Sunday, July 19, 2009

Collaborative Divorces It Is Better to Collaborate Than Fight

Less expensive in these days of recession, too.

Two articles today that I am combining into one with the theme being less expensive divorces.

First, from Domestic Diversions comes Happy divorces: using collaborative divorce to avoid more trauma:

Smart Money shows how making joint decisions can cost less and feel better.
Aleksandra Todorova writes (excerpt):
The goal of collaborative divorce is to avoid that. “In a collaborative divorce, the decisions have to be made by the couple,” Stoner says. The two sides and their attorneys meet together and talk until they reach an agreement everyone deems fair. They agree to provide all information — such as financial records — voluntarily, rather than having their lawyers gather evidence. As a result, collaborative divorce can be significantly less expensive, Stoner says. Costs vary depending on the case, but while a typical litigated divorce could run as high as $150,000, collaborative would be closer to the $15,000 to $20,000 range, according to the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP).

From the UK Telegraph comes Fast-track separations for couples who agree:

Last night, Mr Justice Coleridge announced that such orders could now be approved within a couple of days.

He took the unusual step of reading out a judgment in which he had previously ruled that collaborative law agreements could be brought before the duty judge assigned to hear the day’s urgent cases.

Provided every aspect of the case had been agreed and the hearing would last no more than 10 minutes, all that was needed was a day’s notice to the court and a chance for the judge to read the papers overnight.

“I think every conceivable encouragement should be given to parties to negotiate by this method,” the judge said in a case called S v P.

How much is it worth just to fight for the sake of fighting?

No comments: