Front Page > World > Article Title/Fixture Title

Front Page > Metro

Email | Print | Subscribe

Click-2-Listen

advertisement

Rise of collaborative divorce is not for everyone

COLUMBIA, Md. (AP) — Howard County divorce lawyer Jolie Gelman Weinberg applies the "Jerry Springer" test to potential clients.

If a couple comes in with issues that would make a good topic on the show, Miss Weinberg said, somewhat facetiously, they're probably not good candidates for a collaborative divorce.

Lawyer Elizabeth J. Case assumes that a client who comes in proclaiming, "I'd rather pay you than pay my spouse," is also communicating they might not be ready for such a process.

But a growing number of couples and their attorneys are turning to collaborative divorce as an alternative to costly litigation and even mediation.

Unlike mediated divorces, both sides have attorneys throughout the process and all sides communicate, including attorneys, clients, divorce coaches, a child specialist and financial planner.

Unlike litigation, the process is not supposed to be adversarial. That last aspect makes collaborative divorces controversial in legal circles. Earlier this year, the Colorado Bar Association declared collaborative-law agreements unethical, arguing that every attorney has an obligation to fight for a client's interests.

"There's this fiction in collaborative law that everyone's always telling the truth," said Harry Siegel, founder of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association's family-law section. "If someone's lying, they could actually more successfully get away with it in a collaborative model than in the court system, where there are checks and balances."

However, legislatures in California, North Carolina and Texas have authorized collaborative law. Bar association panels in five states have issued opinions in favor of it. Maryland's judiciary has embraced it.

Click-2-Listen

Front Page > Metro