Cat:
Thanks for the ideas. Actually, there is not any significant amount of
anger involved in either case, but I was disappointed that two IACP members
folded so easily when their clients hesitated to sign the full collaborative
agreement. I would expect a trained collaborative law practitioner to spend
some more effort on explaining how the disqualification provision is essential
to the process instead of laying it on me to decide how to cope with a less
than ideal arrangement.
The group responses have been useful. Thanks again.
Tom H. Nagel
Columbus, Ohio
----- Original Message -----
From: Cat Zavis
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 8:24 PM
Subject: [CollabLaw] Re: WACTD?
Hi Tom ~
It sounds like you are frustrated and perhaps exasperated with the experience
of having collaboratively trained practitioners propose something short of
Collaborative Divorce. Do you want to trust that your colleagues hold the
same vision you do for the practice of Collaborative Law in your community? I
wonder if you are confused about this and want some understanding and clarity
about the intentions for practicing CL in your community? I also wonder Tom if
you are pretty angry about how this unfolded in the case and if you'd like some
trust and perhaps an agreement with attorneys in your community that if a
client has concerns about signing the par! ticipation agreement and the
attorney knows about those concerns ahead of time, that those be shared with
the other attorney both so the other attorney has a heads up and can prepare
his/her client and also so the attorneys can work as a team and determine how
best to proceed?
If it's possible to shift from your feelings of frustration, anger,
exasperation (if those are feelings you are experiencing) I would encourage
some curiosity - both about what might be going on for the attorney and what
might be going on for the client.
I would have a conversation with the other attorney and ask, from a place of
genuine curiosity what is going on for him/her. For example, I might say, are
you concerned about having the clients sign the participation agreement in this
case because you have concerns about whether CL is appropriate in this
situation? Are you uncomfortable signing the participation agreemen! t
yourself? If so, can you help me understand why? Perhaps the attorney is
worried about liability. Perhaps the attorney is concerned that he/she doesn't
have the skills to successfully navigate a case using CL and wants to be able
to support his/her client and have a sense of competence and success. I
imagine there's a lot to learn and explore in this conversation.
I then would explore with curiosity what is going on for the client. Is the
client afraid that the process won't be successful and is the client thus
worried about the expense of starting over? Does the client want a sense of
trust that the process will be successful? Is s/he needing a sense of trust
that the process will be effective and efficient? Is s/he needing some
financial security and wanting to know that his/her resources are being spent
wisely? I'd be curious to know what the fears are around the process itself?
What is the client afraid about? What is s/he worried won't work? What ! is
s/he needing to have more trust in the process? Can that be provided?
Hope this is of help.
Thanks ~
cat
--
Cat J. Zavis
Counselor at Law
360-820-9955
c! at@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.catjzavis.com
The information contained in this transmission is attorney privileged and
confidential. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
named herein. IF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT ADDRESSED TO YOU, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED
THAT YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO REVIEW THE ATTACHED PAGES AND THAT ANY
DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately by telephone collect at 1-360-820-9955, and return the original
message to us (and/or delete from email). Thank you.
WACTD?
Posted by: "Tom Nagel" tomnagel@xxxxxxxxxxx tomnagel42
Thu Jan 27, 2011 6:13 am (PST)
WACTD? stands for What's A Collaborator To Do?
I've been WACTD twice in recent months when a fully trained collaborative
practitioner has announced in our first 4x meeting that their client does not
want to sign the collaborative law agreement (in one case) or wants to delete
the attorney disqualification provision from the participation agreement. Both
times the other attorney wanted to continue working on the case with me and my
client, but without it being a full fledged collaborative case.
So do you play along, or throw the clien t to the wolves of litigation, or is
there some other option?
Here's what I did. I proposed the question to this forum. (Next best thing to
posting the attorney's picture on YouTube.)
Thoughts?
Tom H. Nagel
Judicatum Procurator Recuperatio
