Mediation vs. Collaboration
Which Approach is Best for You?
The Similarities:
- Both…..Empower the couple to make their own decisions about the future
- Both…..Involve experts whose goal it is to facilitate cooperation despite the stresses
of a divorce
- Both…..Seek to minimize the hurt and decrease amount of anger expressed
- Both…..Seek to reach agreements which are in accordance with the Illinois statutes
regarding the dissolution of marriage
- Both…..Insist that the spouses at least have the advice of counsel during the process
and retain counsel prior to filing in court.
The Differences:
In Mediation, the couple gathers an understanding of the law from their own counsel, and then meet with a single Mediator and must be able to represent their own point of view.
In a Collaborative approach, each person meets with their attorney privately and then in a four way meeting has their counsel at their side during negotiations with their spouse and their spouse’s attorney. They may also have a Coach (an expert in the handling of emotion) offering creative ways to reach resolution.
In Financial Mediation, the parties meet with an expert in finance and negotiate the division of assets. Again, each person must be able to represent their own point of view.
In the Collaborative Approach, a Financial Neutral may be called in to suggest how to best divide debts and assets to minimize tax consequences and take into account future needs and earning potential.
Note:
There are also ways to combine the two approaches as by using Collaborative Attorneys for advice and a Mediator to negotiate the issues. In this specialty area of practice, most Collaborative Attorneys are trained as Mediators and most Mediators are trained in Collaborative Law and therefore have the knowledge to integrate the two approaches.
|