Although Collaborative Law can be considered a breath of fresh air in the legal system, it is still a relatively new process for resolving disputes in Texas. It’s not widely known, but more and more people are learning about it and requesting that it be used. As the public seeks to learn about the process, they sometimes encounter misinformation. To help them recognize the bad information, I will briefly mention some common misconceptions. These comments will refer primarily to divorces, but Collaborative Law can be used on just about any family law issues.
1. “It only works if everyone is agreeable and wants to be fair.” Not true. Like any other divorce, a Collaborative divorce usually involves some serious disagreements. People bring their own agendas to the process and may choose it for a variety of reasons. The reason is rarely that everyone just wants to be fair and agreeable. (See other posts on this blog for reasons why people choose Collaborative Law.) People often start the process in an angry or hurt state of mind. When the parties really try to follow the guidelines of the process, Collaborative Law can change the way people act toward each other as they create solutions and achieve their goals.
2. “It won’t work for custody cases.” Not true. Actually, Collaborative Law in Texas provides better resources, in a more humane environment, for resolving custody cases, than does traditional litigation. We use neutral experts who work for both parties and help them find or create new solutions that are customized to the parties’ unique situation. In comparison, litigation generally relies on a “winner take all” approach and usually closely follows the statutory guidelines and schedules, whether they fit the situation or not.
3. “Both parties must completely trust each other for the process to work.” Not true. While there needs to be basic trust between the parties, the process provides more direct involvement by the parties, excellent verification of facts and the assistance of neutral experts who directly work with the parties to gather and interpret information. There will probably never be a divorce with complete trust between the parties – if that existed, they probably wouldn’t be getting a divorce.
4. “The process won’t work if there’s been adultery or other misbehavior.” Not true. There have been many successful Collaborative cases which involved adultery or other troubling issues. If people are willing to commit to focusing on their future instead of their past, they can successfully settle a case even with serious past indiscretions.
5. “Either party can easily hide assets and there’s no way to find them.” Not true. Even though there’s no formal “Discovery” which often takes place in litigated cases, the parties fully disclose records and information to each other. In addition, we often prepare a joint sworn Inventory of the assets and liabilities and utilize various joint, neutral financial experts as needed. We don’t do formal written Discovery or depositions. Instead, we get a thorough, but focused, overview and rely on joint experts to evaluate the facts and help us find and verify the relevant information. No system is perfect, however. The litigation system certainly has its share of hidden assets that “disappear” and are never located. In Collaborative Law cases, there are usually more eyes looking over the finances than there are in litigated cases, so there may be more protection of each party in Collaborative cases.
6. “It’s the way I/we have been practicing law for years.” Again, not true. Some attorneys have been very cooperative and less confrontational for years, which is great. For a long time, it has been clear that well over 90% of all divorce cases settled without a trial, so litigated cases often are resolved without a trial. Nevertheless, Collaborative Law is different in several significant ways: the lawyers cannot go to court (except to finalize the divorce and get the agreed order signed); at the outset, we focus on the parties’ goals and then follow a 4-step problem-solving process; we often use neutral mental health and financial professionals; and we meet and talk directly with each other in a series of relatively short meetings. Those are just some of the differences in the two processes. It’s nice to be cooperative and reach agreements, but the Collaborative process can produce better, customized results in a more civil atmosphere.
7. “Most people just want to get the best outcome possible for themselves.” Not true. That implies that Collaborative Law won’t help a person as much because it tries to have a good result for both people. Actually, there is no reason why both parties can’t have a good outcome. Collaborative Law’s emphasis on creating new, unique solutions means that the pie to be divided can actually be enlarged. Instead of relying on standard formulas and guidelines, Collaborative lawyers help the parties come up with new approaches “outside the box”. While some people are angry and want revenge on their spouse (and are not good candidates for Collaborative Law), a probably much greater number just want to get through the process without breaking the bank. Most people would accept a good outcome for their spouse if they also receive a good outcome.
As more people find out about Collaborative Law, many more will choose the resolve their important family legal disputes by that process. Clearing up myths, like the ones above, will help more people understand how Collaborative Law works and can benefit them.
Contributor: Dick Price (www.pricelawfirmtx.com), attorney in Fort Worth.
