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.
After the service was over, my friend, Larry, came up to me and said, “When I die, I want you to do my eulogy!”
“Then he’s going to have to spend a lot more time with you,” my wife chimed in. “He’ll have to learn a lot more about you.”
“Oh, God, no!” said Larry. “I don’t want THAT. I want him to lie his head off about what a great guy I was.”
For my father-in-law, one of the Greatest Generation’s Navy veterans, there were many amazing accomplishments to remind his friends and family of. There was his status in the family, and the endless help he provided. There was comedy and quirkiness. There was love.
It all begged the question, as I put the remembrance together, of what could be said of anyone? How do you sum up someone’s life? What did they like? What drove them crazy? I thought about some of the divorce clients I’ve had over a 34-year career, about the ones who just wanted to know “what my rights are.” About others who’d never missed a school play all the way through public school, and were terrified they might, if communications broke down. I wondered what eulogies their children might deliver. What would those epitaphs be?
“I just want to know what my rights are”?
“Daddy! You came!”?
“You were always there for me, Mom!”?
It’s said the Past can inform the Present. It might be a good thing if the Future could, as well.
Collaborative divorce is often considered the “respectful way to divorce.” This doesn’t necessarily mean that the divorce is always amicable (although it can be), it means the divorce is done with grace and courtesy. Here are some (of the many) ways in which collaborative divorce can be respectful.
- Cooperation. Resolutions are reached through cooperation and collaboration. Confrontation is inefficient and usually ineffective – it is therefore not a part of this process.
- Honesty. All information is gathered in collaborative divorce through voluntary, complete, and good faith processes. Clients and professionals work together to make sure everyone has all the information needed to make decisions in their own best interest.
- Input. In a collaborative divorce, all voices are valued and heard. Even if it is hard for a client to express their feelings or thoughts on elements of the divorce, the opinion of everyone is valued. Collaborative professionals help ensure this input.
- Creativity. In collaborative divorce, we know there are no one-size-fits all resolutions. We work together to come up with complete and unique outcomes that fit clients’ lives moving forward.
- Support. Clients are not alone in the collaborative process. Every client has legal support with an attorney. Clients can also have neutral financial and parenting specialists as needed. Mental health professionals are also available in the process to help with the communication and emotional challenges of divorce.
- Values. Collaborative divorce starts with development of goals. All the work and resolutions go towards meeting these goals. Clients’ values and interests are key to the process.
- Health. Divorce ends with a future beginning. The collaborative process keeps the overall health and well-being of the couple and the children at the forefront. That health is a focus throughout the process and moving forward.
Many people contemplate and give great thought to starting a divorce. A person considering divorce wonders about cost and timing and how to tell their spouse they want to initiate the process. Many attorneys talk about filing papers with the court to start a divorce or serving papers on the other spouse. People also think about how to tell the children or extended family members they want a divorce. Very few people think about how the divorce process ends.
On the one hand, divorce ends with a Judgment from the Court granting the divorce. However, there are many emotional and relational endings to divorce as well. In collaborative divorce, after couples have respectfully worked together to come up with resolutions, the end of the divorce can take many forms. Here are some recent examples of how the collaborative divorce process can end:
- In a particularly challenging case with a lot of anger and distrust, Wife reached across the table at the end to shake her then ex-Husband’s hand. It took a lot of effort to make that gesture, but it was well received by Husband. Years later, Wife told her attorney that the day they signed papers and shook hands was the day they began healing their relationship. For their children’s sake, that handshake started some necessary changes in their relationship. Over time, their co-parenting relationship greatly improved.
- One couple hugged each other at the end of the process. They went out to have a drink together and toast their new beginnings.
- One client was overheard telling her attorney she was “going to miss her” and may need to stop by her office just to catch up. The attorney provided needed support and guidance through this difficult transition and it was hard for the client to say “good-bye” to that support at the end.
- A child specialist sent an email to both parents at the end of the divorce process. The child specialist congratulated the parents for working so hard to come up with resolutions that kept the children at the center of the process (and not in the middle). The child specialist specifically identified strengths and positive characteristics of both parents and their children. He wished them all well and offered to be an ongoing resource if needed. He entitled the email “The Beginning.”
You are a devout Christian and you think marriage should last forever. Yet you somehow find yourself facing divorce. No doubt you are feeling conflict. You had hoped your faith would help you avoid coming to this place; and you may even feel guilty about the fact that you somehow have found your marriage ending, even if the end of the marriage was not your fault.
Certainly if you believe your faith can help you salvage a happy marriage, you owe it to yourself to work to save the marriage in a manner consistent with what you believe. However, if the marriage cannot be saved, this may be the time to ask yourself if your Christian principles can guide you during this most difficult time in your journey.
Christianity challenges its believers to practice love, compassion and forgiveness, even under the most difficult circumstances. In a divorce you will find yourself, at some point, sitting across the table, from a person who you at one point felt a deep sense of love. Yet, the fear and anger and distrust fueled by divorce may trump all of those feelings. In addition, the behavior in your spouse during the divorce may not inspire a sense of love and compassion.
Still, Christian principles of love and forgiveness and compassion are meaningless if they cannot be applied to the trials and tribulations of divorce. A faith that challenges us to love our enemies and to turn the other cheek must, at minimum, challenge us to rise above our feelings of anger and fear.
Of course, a commitment to love and compassion do not mean that other principles of self preservation must be abandoned. The issues of a divorce will also require you to work to protect yourself, and your children. Is there a way to practice Christian love and still protect your family?
As a divorce attorney, I have worked with hundreds of Christian clients and devout people of other faiths who struggle with these issues. Sadly, I have seen some who have allowed the emotions of the divorce to put their faith on hold as they embraced an “all bets are off” approach and treated their spouse as a true adversary. Thankfully, in recent years, I have also worked with many clients, primarily in the Collaborative Process, who have drawn on their faith to find the courage to truly live Christian Principles through their divorce.
The Collaborative Process, by taking clients away from divorce and providing an entire team of professionals, is designed to help divorcing people bring their best selves to the table. For Christians, that can often mean drawing on principles of faith to face some of the most difficult trials and tribulations. 
Wow, the phrase “First vs. Second Wives” makes me cringe. There is so much wrong with it, or at least so much to dislike or be uncomfortable about.
Let me count the ways (Keep in mind that this is in the context of Spousal Maintenance).
It implies that there will be another wife after the first, which is a fair assumption, but still. It implies that the first and second wives will be at odds with each other over money, which is unfortunate and sad to think about. It implies that the husband, at least in his first marriage, is the breadwinner.
In our culture of perceived independence and self-sufficiency, it may strike us as dependent and therefore inconsistent with current cultural standards.
It uncomfortably reminds us that many spouses, most likely the wife and often for good reasons, give up career and educational advancement, and so their future financial independence and self-sufficiency, to stay at home with children for the benefit of the greater family. Then, if they divorce, they are in big financial trouble without consistent and lengthy financial support from their ex.
I’ve seen many couples divorce where the breadwinner doesn’t want to or just won’t acknowledge the homemaker’s non-financial contribution to the family and opportunity cost of being out of the workforce or taking a lower-paying, more flexible job. I’ve also seen many cases where the homemaker never left home after the kids were older, when it would have been more appropriate to find employment, because re-entering the job market was likely the original marital intent.
There is an interesting article in Time magazine’s May 27, 2013 edition titled “The End of Alimony” and a short radio segment, along eerily similar lines, on NPR titled “Alimony Till Death Do Us Part? Nay Say Some Ex-Spouses.” The basic premise of each is that there is growing momentum (but I’m not aware of any such movement in Minnesota) to limit Alimony court awards, or what we in Minnesota call “Spousal Maintenance.” The irony cited is that while ex-husbands used to be the only ones against Alimony, now second wives are also organizing to do away with Alimony, which their husband’s are paying to their ex-wives. The result, it is argued, makes for a pretty large constituency which legislators ignore at their own political peril.
There is no Spousal Maintenance calculator in Minnesota. Instead it is a case-by-case, facts-and-circumstances analysis.
One of the hardest, and grayest, part of the law in divorce is Spousal Maintenance. It often feels like pulling teeth to get a higher-earning spouse to even acknowledge that the lesser earning spouse has any reasonable financial need. Striking a balance to reach a fair outcome is the key.
Traditionally trained attorneys, in my opinion, often do a terrible job addressing Spousal Maintenance. Just bringing it up is likely to start a battle that is out of proportion to the reasonableness of the request.
That’s why Spousal Maintenance is a great issue to address with a Collaborative Divorce, because at the beginning of a Collaborative Divorce the attorneys and other professionals help the spouses identify their financial resources and shortfalls by analyzing their budgets in relation to their incomes. They also help the lower earning spouse explore their future career options (including going back to school) and therefore their reasonable financial need. The answer is not usually “yes” or “no”, in black and white. The initial answer is almost always “let’s evaluate this”, which is appropriate given the complexity of the question and the importance of the answer. 
I would not wish divorce on any married couple. It is a painful process and results in permanent loss. But I also do not like to see people suffer through unhappy marriages. Naturally, the best solution is to seek to improve the marriage so that both husband and wife can be happy. However, there are times when that is simply not possible. And for those people, their best option may be a “Happy Divorce”.
I realize that “Happy Divorce” is a misnomer. No divorce is truly “Happy”. However, in my thirty years of working with divorcing families, I have known many people who are much happier after the divorce than they were in the marriage. I have also known hundreds of couples who treat each other with more respect after the divorce than they did during the marriage. The ability to get through a divorce in a respectful manner can be an achievement of immeasurable worth; particularly if there are children of the marriage. No child wants to live in an unhappy home or, worse yet, two unhappy homes.
In our culture, we have come to expect that divorce will bring out the worst in people. But I have also seen couples who, although they are facing one of the most difficult times of their lives; have found a way to bring their best selves forward, often for the sake of their children.
Divorce is an end; but it is also a beginning. Many couples even greet divorce as an opportunity to improve their life skills. In some occasions, these couples, when faced with divorce, find ways to communicate more effectively; work to improve their parenting skills through a neutral parenting specialists; and even find ways to better their financial capacities through the help of a neutral financial expert. While there are many ways to achieve these goals, one method that is rapidly growing in popularity is called Collaborative Divorce, where couples work with a team of professionals (lawyers, mental health professionals and financial experts) to help them improve their lives after divorce in significant measurable ways. To learn more about this option, go to www.collaborativelaw.org or www.divorcechoice.com.
T. Boone Pickens Photo Creative Commons Licensed, Author: David Shankbone
Texas millionaire T. Boone Pickens found a way to save “several millions” on his divorce. His discovery could save you something just as valuable.
When T. Boone Pickens recently filed for his fourth divorce, he decided to try something different. Rather than proceed with a traditional divorce, as he had on the previous three occasions, he decided on a Collaborative Divorce, a process he claims saved him “ several millions”.
In an interview with the Dallas Business Journal, Mr. Pickens said that said that “Collaborative law keeps everything on a high level, and everybody cooperating.”
In fact, Mr. Pickens was so grateful for the Collaborative process that he has recently donated $100,000 to the Collaborative Law Institute of Texas.
If you are facing divorce, this may not mean much to you since you probably are not in a position to save (or lose) millions. However, you may find that you can save something even more valuable. Mr. Pickens was impressed that the Collaborative Process not only helps clients save money but saves on the “emotional wear and tear on families.” For most families who face divorce, this is the more crucial issue. Collaborative Divorce is a method where attorneys and other professionals work with divorcing family for settlement purposes only and resolve issues out of court.
I have represented hundreds of families through the Collaborative Divorce process and while none of these families saved millions of dollars, many of them are just as elated because of what it saved on the emotional wear and tear on their families . Most parents would agree that while a divorce process that saves us money can be worth millions, a process that spares the emotional wear and tear on our families can be priceless.
To learn more about the Collaborative Process, go to www.Collaborativelaw.org.