What is the difference between Collaborative Practice and conventional divorce?
In a conventional divorce, one spouse files for divorce and sets in motion a series of legal steps which eventually result in a resolution of the case by the court. In this process the desires and goals of each party are most often not addressed, and their respective needs will not necessarily be met. The end result is a Judgment imposed on the couple which has been decided solely by the court. Unfortunately, spouses going through a conventional divorce often come to view each other as adversaries, and their divorce as a battleground. The ensuing conflicts can take an immense toll on the emotions of not only the spouses, but also their children. Collaborative Practice, by definition, is a non-adversarial approach to divorce. The spouses and their lawyers pledge in writing not to go to court. The spouses negotiate in good faith and achieve a mutually agreed upon settlement without court intervention. The cooperative nature of Collaborative Practice can greatly ease the emotional strain
In conventional divorce, one spouse sues the other for divorce and sets in motion a series of legal steps. These eventually result in a settlement achieved with the involvement of the court. Unfortunately, spouses going through a conventional divorce can come to view each other as adversaries, and their divorce as a battleground. The ensuing conflicts can take an immense toll on the emotions of all the participants, especially the children. Collaborative Practice, by definition, is a non-adversarial approach to divorce. The spouses—and their lawyers—pledge in writing not to go to court. They negotiate in good faith, and achieve a mutually-agreed upon settlement outside of court. The cooperative nature of Collaborative Practice can greatly ease the emotional strain caused by the breakup of a relationship, and protect the well-being of children.
In conventional divorce, one spouse sues the other for divorce and sets in motion a series of legal steps. These eventually result in a settlement achieved with the involvement of the court. Unfortunately, spouses going through a conventional divorce can come to view each other as adversaries, and their divorce as a battleground. The ensuing conflicts can take an immense toll on the emotions of all the participants, especially the children. Collaborative Practice, by definition, is a non-adversarial approach to divorce. The spousesand their lawyerspledge in writing not to go to court. They negotiate in good faith, and achieve a mutually-agreed upon settlement outside of court. The cooperative nature of Collaborative Practice can greatly ease the emotional strain caused by the breakup of a relationship, and protect the well-being of children.
A. In a conventional divorce, one party sues the other for divorce and sets in motion a series of legal steps. These eventually result in a settlement achieved with the involvement of the court. Unfortunately, couples going through a conventional divorce can come to view each other and all those involved as adversaries, and the uncoupling becomes a battleground of endless motions. The ensuing conflicts can take a tremendous toll on the emotions of all the participants, including the children. With a Collaborative case, it is, by definition, a non-adversarial approach to divorce. The parties, and their attorneys, pledge in writing NOT to go to court. The mental health and financial professionals are not allowed to go to court. They all negotiate in good faith and achieve a mutually agreed upon settlement outside of court. The cooperative nature of a Collaborative case can greatly ease the emotional strain caused by the ending of a marriage, and protects the well-being of the children.
In conventional divorce, one spouse sues the other for divorce and sets in motion a series of legal steps. These eventually result in a settlement achieved with the involvement of the court. Unfortunately, spouses going through a conventional divorce can come to view each other as adversaries, and their divorce as a battleground. The ensuing conflicts can take an immense toll on the emotions of all the participants, especially the children.
