|
Arnold Cribari offers three alternatives
for clients involved in divorce, custody and
visitation disputes and other family matters.
Choice 1: Mediation
Mediation is recommended when there is
an approximately equal balance of power between the divorcing
spouses who share common values. Both parties must be able to
advocate for themselves on a relatively equal footing. In this approach, one
attorney serves in a neutral capacity in mediating the two
parties’ negotiations. The goal is to help the couple reach a
meeting of the minds on all issues to avoid courtroom
litigation, and make a settlement agreement acceptable to both
parties. Once this meeting of the minds is reached, the
mediator recommends that each party have the proposed settlement
agreement reviewed by their own separate attorneys.
Choice 2: Collaborative Law
In collaborative
law, both spouses have their own
attorneys whose collaborative training
enables them to work as a team. The
attorneys focus on each spouse's needs
and concerns - and those of their
children - with the goal being a
settlement that works for everyone. Even
when there is an unequal balance of
power and strongly contested issues in a
divorce, skilled collaborative attorneys
make this an effective alternative for
many couples. Collaborative Law, like
mediation, takes the divorce process out
of the adversarial court-based system.
Unlike mediation, collaborative law
offers each spouse a skilled advocate to
provide legal advice and support
throughout the negotiating process. The
collaborative lawyers also serve as
peacemakers to help minimize conflict
and stress, and resolve disputes.
Collaborative Law is so different from
traditional adversarial-based negotiation, we have devoted a
separate section of this website to this innovative concept.
Click here for
a full explanation of Collaborative Law.
Choice 3: Traditional Negotiation
with Courtroom Litigation as an Option
This option often
takes place within the adversarial court
system. The adversarial system is
usually NOT the best forum for
dissolving a marriage, but – until
recently - it was the only system
available. Working within the
adversarial system is necessary when one
or both of the parties are more
interested in “winning,” than in coming
to an equitable resolution. It can be
the best alternative for a spouse that
has been the victim of serious abuse.
This is the most
expensive and emotionally draining
alternative. The negotiation in
this process is based on power and the
threat of courtroom litigation as an
incentive to come to an agreement.
Ironically, if negotiations break down,
both parties give up their power and put
the decisions in the hands of a judge.
Nevertheless, there are some cases that
must be handled this way. If this
approach is used, it is critical that
the attorney be highly skilled in the
subtleties of negotiation, but also
experienced with litigation, able to be
aggressive when necessary, and
well-versed in statutory and case law. |