HCBA Lawyer Magazine Vol. 28, No. 4 | Page 21

Collaborative Law Section Luncheon on december 4, the Collaborative law section received insight from alice boullosa, lMft, and kristin diMeo, CPa/abv, two experienced neutral Continued from page 18 collaborative professionals, on what successful collaborative teams do really well and what not to do, based on lessons learned. Collaborative Professional must assess the likelihood that a Resolution can be reached in a manner consistent with these Standards and within a timeframe appropriate to this matter and to the client(s) circumstances.” Like Rule 4-1.19 screening, the Standard 2.4 screening must take place before a participation agree - ment is signed and throughout the process. Confidentiality Before the Participation Agreement Is Signed Standard 1.4B reminds us that a collaborative professional may not disclose confidential information before a participation agreement is signed. Of course, with informed (preferably written) consent, a client may permit the professionals to communicate to prepare for the collaborative process. Conclusion Keep in mind that, under Standard 1.1, if there is a conflict between professional rules of conduct and the Standards, the rules of conduct control. Further, the IACP is not a regulatory body and does not enforce the Standards. But the Standards are considered best practices developed and approved by leaders in the field. We can and should use the Standards to improve our collaborative processes. Available at https://www.collaborativepractice. com/professional/re sources/iacp-standards-and- ethics.aspx. 2 This article is based, in part, on a workshop conducted by Diane Diel, David Fink, and J. Mark Weiss of the IACP Ethical Standards Rewrite Task Force. 3 Standards 4.5B & C provide exceptions to (i) provide referrals or (ii) consult about reinstating or resuming the collaborative process or other ADR processes. 1 thank you to the luncheon’s sponsor: Author: Adam Cordover – Family Diplomacy MAR - APR 2018 | HCBA LAWYER 19