unless you find ways to deal with it effectively. Here are some tips that I think will help you come to grips with this difficult reality. Take a Macro Look at the Hourly Fees. Charging by the hour creates an enormous misconception about how a lawyer’s time is used. For example, if an attorney charges $285 per hour, it creates the impression that each hour they spend on behalf of clients is worth $285. Nothing could be further from the truth. When I look back on my cases, even the cases where I think my clients achieved a priceless outcome, I realize that many of the hours I spent on the case were not worth anything near that amount. Much of the time on the case is spent reviewing documents, listening to the client’s story about what has happened, describing the process to the client, going over ground rules, etc. Very likely, my client could find people to do some of those things for $15.00 per hour. Those tasks, by themselves, have little value. On the other hand, when I look back on my most successful clients, the ones where clients made great decisions during their divorce, I realize that some of the moments that I spent with clients created a great deal of value for them. A tangible example might be a time when I, often in conjunction with the other team members on the case, came up with a creative financial solution that saved the clients thousands of dollars in future taxes or transaction costs. The work spent on developing that option may have been less than an hour or two but may have led to savings that were worth more than ten times my hourly rate. More significantly (and this is the most abstract part of our business), there are moments when the assistance of an attorney may be nearly priceless. When a client is struggling with the emotions of the divorce in a way that is causing them to mistreat their spouse and inadvertently harm their children, this may be when they need the most help from their “advocate.” A good divorce attorney can sometimes help them rethink what they are doing; sometimes in subtle ways, like truly listening to a client, helping them see the impact of their behavior, urging them to get the help they need to address emotional barriers, or simply making sure they understand their options. The impact of that work may not be obvious at the time, or even for many years. Yet, when they look back, the clients come to realize that certain decisions that they made, hopefully with skilled guidance from their attorney, helped them achieve a priceless outcome for their family.