I have incorporated referrals to child specialists in all of my case
consultations in which children are involved. I find that my clients tend to
have an easier time suggesting to their spouse that the two of them meet with a
neutral child specialist as an entry to the process option conversation.
The couple then meets jointly for a consultation with the child specialist for
a child-centered conversation about options, impact of choices on children, how
to talk with children… My experience is this anchors the couple in the area
(i.e., their children) where they have the most common goals and interests.
The child specialist can also provide the spouse with collaborative lawyer
referrals.
Locally, other professionals (including therapists) are starting to refer
directly to the child specialist who may then be a referral resource for
collaborative lawyers. Interesting how less lawyer-centric cases are when the
child specialist originates one or both referrals.
I use this same approach in my mediation practice with very positive results
for the family and the process.
Susan Hansen
Collaborative Lawyer and Mediator
www.h-hlaw.com
[Firm logo]
Hansen & Hildebrand, S.C.
126 N. Jefferson Street, Suite 401
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 USA
' P: (414) 273-2422
• E: sah@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sah@xxxxxxxxxx>
Co-founder: Milwaukee Mediation Center
www.milwaukeemediationcenter.com
From: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 7:55 AM
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Megan Yates
Subject: RE: [CollabLaw] RE: Neutral Coach - Participation Agreement
"Yes, disqualification is an important distinction, but from the client's
point of view, not the most convincing or understandable distinction."
I respectfully disagree.
I have found that when the dynamics of the withdrawal provision are explained
with true conviction and understanding (and that is a full workshop by itself)
clients do understand the value of the disqualification agreement very well,
(sometimes more than the attorneys). Many attorneys, particularly when they
have not had a lot of cases, have an instinctive hesitation about the
withdrawal provisions that causes them to explain it in an unconvincing way.
Consequently, their clients are not impressed with the collaborative
commitment. When we add the lukewarm feelings about the withdrawal provision
with the clients is being told that he or she needs to hire a full team, the
client simply chooses another process. That dynamic is not helping increase the
use of coaches.
The disqualification provision (or Collaborative Commitment) is the cornerstone
that shifts the whole way of thinking and opens the door to great ideas such as
working with other professionals. Helping clients really understand what
they means is the most difficult aspect of our Collaborative training because
it involves both internal shifting and external skill development. As our
skill in truly understanding how to energize clients around the Collaborative
Process improves, the number of Collaborative cases, and the number of cases
involving coaches will increase.
Yes, during our first 25 years, clients have typically come in through the
lawyer portal and we have come to see that as "lawyer centric". I agree that
it a good sign that clients are starting to come in through other portals.
When that happens, the clients sometimes choose to have the lawyers absent from
some of the meetings and, quite often, that goes very well. Clients will be
drawn to what is truly working, so we need to be as "client centric" as
possible.
Ron Ousky
Collaborative Attorney and Mediator
Wevorce Associate
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 550
Edina, MN 55435
(952) 806-9787
www.ousky.com<http://www.ousky.com/>
www.collaborativedivorceoptions.com<http://www.collaborativedivorceoptions.com/>
www.wevorce.com<http://www.wevorce.com>
[C mark]
From: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 2:40 AM
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Charles D. Stark; Megan Yates
Subject: RE: [CollabLaw] RE: Neutral Coach - Participation Agreement
The Collaborative movement about 15 + years ago, started as an attorney centric
movement. I expected that the portal to Collaborative Practice would shift to
the mental health community. However, it seems most couples come to
Collaborative Practice through their attorneys than any other source.
As an attorney, I deem it to be my professional responsibility to inform all
clients of all process choices. It is difficult to present the pros and cons
of Collaborative practice to a client for informed decision without discussing
in depth the pros and cons of one or two coach models and a neutral financial
analyst. While I respect a client's choice, it is hard to distinguish
Collaborative Practice from cooperative practice, if there is not a team as
aproach. Yes, disqualification is an important distinction, but from the
client's point of view, not the most convincing or understandable distinction.
Chuck Stark
Santa Rosa, CA
sonomacountylawyer.com
C.D. Stark
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: "Ron Ousky ron@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ron@xxxxxxxxx> [CollabLaw]"
<CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: 05/14/2015 8:17 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Megan Yates <megan@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:megan@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [CollabLaw] RE: Neutral Coach - Participation Agreement
Thanks Aaron,
'
Yes, I have found that if I can be as clear as possible with my client about my
role as a Collaborative attorney, I get hired to do Collaborative work with
high frequency. Once I have earned their trust and helped the client look at
the divorce process differently, it is much easier for them to understand how a
coach can be helpful. That way, they get true "buy-in" one step at a time.
It is the same method I use in describing the role of financial neutrals and
child specialists as well. I do not make either of them mandatory, but I am
guessing I have about as many cases involving each of those professionals as
anyone around. I truly think that the push toward an orthodoxy of "full
teaming" (whatever that truly means) has had the unintended consequence of
reducing the number of families who are able to benefit from the Collaborative
Process and keeps the work for coaches quite sparse.
Ron Ousky
Collaborative Attorney and Mediator
Wevorce Associate
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 550
Edina, MN 55435
(952) 806-9787
www.ousky.com<http://www.ousky.com/>
www.collaborativedivorceoptions.com<http://www.collaborativedivorceoptions.com/>
www.wevorce.com<http://www.wevorce.com>
[C mark]
From: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 8:39 PM
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Megan Yates
Subject: Re: [CollabLaw] RE: Neutral Coach - Participation Agreement
Ron Ousky wrote:
"Ironically, I believe this approach has actually allowed me to team
with far more coaches than if I had taken a more rigid approach."
Ron, this is a very interesting statement. Could you say more about this?
Aaron Welt (highly underused Collaborative Divorce Coach)
Aaron G. Welt, Ph.D.
261 James St.
Suite 2-C
Morristown, NJ 07960
973-538-7490
awelt@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:awelt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Ron Ousky ron@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ron@xxxxxxxxx> [CollabLaw] wrote:
Thanks Robert,
I have to confess that I cringe at the word "mandatory" in this
context. I am a believer in Stu Webb's "One Rule Only" principal
that states case need only meet one criterion to be called
Collaborative: The professionals must withdraw if the matter proceeds
to court.
I have found that holding firm to that one rule and having flexibility
with all other rules has allowed me to help a greater number of
families through the Collaborative method. Ironically, I believe
this approach has actually allowed me to team with far more coaches
than if I had taken a more rigid approach.
*/Ron Ousky/*
Collaborative Attorney and Mediator
Wevorce Associate
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 550
Edina, MN 55435
(952) 806-9787
.
Attachment:
binUcO1sGZp0r.bin
Description: image005.jpg
Attachment:
binCdMwctQXIo.bin
Description: image006.jpg
Attachment:
binJ_eHnqQJL_.bin
Description: image002.png
