Just Noting Some Blog Posts

Just noting some interesting posts that I wish I had more time to comment on but I think worth reading.

Children & divorce: where do we go from here? By guest bloggers Stephen Hopwood & Andrea Essen. from Marylin Stowe's blog has this:

Well, the unpalatable truth remains that although the Children Act is the best fix for a difficult situation, it will never be as effective as an agreement made by parents who work together for their children. What is more, a recent survey of 4,000 parents and children makes for grim reading. Seventy per cent of parents quizzed cited the child’s welfare as the main priority during separation. However:

• Nineteen per cent of children reported that they felt used, 38 per cent felt isolated and 37 per cent felt alone.
• For 38 per cent of children, the separation meant they never saw their fathers again.
• Many admitted that they had turned to drink and drugs, played truant from school or self harmed.
• Fifty per cent of parents admitted putting their children through an intrusive court process to ascertain access issues and living arrangements.
• Twenty-five per cent of parents surveyed believe that their child was so traumatised by the separation that they self harmed or contemplated suicide.
• Twenty per cent of separated parents admitted that they actively set out to make their partners experience “as unpleasant as possible”, regardless of the effect this had on their children’s feelings.

Woudl that we could have a study like this in Indiana.

Family Law Prof Blog has Georgia Clarifies that Disclosure of Financial Information Is Required for an Enforceable Premarital Agreement.  I cannot imagine any reason for this not to be considered the best practice for Indiana (even if Georgia law itself has no application here).

Also from Family Law Prof Blog are A Divorce Fair? and The Recession's Impact on Child Support.

And I will close with Domestic Diversion's The kids are alright: How children of same-sex couples are doing

Divorce: Deaing with how the divorce affects the children

Another non-legal post because these problems affect the legal case. Child-Centered Divorce published When Children of Divorce Act Out – Caring Parents Step Up!

Diffusing blame. Some children, especially pre-teens and teens, may blame one parent or the other for the divorce. Sometimes they may be correct in this interpretation given circumstances they have been aware of for years (alcoholism, absent parent, domestic violence, etc.). Other times they side with one parent as a result of their prior relationship …

... Regardless of why you or your spouse is being blamed, keep your cool. In many cases blaming is a defense against feeling overwhelmed by the circumstances in your child’s life. Suddenly there are so many changes in such a short period of time. Often this behavior is not meant against you personally. It is merely a child’s way of coping. When you keep this in mind it is easier to not personalize the outbursts and accusations. Patiently remind your child that you understand their frustrations. Acknowledge they have a sincere right to feel that way. Tell them how much you love them and how much you regret their hurt and pain. Let them know this was a difficult decision for both parents yet one you feel is the best alternative for your family’s future happiness and well-being. Be patient and consistent. And don’t internalize a child’s expressions of frustration as a lack of love for you as a parent.

Countering distress. Often, negative comments from your children are expressions of distress and not criticism. Children want and need encouragement, support, and security during times of stress and change. If their needs are not being met because one or both parents are too caught up in their own hurt and drama, it is not surprising to hear negative comments and outbursts. When you realize that this is a call for attention, recognition and the emotional healing that you can provide, you can move into action. This is the time to reinforce your comments about the key messages every child needs to hear. They include: You are safe. You are loved by Mom and Dad. You will not lose Mom or Dad. You are not to blame for the divorce. Although change can be challenging, everything will work out okay.

Patient acceptance. In many ways divorce is like death. Sometimes the best thing you can do is fully be there for your children and understand what they are going through from their perspective. Talk if they want to talk. Hug and cuddle if they respond to affection. Continue as many family routine activities as possible on a day-to-day basis. Be honest and sincere when you are upset or frustrated by changes in your family life – and let them express their frustrations, as well. Most importantly, accept and acknowledge whatever they share with you as okay for them to feel. Try to put yourself into the mind-set of your six, ten or fifteen year old and experience the world from their viewpoint. It will help you be more empathic, less judgmental and more open to really “hearing” what they have to say.

Looking to Lower Cost of a Divorce?

I do not necessarily agree with Domestic Diversions' Rush to judgment: how to lower the costs of divorce as I think mediation increases the cost of a divorce. The people have to pay for the mediator and then pay someone to make sure that the terms are properly put before the court. (I assume that the parties have assets, including real estate, and/or children and those issues lead to the mediation).

Divorce mediation, in which a neutral third party helps a couple negotiate an agreement, is an even cheaper alternative for folks who can still bare to sit at the same table. Doskow estimates it costs about half as much as a contested divorce. But the expense isn’t the only reason she’s a proponent. “I like mediation because it keeps the decision making with the people who are most invested in it,” she says.

I assume the original writer meant "bear" and not "bare" but therein lies the real problem with mediation - for me - if the parties can agree then they should just pass Go and find an attorney who will do an uncontested divorce for them. A lot of money is saved by the lack of fighting.

All the same, remember mediation is an option. You need to decide if it is a feasible option for you.

I cannot find any fault with SmartMoney.com's The Top 5ive Mistakes to Avoid When Getting Divorced at SmartMoney.com and especially the first "mistake" on its list:

GETTING DIVORCED CAN be a daunting experience. After all, you're not only breaking up with your spouse, but you're also carving up your assets and the time you spend with your children (if you have them). With so much emotional and logistical baggage to deal with, the entire process can be lengthy and expensive. However, with just a little planning, you can avoid some of the most common — and costly — pitfalls that divorcing couples experience.

Here are the top five mistakes you should avoid when splitting with your husband or wife.
1. Being Unprepared
Always keep in mind that divorce attorneys charge by the hour. In some major cities, those rates can climb as high as $200 to $300 an hour. That's all the more reason why it's important to do as much of your own legwork as possible. For example, in order to start splitting up you and your spouse's assets, your lawyer will need copies of all your financial and legal documents, including tax returns, bank statements and a list of your outstanding debt. By gathering and organizing the paperwork on your own, you can easily save several hundred dollars, says Daniel Clement, a New York-based divorce attorney. Leave the paper chase to your attorney, and you're basically paying him to compile what's sitting in your mailbox, he says.

Do give the other four a read.

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?

Educate your family about your divorce

Alaska Divorce Blog provides some very interesting article. I read Divorce: Tips For Your Parents and Relatives and kicked myself for not having thought of this subject. I would only add that these tips apply to custody and child support and paternity and visitation cases. Which means they apply to all my family law cases. Here is the advise from Alaska:

There are a couple of things that you can do to attempt to avoid having your family create additional conflict between you and your spouse or to jeopardize your position in a contested custody case.

• It is important for the children to be able to have good relationships with both sides of the family. Therefore, avoid the temptation of calling your spouse’s parents or relatives to discuss the details of the divorce or to talk your feelings about your spouse. If you have a need to “vent” which is only natural, find a good counselor who can help you work through your feelings about the other spouse.

• At the point you decide to tell your parents or other relatives that a divorce is on the horizon, encourage them to avoid discussing the details of the divorce with your spouse’s parents or relatives. In particular, explain to your family that any e-mails or letters they send to your spouse’s parents or relatives could end up in the court file, particularly if you think there is going to be a disagreement over physical or legal custody of the children.

You can educate your family about the positive effect they can have upon your children during this difficult transitional period. Hopefully, you can make them understand that you are looking at the long-term benefits to the children, which result from having healthy relationships with both sides of the family. This of course assumes neither of the parents or relatives have domestic violence, physical, sexual or substance abuse. The presence of any of these factors would alter the landscape of the divorce case and could require a different approach. If you have any concerns about these issues you should discuss them with your divorce lawyer.

Collaborative Divorce

I mention collaborative law on a fairly often basis. Rochester Family Lawyer wrote what I think is a good outline with the Basics of Collaborative Family Law

"Collaborative divorce in New York uses informal methods of financial disclosure such as voluntary production of financial documents, four-way conferences, negotiation, and where needed, outside professionals, including family counselors, accountants and financial planners.

Collaborative law creates a cooperative atmosphere, unlike the adversarial atmosphere of the courtroom. Unlike mediation and arbitration, Collaborative Law provides the client with trained legal advocates, without the court costs. A New York divorce handled in court is likely to be much more expensive and time consuming than the costs and time involved in collaborative law.

Collaboration represents the middle ground between mediation and full adversarial litigation. In mediation, the parties meet with a neutral mediator who assists the parties to find a compromise. In mediation the parties advocate for themselves, the mediator cannot give any party advice or assist either of the parties in advocating their position."

***

Some General Principals and Guidelines of Collaborative Law:

Negotiation through cooperation rather than adversarial strategies
Practicing law through problem-solving negotiations in which the parties are proactive, seek to understand and to be understood
The parties are responsible for the action and the outcome
The parties develop common ground rather than focus on differences
The parties seek to understand the other person’s interests and concerns, which will lead to creative solutions to problems
The parties seek to resolve issues and concerns with each accepting and supporting the other person’s opinions

Remember, if you want more information about retaining me for a case, please give me a call at 765-641-7906.

The Costs of Collaborative Divorce

I am not so sure that I am greatly surprised that collaborative divorce might have a high price tag. Thanks to Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer for leading me to this letter to The Toronto Star - Collaborative divorce not cheap:

"Collaborative divorce is a translation for making lots of money. I was advised that the process would cost anywhere from $4,000 to $8,000. After almost 12 months, I'm looking at more than $15,000 with no end in sight. Between the two lawyers, facilitator, financial adviser and lawyers' assistants, the money I could have put into my children's education has gone down the drain.

There is nothing about the process that is collaborative – other than how the players collaborate together to make money."

I also want to note this from Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer's article, A Canadian Participant Rates Collaborative Divorce as … Not Cheap:

"Collaborative divorce has been enthusiastically embraced by many attorneys and other professionals serving people going through divorces.

Its primary virtues are touted as:

1. nonadversarial
2. less costly than litigation

Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on the particular case and parties."

The New Economy and Divorces

Another example where Indiana, and especially the Anderson area, has a led on the rest of the country: In Housing Fall, Breaking Up Is Harder to Do. The New York Times reports a problem we have had here for a while and I expect to persist.

Chalk up another victim for the crashing real estate market: the easy divorce.

With nearly one in six homes worth less than the mortgage owed on it, according to Moody’s Economy.com, divorce lawyers and financial advisers around the country say the logistics of divorce have been turned around. “We used to fight about who gets to keep the house,” said Gary Nickelson, president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. “Now we fight about who gets stuck with the dead cow.”

As a result, divorce has become more complicated and often more expensive, with lower prospects for money on the other side. Some divorce lawyers say that business has slowed or that clients are deciding to stay together because there are no assets left to help them start over.

I can say that there is no easy solution to this problem. One current case has several upside down properties. That has been the easiest case - the client is judgment proof.

What Women Want for Christmas

I found Christmas and Divorce: What Women Want at Marilyn Stowe's blog. Some good points I took away from the article:

"I do not doubt that in the run up to Christmas, in the gloom of the wet winter and with the season’s commercial pressures piling on, the prospect of Christmas can be so depressing that it can drive women to consider divorce. They struggle on as best they can, with housework and other chores, while holding down jobs and raising children. Eventually, they collapse under all the pressure and divorce.

Oddly enough, I am seeing a small flurry of women calling about divorces this year. I will need to wait and see where if they actually file or not. The political and economic and financial news being so glum, it is reflected (seemingly) everywhere.

The divorce rate remains high and politicians wring their hands in despair, failing to comprehend that family breakdown is not fuelled by the divorce law, but by our lifestyles."

I chewed that over. Over here, I hear fewer and fewer politicians trying to make points over our divorce rate. Maybe because the economic crisis looks overwhelms everything else. However, I think we ought to take note of what she describes as the cause of divorces. Which the sheer stress of the holiday season increases. Yes, I think she makes a great point.

If the thought of Christmas is stressing you out or if your wife is threatening divorce, and it is possible to do something practical that will relieve pressure and save someone’s sanity at this time of the year - please, do it!

I can’t guarantee that it will make everything perfect, but it can make Christmas more enjoyable for everyone. And the cost is much, much, cheaper than a divorce.

Think about it. Yes, men get stressed out this time of the year, too. I feel the stress myself - after all I live with a seven year old who has memorized the commercials.

Collaborative Divorce Updates

Domestic Diversions published Getting through and to the same place: Collaborative process lessens stress of divorce:

“The process is so structured,” Denton explained. “It allows folks to get through and get to the same place so they can make decisions together. It provides an environment where everyone is really motivated to be on their best behavior at a time when it’s sometimes hard to be on your best behavior because you’re so emotional.”
****
Denton said choice is one of the key advantages to the collaborative process. The couple has much more control in their family’s fate and their finances — as opposed to involving the courts.

I have also learned of Collaborative Divorce Newsblog. Those wanting to know more about the collaborative divorce process might want to take a look at the blog post Short Preview of Hal and Elaine DVD. The DVD is "a demonstration in 21 short chapters of an interdisciplinary collaborative divorce team working with a couple whose divorce-related challenges become increasingly difficult..." (I did not get to listen to all of the demo video - the laptop does not like videos - but I was very interested in what I did hear.)

Collaborative Divorce Newsblog lead me to Collaborative in Jersey. While a relatively new blog and one which the writer is not excessively concerned with aesthetics, I think there is some good writing putting forth some good ideas here. Take a look at Trial by Battle:

A change is needed. In fact, the judges will tell you that no one knows the facts in a case better than the parties and their attorneys. This is the usual warm-up talk our family judges give before sending the parties off to mediate, which is mandatory before the court will give our clients here in Jersey a trial date. They are right, of course. A single person sitting for hours, days or even weeks presiding over a trial is not going to fashion a judgment which is better than an agreement worked out between the spouses. This is a given fact, and is due to the reality that marital breakups are too complicated to resolve by just one person. Some issue or issues are likely to be left unresolved or one or both parties will be so upset by the decision, that years of post-judgment litigation is a certainty. Bu the change is here, and it is called collaborative law. It presents a better and more dignified way in which to resolve marital disputes, and with the least amount of damaging stress to the family. In fact, this evolved form of dispute resolution has already spread through Canada, Europe and into South West Asia. (BTW: Did you read that the Richie’s were going to collaboration? Actually, I thought that Madonna would have preferred public exposure (ugh!), but she is a mom first and knows that’s not the way to go.) Collaboration is quickly growing as the first choice for dispute resolution among couples, because people realize that this is a common sense way to handle the most sensitive issues we have within our families. If we litigators, whom have been on the front lines all these years and have witnessed the pain of divorce on all family members, are telling you that the system needs to change, then take our free advice and choose, if you must, a better way to divorce.

Some years ago asked me what my win-loss ratio was like. I replied that I do family law and even a win is more like a loss. I repeat here what I have written in almost every post here about collaborative divorce: until the general public learns about its benefits, collaborative divorce will never take off.

For those looking for more articles on this blog about collaborative divorce, please use the search box above and use that term. There are several.

Collaborative Divorce Resource on Squidoo

Since I keep writing the major thing collaborative divorce needs is to educate the general public, I have to note Divorce Without Drama on Squidoo.

Here is a short explanation from Wikipedia of what Squidoo is:

Squidoo is a network of user-generated lenses—single pages that highlight one person's point of view, recommendations, or expertise. Lenses can be about anything, such as ideas, people or places, hobbies and sports, pets or products, philosophy, and politics. Lenses aren't primarily intended to hold content; more emphasis is placed on recommending and advice then pointing to content on the web. Annotation and organization and personalization delivers context and meaning.

So think of it as an extended explanation of collaborative divorce in one place.

Will Collaborative Divorce Work for You? from Georgia Family Law Blog has a link to the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals, at www.collaborativepractice.com.

Reading Around the Blogs: Collaborative Divorce

William Wilson has a very good post on collaborative divorce, So what is this collaborative law thing anyway?. I suggest that you read it in full. It is that informative. However, I do want to quote one paragraph:

If there is one thing that characterizes the traditional divorce model it’s this: If we can’t get an agreement, we’ll let the court decide. This option–being able to go to court–means parties can be unreasonable. “I’ll take my chances with the judge,” is a line familiar to many divorce attorneys, and it often follows a rejection of someone’s proposal.

Let me say that if you think you really want a judge to decide your case, then pay attention now. Judges think that if both parties are unhappy with their decision then they have done their jobs right. Understand? The judge may give you less than you got in the agreement. Remember, too, that it just cost you more to get a judgment you are even less happy with than the rejected agreement.

Speaking of Mr. Williams and South Ben, his post Indiana and Michigan lawyers, others receive collaborative law training indicates that they are doing more on this subject up north than we are doing in my area. More power to them. I have maintained on this blog that the biggest obstacle to expanding collaborative divorce is education - education of both clients and lawyers.

Now from Texas, The Top 5 Fears about Collaborative Law* *and why you shouldn't worry!

1. The process won't work and I will have to hire another attorney, and that's expensive.
2. The other party will hide information.
3. The process will be too slow.
4. Collaborative Law is too expensive.
5. 5. The other party won't cooperate.

   While that can happen (it often happens in litigation), it rarely happens in Collaborative Law cases. Both attorneys screen their clients to make sure the clients understand their obligations under the Participation Agreement before it's signed. When a mental health professional is used, she or he can be helpful in avoiding or ending such lack of cooperation. The MHP's role is not to provide therapy, but she or he will work with the parties so that they are comfortable and feel safe in the process. Both parties face the same incentive to stay in the process and they can only do that by cooperating. Lack of cooperation has rarely been an issue in the Collaborative cases I have handled.

I saved that point to quote in full to make the point that collaborative divorce is a tool. As with any tool, it fits a purpose. The following comes from the Oregon Divorce Blog's Which divorce model is best for me?. I think it make even clearer what cases cannot use the collaborative model.

There are costs and benefits to proceeding under any model. In a perfect world, the collaborative model would be the most cost-effective and most effective at resolving disputes in a manner that benefits all parties. If your case involves physical or extreme emotional abuse, drug or alcohol abuse by one parent so severe that parent cannot understand the harm it has caused to kids or that parent is not able or willing to put up with supervision and requirements, if one party is unable to financially move forward and the other party will not cooperate, or if it is impossible for the parties to trust each other, then a traditional litigation model will be necessary to resolve your dispute.

A good attorney who is trained and experienced in both models can assist you, not only in choosing the best model for you, but also, in making sure that you do not make the wrong choice. The collaborative model can also be used to assist parties in domestic partnership dissolutions and custody disputes as well as in a divorce.

May own feelings about collaborative divorce is that this is the future for the majority of divorce cases. Where it will not apply are those cases of abuse or other bad acts make collaboration impossible. Maybe a war analogy is not totally inappropriate here: where we could talk with the Soviets during the Cold War, we could not even think of speakign with the Japanese on December 8, 1941. The former cases can be collaborated on while the others will never be.

I also maintain that collaborative divorce will not increase unless and until the public understands its purposes and benefits.

I have not archived any of my earlier posts as being specifically collaborative divorce. If you use the search box at the top of the page with the terms collaborative divorce, they should all turn up.

Do Read the IACP's Collaborative Practice Knowledge Kit

It is in PDF format but is very worth reading for anyone wanting an introduction to collaborative divorce. You will find the kit here.

Collaborative Divorce Knowledge Kit

I am getting older. The older I get the more convinced I am that our family law system is terribly ineffective at dealing with the problems of families.

That statement annoys quite a few of my fellow attorneys and not a few judges. It also confuses potential clients. As I have consistently put it for years, divorce is traumatic enough without lawyers making it more so.

Which bring us to collaborative divorce. I have written before on the subject and those posts can be found in the archives. Mostly importantly, people need to understand collaborative divorce as a tool and not a panacea.

Which leads me to this post from Domestic Diversions Blog:

The International Academy of Collaborative Professionals wants you to discover the collaborative process and whether collaborative divorce is right for you. To that end and for a limited time, the IACP has created a kit that answers many of the common questions about collaborative divorce and has the kit available for download.

I suggest anyone interested check this out soon.

Marriage, Cohabitation, Divorce - Oh, the choices

No light reading contained in Blue over you Why red states have higher divorce rates. Covering Georgia, Connecticut, religion, education, divorce, Sweden and living together, does make for an easy summary of the ideas kicking around in this article. No need to remind anyone that Indiana is a red state?

Divorce: Resources for Collaborative Divorce

California attorney Julia Brungess has a web page with links to Articles, Video Resources, Collaborative Practice Blogs, Training, and a listing of Books here.

I will repeat that Indiana has no formal move towards collaborative divorce. I have written about this before here that I think most Indiana attorneys would find collaborative divorce a good thing - if the clients do. The general public need to understand that they control the litigation, that this litigation does not need to be a duel to the death. I have not placed these articles on collaborative divorce into a category of their own, but they can be found by typing "collaborative" into the search box at the top of the page.

Unhappily Married in Britain, Does This Sound Like Your Marriage?

The UK Telegraph reports on a new poll of Britons:

The study has revealed 56 per cent of people admitted they were not completely happy in their relationship - and more than half said they had considered divorcing their spouse.

For 29 per cent, the motivation for staying in a doomed marriage was avoiding a massive financial upheaval - with 42 per cent predicting they would have to give up their home if they split.

The poll, of 2,000 married couples, also revealed that 37 per cent said they were staying for the sake of the children.

A spokesperson for Relate, the relationship counsellors, said: "It's so easy for married couples to get stuck in a rut once the realities of paying the bills and getting the children's breakfast sets in.

"Relationships inevitably change over time. Couples who address their problems and talk to each other when they feel they may be taken for granted, stand a better chance of pulling through.

Or how about this:

The survey, commissioned by Seddons solicitors after a rush of New Year divorce applications, showed 30 per cent of men are scared that they would have to be without their children.

More than half also admit they would miss the financial security that comes from being with their husband or wife, and the same number say they would stay for the sake of the family unit.

For those who not wanting a divorce, take a look at some of the articles in the archives labeled "Marriage". Talk to your spouse, work at fixing the problems, get counseling. Divorce may not be brutal but why not try to avoid the stress of a divorce by dealing with the problems of your marriage?

Understand I do not advocate anyone staying a marriage where the relationship may lead to the destruction of one or both people. If you think the marriage is irretrievably broken, you have the grounds for a divorce in Indiana. I suggest you look in the archives under "divorce" and "Divorce General" for articles about preparing for a divorce. Then call a lawyer.

Collaborative Divorce: A New Article

The Associated Press picks up on the collaborative divorce trend with the article Keen Interest In Gentler Ways To Divorce.

Yet many couples are embracing the approach, recently endorsed by the American Bar Association, as part of a broader quest to find more civilized, efficient ways to end a marriage. Do-it-yourself divorces and mediation also are popular options.

Lawyers by the thousands want to be part of the trend.

"Most of us had that moment where we realize the adversarial process is so damaging for our clients and there's a recognition that we can do better," said Talia Katz, a former divorce lawyer who is executive director of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals.

You can find more information on collaborative divorce here, here, here, here, here, and here. You will find an article about mediation and collaborative divorce law here.

While the dollar amounts mentioned below are at Massachusetts rates, I say pay attention to the relative numbers. I do not recall seeing anything comparing the different methods of divorce by dollar amounts (but it is very early in morning when I write this):

Hoffman works at the Boston Law Collaborative, where the staff includes a psychologist and a financial planner. It offers divorcing couples a range of options, including mediation and collaborative divorce as well as conventional litigation.

The firm analyzed 199 of its recent divorce cases, and found that mediation, collaborative divorce and litigation all produced high rates of successful settlement. Mediation was by far the least expensive option, with a median cost of $6,600, compared to $19,723 for a collaborative divorce, $26,830 for settlements negotiated by rival lawyers, and $77,746 for full-scale litigation.

For Hoosiers, I want to throw a bit of caution at the mediation cost. Would anyone not represented by a lawyer take a case into mediation? Would the non-lawyer know how to start the mediation process? It may be that Massachusetts has a different process for its divorces that makes mediation a more available remedy. The article does point out some problems with mediation:

Rita Pollak, the Boston lawyer who represented David Boyle in his divorce, said mediation might be a good option for some couples, but there are reasons to try the collaborative approach.

"At mediation, each partner has to come to the table and speak for himself or herself at a really emotional time, and sometimes there's an imbalance in knowledge or power," she said. "If you don't have your attorney at the table to protect you, the mediation can be pretty tricky."

With that caveat, I think someone with more resources (hello, Indiana University or Purdue or Ball State or Indiana State University or the Indiana Bar Association or the Indiana Supreme Court) make the same sort of survey for Indiana.

The article briefly touches on unbundling, which may not be available in Indiana due to our ethical rules.

In another trend called unbundling, several states now allow attorneys to offer limited help to people who can't afford a full-service divorce. This coaching for example outlining options and helping draft a final agreement might cost $1,000 or so, many times less than the fee for full legal service.

Prenuptial Agreements - Some Indiana Thoughts on an English Case

Comparing how Indiana deals with prenups and property issues.

The English blog Family Law Week published Pre-nups can "short circuit" ancillary relief proceedings which lead me to the London Times' reporting on the case, Divorcee worth £18m fights for a slice of fourth husband’s fortune.

Reading The Times, I read a few things that I thought this could serve to make some points about Indiana. First, the lack of a British statute on prenups surprised me. Indiana has one.

Second, I think we get our cases tried a bit quicker (but maybe not by much) here.

His team argued that the facts could be heard in one day rather than enduring the usual proceedings, which might entail three hearings, a delay of up to 18 months and significant costs.

Not that we do not have cases going this long, but three hearings on property issues? Then, too, the cases I know that lasted over year usually had some sort of reconciliation during that time.

Last, the English decided to use something that sounds like our Motion for Summary Judgment:

The High Court judge Mr Justice Bennett agreed that the case could be heard in one day in February, when the prenuptial agreement would be evaluated and a decision made there and then over whether to throw out Mrs Crossley’s arguments..

Yesterday, Mrs Crossley’s legal team argued that in agreeing such a procedure Mr Justice Bennett was denying her access to the courts. She would have no chance to present evidence about undisclosed assets that she claimed rendered the agreement invalid.

Considering how Indiana court interpret prenuptial agreements (see my post Interpreting Prenuptial Agreements), prenuptial agreements lend themselves to summary judgment motions. Summary judgment requires no dispute of material fact which allows for a judgment on purely legal grounds. I noticed this procedure used in Ervin Mark Ball v. Kelli T. Ball (Pdf format).

For more of my articles on prenups, click on the link below that reads "prenuptial agreements."

I am available for writing or reviewing an Indiana prenuptial agreement, just give me a call at 765-641-7906.

Divorce in Indiana

I suggest reading these articles for a general overview of Indiana law on divorce .

If you are more interested on Indiana law about divorce and dividing property (including debts), you will want to read these articles.

These articles deal with child custody - as part of divorce and also modification of a custody order. The same thing applies to these articles on parenting time (visitation) and child support - they include both divorce and modification cases.

I also have information on uncontested divorces here.

Indiana does not have alimony but it does have maintenance and I have articles here on maintenance.

You should probably also read the articles on appeals to get an idea of the whole court system in Indiana.