Ann
Your post, as is usual, cuts to the heart of the issue. How we are viewed
is less through our own eyes but through the eyes of the clients. I think
that it is a mistake at times to make the Collaborative process sound as if
it is free of pain and discomfort.
With your experience, you are able to put things into perspective but the
client who is going through what may be their only divorce is totally lost
and doesn't realize how ugly things can get. I know that I laughed at the
War of the Roses, until I went through my own divorce, which was probably
one of the simplest and yet , did get out of hand at times.
From my own perspective, I also find it interesting to somehow include the
"roadmaps" that were shared, with the idea of how does the CL really appear.
I do not recall which group used the term "pro-bono" to describe their
initial six way meeting with the client in an attempt to have the client
retain the team, for a fee of course. What struck me was rather than
saying a complimentary consultation, in order to sell a service, they
labeled it "for the public good."
From: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Ann Gushurst
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 3:54 PM
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; cppil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [CollabLaw] How different from litigation? How much like
mediation? Is our message getting distorted? Is CP getting distorted?
cMr,
Unfortunately, it REALLY depends on the people involved - including the
participants.
I have a good friend who is not practicing in Colorado who claimed to have
done dozens and dozens of collaborative cases . Upon talking to several of
the clients, I realized that the 'collaborative' process followed sounded
really a lot like what was described below. controlled settlement
negotiations between two attorneys who were really used to working together.
I also know that in some of my own cases, we resorted to more of a
settlement negotiation when the parties fired/ refused to work with coaches.
However, my guess is that most of my clients would not describe their cases
as outlined below.
Having said that, the perspective a client has about the process can often
vary markedly from the perspective of the professionals. I am constantly
reminded of that. Just the other day, we finished a very difficult case
which was NOT collaborative, but which was settled in mediation (of a very
settlement negotiation type). The client was very unhappy with the way the
final two days wrapped up with the myriad of last minute negotiations and
demands, and was very unhappy with the opposing counsel. And while some of
his complaints were very valid, I reflected on how really, his case was
fairly civil, many of the last minute hiccups were the product of opposing
counsel's inexperience and opposing party's mean-spiritedness (after all,
they were getting divorce for a REASON) but they were MINOR.
It's all perspective right? My client was irate. Was threatening to pull
the plug. And while it was annoying, it was a good site better than a 6
month litigation battle - but how to impart that to the client? "Look, it
could have been WAY worse and way more expensive, count your blessings. She
was only bitchy for two days.??" just kind of rings hollow, you know?
Same for collaborative divorce which, when all is said and done, is still a
divorce - painful, expensive, and full of unexpected loss.
Ann
From: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of carl Michael rossi
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 11:13 AM
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; cppil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [CollabLaw] How different from litigation? How much like mediation?
Is our message getting distorted? Is CP getting distorted?
I put this also on a LinkedIn Group....but I still prefer using the
listServe for such questions....
Came upon a very interesting chart comparing
Mediation-Collaborative-Litigation....compiled by a non-attorney mediation
service in New Jersey and Illinois. Some highlights from the CP column:
"Child Focused? - Maybe - collaborative divorce is directed by two family
attorneys who may or may not have your children's best interests in mind."
"Participation by the Parties - Medium - Collaborative divorce is controlled
by family attorneys and other professionals. You have some input in the
settlement they draft."
"Fairness - Medium - Having a family attorney fight for you might lead to a
fairer agreement. Or it might not.If you're lucky you'll have two attorneys
in the room who know each other and can at least try and work together."
"Likelihood of compliance - Moderate - The parties may have had some hand in
the settlement but since it was more likely directed by two family
attorneys, you may or may not agree with the settlement and want to comply."
Obviously this person is pushing his own services. But how far off is he? My
perception is that the more a professional considers CP as "settlement", the
more the process ends up being just what this one says about us.....that it
isn't all that different from litigation. What do you think? How do you make
sure that you are NOT just 'settling'?
InJoy!
cMr
Collaborative Practice Chicago
Divorce Without Warfare
carl Michael rossi, M.A. J.D., L.P.C.
Attorney, Mediator, Coach, Counselor
773-442-2751
<mailto:cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> cMr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<http://www.cpchicago.net/> www.CPChicago.net
Executive Director, <http://cppillinois.com/> Collaborative Practice
Professionals of Illinois
Publisher, The World of Collaborative Practice
<http://theworldofcollaborativepractice.com/> : A Magazine Promoting
Collaborative Dispute Resolution for the Full Range of Possibilities. An
international online magazine for professionals and the general public
Attachment:
binoeU7aDF5FQ.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped
Attachment:
binAZTfyfbvHh.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped
