Posted on

When you hear “The Federal Reserve raised interest rates,” it sounds like bad news—especially if you’re going through a divorce and trying to figure out what happens to the house.

But it’s not quite that simple.

Think of the economy like a car going too fast. Inflation means prices are rising too quickly. One of the Fed’s tools to slow things down is raising the rate banks pay to borrow money overnight.

That can make borrowing more expensive throughout the economy.

But here’s something many people don’t realize: The Fed does NOT directly set mortgage rates.

Mortgage rates are influenced by the bond market, inflation, the economy, and what investors believe will happen next.

So why could a Fed rate increase eventually be helpful?

Because one reason the Fed raises rates is to fight inflation. If inflation begins coming down, longer-term interest rates—including mortgage rates—could eventually improve.

And that can matter A LOT during a divorce.

Higher mortgage rates can reduce what buyers can afford. That may mean fewer buyers competing for homes, slower home sales, and potentially less pressure pushing home prices higher.

For a divorcing couple, that can change the numbers in several ways.

Maybe one spouse wants to keep the house and needs to refinance to remove the other spouse. Maybe the house needs to be sold. Maybe both spouses need to qualify to purchase new homes after the divorce.

The interest rate, home value, equity, support payments and wording of the divorce decree can all affect what is possible.

That’s why the house shouldn’t be an afterthought in a divorce.

Before agreeing that “she keeps the house,” “he refinances within six months,” or “we’ll just sell it,” it makes sense to find out whether the plan actually works financially.

Sometimes waiting could help. Sometimes acting sooner makes more sense. And sometimes a small change in how the mortgage or divorce agreement is structured can make a major difference.

Don’t Make a $300,000, $500,000 or $800,000 Housing Decision Based on a Guess.

I’ve been in the mortgage business since 1999, and I help divorcing homeowners understand their mortgage options before important decisions become permanent.

If you are going through a divorce—or you’re an attorney, mediator or real estate professional working with someone who is—give me a call.

Let’s look at the numbers before you decide what happens to the house.

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.
Ph: 952-405-2090
www.RainbowMortgageInc.com

 

 

 

Posted on

Divorce after 50 involves a different set of financial stakes than divorce earlier in life. There’s less runway to rebuild retirement savings, more complexity in how assets have grown over decades, and often a spouse who has been out of the workforce far longer than anyone planned for. Most of the decisions in a divorce settlement can be revisited or adjusted over time. A handful cannot. Getting those few right, the first time, matters more than almost anything else in the process.

This holds true no matter which path a couple takes to get there. Whether the case is mediated, handled collaboratively, or litigated with each spouse independently represented, the financial mechanics underneath the settlement don’t change. Here are five decisions worth slowing down for, regardless of which room the conversation happens in.

  1. Not knowing your post-divorce budget

Almost everything else in a gray divorce settlement depends on this one, which is exactly why it tends to get shortchanged. Most people, married or not, don’t have a clear picture of where their money goes each month. That’s a manageable gap during a marriage. It becomes a much bigger problem when someone needs to prove, with real numbers, what they need to live on going forward, especially for the spouse who hasn’t been the one handling the household finances.

In Minnesota this support is called spousal maintenance (some states use the term alimony; it’s the same concept). Need must be demonstrated, and the other spouse must have the ability to pay. A spouse who underestimates their future budget, or who waives maintenance without a realistic number behind that decision, often can’t go back and ask for it later. In some settlements that waiver is permanent. Others are structured as reserved, meaning maintenance could still be modified later if certain conditions are met, but that’s not something to assume without it being spelled out clearly in the decree. If the money runs out five or ten years down the road, a permanent waiver is usually the end of the road, and inflation only accelerates how fast a fixed amount of savings loses ground.

This same budget also drives the decision about the house, whether Social Security timing matters yet, and how to fairly divide accounts with very different tax treatments. Even when maintenance isn’t part of the conversation, a realistic budget built before the settlement is signed, rather than guessed at afterward, is one of the more valuable things a divorcing spouse can walk into negotiations with.

  1. Dividing assets without accounting for the tax bill

Not all assets are taxed the same way when they’re divided, and treating a dollar in one account as equivalent to a dollar in another is one of the more common and costly mistakes in a settlement.

A 401(k) or a private-employer pension requires a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), a separate court order that must be drafted correctly and approved before any portion moves to a former spouse without penalty. Government, municipal, and military pensions use a similar but differently named order, since QDROs are specifically a private-sector concept; the mechanics are similar, but the terminology and the plan administrator’s rules differ. IRAs work differently still and don’t use either type of order; they’re divided through a direct transfer incident to divorce. The distinction matters because if the account owner withdraws or cashes out funds themselves instead of transferring them properly, the owner, not the receiving spouse, is the one who owes the tax and any early withdrawal penalty. This catches people off guard often enough that it’s worth stating plainly: whoever pulls the money out is the one who pays for it.

Brokerage accounts carry their own consideration, since assets with significant embedded capital gains can trigger a tax bill whenever they’re eventually sold, even though the split itself may be tax-free at the time of transfer. And the shift in filing status itself, from married filing jointly to single or head of household, compresses the income brackets each spouse now falls into, which changes the real, after-tax value of every account in the settlement. None of this needs to be resolved perfectly in the moment, but it needs to be on the table before assets are divided, not discovered afterward.

  1. Keeping the home without running the full numbers

The marital home is often the largest asset in a settlement, and the decision to keep it or sell it tends to get made emotionally long before it gets made financially. One spouse, often the one who wants to stay for stability or the children’s sake, may not have the ability to refinance the mortgage or buy out the other spouse’s share of the equity on their own.

The tax picture matters too. The capital gains exclusion on a home sale is $250,000 for a single filer and $500,000 for a married couple filing jointly, so whether the home is sold while still married or after the divorce is final can meaningfully change the tax outcome. And when one spouse keeps the home while the other receives an equivalent dollar amount in retirement accounts, that’s rarely an apples-to-apples trade; retirement dollars carry an embedded tax liability that home equity doesn’t, so a fair comparison requires tax-effecting both sides of that trade rather than comparing raw balances.

Underneath all of it is the budget question from the first section: can this person afford the mortgage, taxes, insurance, and upkeep on their post-divorce income? Sometimes the answer is yes. Often, running the full numbers reveals that keeping the house becomes a financial drag that outweighs the emotional value of staying, and selling turns out to be the more stable long-term choice.

  1. Claiming Social Security before running the numbers

If a marriage lasted ten years or longer, a former spouse may be eligible to claim Social Security benefits based on the other spouse’s earnings record, sometimes resulting in a higher monthly benefit than claiming on their own work history would provide. That same ten-year marker also opens the door to survivor benefits if the former spouse later passes away, which follow a different set of rules and can pay meaningfully more than the spousal benefit alone. There’s more strategy available here than most people realize: it’s sometimes possible to claim one benefit, survivor or retirement, while letting the other keep growing through delayed retirement credits, worth roughly 8% a year up to age 70, then switch to the larger benefit later. Getting that sequencing right depends entirely on the numbers and circumstances involved, and claiming the wrong way, or at the wrong time, can permanently close off the more valuable option. This is worth modeling out well before the benefit is needed, not in the months leading up to it.

  1. Letting beneficiaries and estate documents lag behind the divorce

This is the most common oversight, and one of the hardest to undo after the fact. Life insurance policies, retirement accounts, wills, powers of attorney (both financial and healthcare), healthcare directives, and trusts often still reflect a marriage that’s already ended, simply because updating them wasn’t part of anyone’s checklist.

Minnesota has a revocation-on-divorce statute that generally cancels a former spouse’s beneficiary designation once the divorce is final. It’s a useful backstop, but it shouldn’t be treated as a substitute for updating these documents directly. Statutes vary by state, coverage gaps exist, and the smarter, more reliable move is always to update beneficiaries and estate planning documents yourself in the weeks after a settlement, not to rely on a law to sort it out later. If something happens before that update is made, it usually can’t be undone.

Why this matters regardless of process

None of these five decisions depend on whether a divorce is mediated, collaborative, or litigated. They depend on whether someone with financial expertise is looking closely at the numbers before paperwork gets signed, starting with a realistic budget and carrying through every account, asset, and document that touches it. That’s true whether that expertise sits at the table as a neutral financial professional working with both spouses, or as an advisor supporting one spouse and their attorney through the process.

If you’re the one navigating this transition yourself, it’s worth asking your attorney or financial professional directly whether each of these has been addressed before you sign anything. And if you’re an attorney or mediator working with a client through a gray divorce, these are worth flagging early, well before the settlement is drafted. Once a divorce is entered into the court record, very little of it can be revisited, aside from modifiable items like child support or spousal maintenance review, and ongoing compliance between the parties. That’s exactly why these five decisions are worth getting right the first time.

Mike Miller, CFP®, CDFA®, is the founder of Integra Shield Financial Group and a member of the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota. He works with individuals and families navigating retirement and divorce transitions. Anyone working through their own gray divorce is welcome to reach out. So are family law professionals looking for a financial resource for clients.

Advisory Services offered through Cambridge Investment Research Advisors, Inc., a Registered Investment Advisor. Securities offered through Cambridge Investment Research Inc., a Broker/Dealer, Member FINRA/SIPC. Integra Shield Financial Group and Cambridge are not affiliated. Neither Cambridge nor Integra Shield Financial Group provide legal or tax advice.

About the Author

Mike Miller, CFP®, CDFA®, is the founder of Integra Shield Financial Group in St. Louis Park, Minnesota, and a member of the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota. He works with individuals and couples navigating retirement, gray divorce, and other major financial transitions, serving at times as a neutral financial professional in mediation and collaborative processes, and at other times as an advocate for one spouse working alongside family law counsel. Mike specializes in retirement income planning, Social Security optimization, and the financial complexities specific to divorce after 50. He’s a frequent speaker and educator on retirement income and financial well-being for both consumer and professional audiences.

Mike Miller, CFP®, CDFA®
Integra Shield Financial Group
Ph: (763) 201-1390
www.integrashieldfinancial.com

 

Posted on

One of the biggest mistakes we see during a divorce is trying to protect a low interest rate at all costs.

At first, it sounds like the obvious choice. But let’s see what it really costs.

The Situation

In 2020, you purchased a home with a $350,000 mortgage on a 30-year fixed loan at 3.25%.

Monthly principal and interest payment: About $1,523

Today: Your home is worth $550,000. You are keeping the home. You must pay your former spouse $100,000 for their share of the equity.

Now you have two options.

Option 1: Keep the Low Interest Rate

To avoid refinancing, you withdraw $100,000 from your retirement account.

Your 401(k) originally had $300,000 invested and has been averaging 6% annual growth.

If you leave the money invested, after five years your retirement account would grow to approximately:

$401,000

But after taking out $100,000, you only have $200,000 invested.

After five years, that account grows to only about: $268,000

The Real Cost Five years later…

Retirement account if you leave it alone: About $401,000

Retirement account after withdrawing $100,000: About $268,000

Difference: Approximately $133,000.

Most people focus on the fact that they “only” took out $100,000.

What they don’t see is that five years later, their retirement account is over $130,000 smaller than it could have been.

That’s the true cost of protecting that low mortgage rate.

Option 2: Refinance

Instead, let’s refinance.

Assume your current mortgage balance is about $304,000 and you borrow an additional $100,000 to buy out your former spouse.

New loan: About $404,000

Interest rate: 6.5%

New monthly principal and interest payment: About $2,556

That’s roughly $1,033 more per month than your old payment.

Yes, the payment is higher.

But your retirement account keeps growing.

The Lesson: Interest rates matter. But they aren’t the only number that matters.

We’ve seen many people make decisions based only on keeping a 3% mortgage, without realizing they may be giving up well over $100,000 in retirement savings over the next several years.

Every divorce is different.

Before you cash out your retirement to protect a low interest rate, make sure you’ve compared the true long-term cost of both options.

Sometimes the loan with the higher interest rate leaves you with more wealth in the long run.

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.
Ph: 952-405-2090
www.RainbowMortgageInc.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
serenity-prayerMany recovering alcoholics claim that the wisdom of The Serenity Prayer saved their life.  I have found in my practice that the wisdom contained in this simple prayer can also serve as an essential guide for helping people through a difficult divorce. The Serenity Prayer, which asks for the serenity to accept the things you cannot change; the power to change the things you can and the wisdom to know the difference, provides an important framework for dealing with almost all difficult situations. Divorce almost always creates unfortunate realities that lie outside our control; the fact that you will not see your children on certain days; the reality that your family income will now be spread through two homes; and many other stubborn truths.  These realities cannot be changed and, in the end, the ability to find acceptance and serenity is a worthy goal. Divorce also requires people to summon courage to address daunting challenges; finding ways to co-parent when you are angry or scared; learning to manage new financial challenges; or trying to communicate effectively in painful situations.  People who find this courage in divorce are much more likely to achieve their goals. Finally, gaining wisdom about which areas need acceptance and which challenges require us to act courageously is often the ultimate challenge in a divorce.  While some of this wisdom may come from divorce sources, some of the wisdom can be gathered by finding people you can trust to help you focus  your time and energy on your most important goals. One thing I like about the Collaborative Divorce Process  is the focus on giving people the tools they need to truly help themselves.  The first step in the process is generally to help clients identify their highest goals.  As the process evolves divorcing couples are counseled to accept the things beyond their control so that they can focus their attention and limited resources on the things that truly matter.  Clients who truly commit themselves to these principles can move from chaos to a new sense of order; sometimes even a deep sense of serenity.  In any case,  I have found that giving people the opportunity to gain wisdom about when to  “let go” and when to work for change is the most important part of a divorce attorney’s job.