|
different environment . I think collaborative law is to the legal profession what integrative medicine is to the medical profession : a broad , deep , and sometimes unconventional approach to a problem that seeks solutions that meet the needs of the whole person . As my collaborative law colleague Richards Witte , Ph . D ., put it :
Most people who go through a divorce experience a certain measure of “ narcissistic wound ,” whether the person initiates the divorce or not . What one invested into the relationship did not draw the return expected , wanted , or needed . For those persons who entered into the relationship with a certain degree of healthy separateness , there likely will be fewer feelings of grief , disappointment , and betrayal . Conversely , for those who entered into the relationship needing the other to complete their own sense of self , the breakup will probably bring powerful feelings of narcissistic loss , which will be accompanied by deep anger projected at the other . The costs to this formula are inhibited capacity to grow , self-contempt for holding such condemning feelings , not to mention the negative effect visited upon the children who are not free to love both parents .
Collaborative law easily adapts to the couple who , although hurt and angry for experienced failures in the relationship , are generally intact , and have some access to self-reflection that each has contributed to the demise of the relationship . They can project beyond the immediate feelings to a place where they can create new
|
lives for themselves and their children . Litigated divorce , on the other hand , draws the couples where emotional injury and defenses to emotional pain can be played out in a court of law .
... The neutral mental health coach who is nimble , creative , and adaptive , with the help of strategic outside clinicians acting as consultants , can aid the process of CL in transforming a self and other destructive processes into one in which the couple can divorce feeling adequately safe , affirming themselves as good people , and holding a vision of a hopeful future . The chief task , if this is to be accomplished , is for attorneys , the mental health neutral , and strategic others to focus on and to hold dear those parts of the divorcing couple which want to express themselves as fair , just , and generous , i . e ., as good and loving people . At the core of even the most wounded people is a desire to rise above the fearful and destructive feelings that dominate them at this life juncture and especially during the initial phase of the divorce process . By the team focusing on the expression of the best in the couple , each partner then reclaims these core self-values and communicates them to the other with the respect longingly wanted by each . ... Here , then , is our charge in collaborative law . If we support the best in our clients , if we hold the expectation and hope that they will emerge through this process and that they will be better for expressing themselves generously and justly , then we will have a good outcome ( settlement ), and we will have whole families . 6
|
Collaborative law offers a healthy reframing of the issues that allows the couple to grieve and process their loss , but emerge intact . We do not deny the existence of strong feelings , but empower clients to take control over what they can and support them in expressing their “ best selves ” at a time when they may not be feeling their best . The lawyers are not left to our own devices to handle a client ’ s emotional reactions to this major life transition . We have the benefit , expertise , and realtime interventions of a mental health professional as part of our team . This is a key to its success .
Consider this : if a client ’ s first call in his or her early distressed state of mind is to a divorce lawyer who has not received collaborative law training , but is only trained in the art of adversarial warfare , there is a very real risk that things are going to go from bad to worse in a hurry ( or slowly , over the child ’ s minority with post-judgment motions and appeals ). Failing to address a client ’ s emotional needs during the divorce or otherwise underestimating the power of emotion and the marital dynamic is perilous . It is likely to cost the client a small fortune in attorney ’ s fees and generate ill will between the parties for the rest of their lives . The actual interests of the children are easily lost in the client ’ s zeal to make his or her spouse “ pay ” for the act of leaving the relationship . This is not a normative issue . Neither person is particularly bad or evil . The family lawyers are doing their best to support their clients , but the adversarial model is not designed for nuance or to address grief .
Divorce is a grieving process . Clients experience the same stages of grief identified by Kubler-Ross : denial and isolation , anger ,
|
Divorce With Dignity |