Our group struggles with the logistics of introducing facilitators and
other allied professionals constantly, particularly because we have a
split of opinion/practice over whether starting the process in a
format other than 4-ways is appropriate.
On the one hand, we all know the value of facilitators and the wisdom
of having a neutral mental health participant at the first meeting.
On the other hand, about half of our association is steadfast in
believing that having a 5th or 6th participant should be the
collective decision of the 4-some: and by the Collaborative Attorneys
choosing the other participants in advance defeats the collaborative
spirit and takes control of the destiny of the spouses totally away
from them (bearing in mind that the wife and husband themselves chose
their own Collaborative Lawyers). Adding to the challenge of this
issue is that we've found many Collaborative Attorneys don't even
address the subject of other professionals when meeting with
prospective clients prior to the onset of the collaborative process.
Thanks for the insights, David and Happy 2009!
--
Dan
Daniel G. Cantone, Esq.
CANTONE LAW FIRM, P.C.
dgc@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Park Professional Building
5426 West Genesee Street
P.O. Box 475
Camillus, New York 13031
(315) 484-9255
fax (315) 484-9270
On 1/2/09, dmurch1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <dmurch1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It is always interesting to see how different professionals introduce other
collaborative professionals into the collaborative process. I think the
recent post about having the neutral be the intake portal is a fascinating
concept.
Recently I was working with a collaborative attorney and we were discussing
who we might work with to help with a new case we were starting. We chose a
financial and a mental health professional to begin.
lWe each spoke with our clients in seperate meetings and there were several
e-mails all around inviting the couple to let us know their schedule so that
we could each meet separately with the process fascilitator before we were
all together before we came all together at our scheduled meeting. The
holidays intervened and the meeting date was upon us.
We all met at the prearranged time and the couple acted as if we had never
had the discussion. They did not respond to the e-mails or phone calls.
Now tell me again why we need another professional at the table? It went
just fine. We just sat down and started explaining our roles and trotted out
a participation agreement and went on our way.
I have had this experience a couple of times now. Ground work and
preparation were made, but there was a bit of denial or passive/agressive
stuff going on and the clients behaved in ways that were a bit resistant.
What worked well was that the professionals weren't reactive and gently and
purposefully moved forward. It all worked out.
I wonder if anyone else has had a similar experience.
Happy New Year everyone.
Best,
Dave Murch
Rochester, New York
