What are the pros and cons of collaborative divorce?
Amy Zylman Shimalla’s Answer:
The one “negative” is that, if the process ends, the parties must retain new counsel, as well as new experts. The team members do not move forward with the parties into litigation.
The pros are so many. It is private, and there is no open, public court file or hearing. The collaboratively trained lawyers are also trained mediators, so they bring creative problem solving to the process. At the same time, each lawyer is an advocate for his/her client – so the parties have the benefit of having their advocates with them throughout the process. That is invaluable. Information is exchanged voluntarily, without formal discovery demands. And particular focus is on the well-being of the children, thus avoiding collateral damage.
Other Videos on Collaborative Divorce:
- How does someone choose the right collaborative lawyer for their unique situation?
- How does Collaborative Divorce work?
- Can the collaborative model be used if there is a business involved?
- Are there any advantages to using a collaborative process rather than litigation for high-net-worth cases?
- Why do the parties have to retain new lawyers if they decide to move from the collaborative process to litigation?
- If a couple is in litigation, is it too late to proceed in a collaborative divorce?
- How long does collaborative divorce typically take? Does it usually require multiple sessions?
- What makes a couple ideal candidates for collaborative divorce?
- Is it possible to achieve resolution via collaborative divorce for a high-conflict couple?