Monday, October 26, 2009

Mediators With "Issues"

I was recently asked how mediators are able to keep their own "issues" out of the mediation and my answer is that I don't think they can. If a mediator is impatient or demanding or self-absorbed, how would that not come through and influence the mediation process? On the other hand, if a mediator is naturally a good and patient listener who is intuitive and can easily sympathize with many different types of people in various circumstances, that will also come into play in the mediation.

People who are in a mediation, regardless of the type of case being mediated, need to feel that they are being heard, that their needs and interests are being acknowledged and factored into the final resulting settlement. If a mediating party feels like the mediator is impatient, cuts him/her off or is dismissive of something that was raised as a concern, how is that party going to feel like the process worked to meet his/her goals?

When parties agree to mediate, they still want to feel like someone heard their side of the story and gets where they're coming from. I don't believe that mediators can "fake it" and have a client feel like they're understood if the mediator doesn't truly care or understand that party's point of view. If we have biases or judgments that prevent us from getting below the surface and figuring out where the client is coming from, and helping to communicate that to the other party, I think we are not doing our best work.

As mediators, just as in any profession, our personal history, background, personality and yes, "issues," influence our work. But maybe more so as mediators than in certain other professions, we need to continue to do work on ourselves to be the best that we can be as mediators dealing with sensitive disputes.

As we work to balance power dynamics, create a safe and trusting environment for open discussions and work to ensure that the goals and concerns of our clients are met, we need to be able to be present, focused and aware of unspoken concerns or hints and clues about what is going on below the surface of the conversation. If we are consumed by our own "issues" or biases, or unaware of (or unconcerned about) the difficulty of the situation for our clients, our clients will not be as satisfied with the process because they will not feel "heard" because, in fact, they will not have been.

Monday, October 19, 2009

"Divorce is no longer one size fits all"

The San Diego News Network is featuring a Family Law blog series sponsored by San Diego family lawyer Garrison "Bud" Klueck which includes in Part I of the series:
"A good way to remember the various options that divorcing couples have is summarized in a little poem:

Litigation, mediation or collaborative law,
Divorce is no longer, one size fits all."


Part II of the series discusses various models of divorce mediation and is worth reading to understand the different ways in which attorneys, mediators and other professionals might be involved in mediation. I have included an excerpt below or click here for the full article.

Mediation is probably the most popular form of alternative dispute resolution or “ADR.” Mediation uses a neutral that assists the parties in coming to resolution of whatever disputes are between them. But unlike other neutrals, like judges or arbitrators, the mediator does not make the decision. The parties make the decision. The method, therefore, is very empowering to the people who use it. The mediator uses his or her skills, training and experience to assist the parties in coming to a productive resolution of their disputes.

In family law, there are four “models of mediation.” There is a “three-person model,” “a five-person model,” “a three-person plus model” and a “four-person model.”
The three-person model is the simplest and most popular. In the room are just the mediator/neutral and the two parties. Because the mediator is a neutral, potentially that neutral’s office personnel can prepare all the paperwork or required documents for both sides. Technically, both husband and wife or domestic partners will remain listed as being “in pro per” or self-represented on the documents going to the court. The neutral mediator does not represent either side.Read more: http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2009-10-14/blog/sponsored-blogs/methods-of-divorce-part-2-mediation#ixzz0UPd1MFPl

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Divorce Mediation Interview on the Rob Black Show


I had the pleasure of being invited to join the Rob Black radio show this morning on www.talk910.com to discuss divorce mediation. Rob has a great radio show on money, finances and investments and also has a daily show on Kron TV.

Here is a link to the podcast so you can hear the show: Link.

Or go to the website and select "Listen" to today's podcast.

Here's more information about Rob's shows so you can tune in any time:

Rob Black & Your Money
Channel 4 KRON TV

"Rob Black and Your Money" is on daily at 4:00 pm on Channel 4 KRON in San Francisco. Rob is always on the hunt for financial news you can use. Audiences gain valuable information and education about what is happening in the financial world, and viewers can utilize this education to make money. To tap directly into Rob's Wall Street expertise, watch the show and try to figure out why Rob selected the stories that he did. He tries hard to make sure that every story has a lesson in it so that you can become better investors. Rob will take your calls on the news if you call 800-440-4884.


The Rob Black Show
KNEW 910 AM

Flamboyant, irreverent, over-the-top, and smart as a whip, Rob Black personifies fortune-making spirit of today's marketplace. Combining his uncanny ability to predict market winners & losers with his groundbreaking use of the callers information. Black combines market savvy, an eagle eye for brand positioning, and a unique style of fired-up energy to put audiences of the on the road to financial success. To tap directly into Rob's Wall Street expertise, give him a call on the show hotline. Rob wants to speak with you! Call toll free at 1-800-345-KNEW (5639). You can hear the show live from 10 a.m. to Noon on 910AM KNEW. You can hear the show anywhere in America via the live stream at www.910KNEW.com

Mediation: the least expensive divorce option

From the Ridgefield Press in Connecticut, family law attorney, Karen Stansbury, switched from 20 years of litigation to providing mediation services for family and civil disputes. Here are excerpts from the article

“I will no longer practice family litigation — I’ve done it for 20 years and I do not think it works,” she said. “In the traditional litigation process, parties give up control of their lives and suddenly a team of total strangers has its nose in their personal affairs and is telling them what to do. It is a truly invasive and disgusting experience.”

In 2007, she said, the Boston Law Collaborative found that mediation was by far the least expensive divorce 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.

“The key to successful mediation is the willingness of each party to listen to the other party and to understand their different perspectives and concerns,” Ms. Stansbury said. “No one ‘wins’ in mediation. The goal is to reach an agreement that is based on fully informed decisions.”

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Mediation in Paradise

There's a part of me that doesn't want to believe there are conflicts in such idyllic places as Maui. Granted, I haven't been there in many years, but my memory (or maybe I imagined this) is of a slower, more peaceful and enjoyable way of life which exists in a lush island paradise (maybe I should go back to confirm this...). I prefer to think of it that way rather than to think there are workplace conflicts in Maui which are not easily resolved with a handshake and a smile.

But the truth is there are conflicts everywhere, even in good companies, in healthy families, in happy relationships, and yes, even in island paradises. And, when those conflicts reach a certain level, or involve legal rights and obligations, those conflicts may require the assistance of a skilled mediator to provide neutral, unbiased guidance and structure for productive discussions to help the disputants resolve their disagreements.

According to the Maui News, there are, in fact, conflicts in Maui (gasp!). Luckily, the "Mediation Services of Maui" has been granted some money for its conflict resolution program in the workplace. Here's what they have to say about the purpose of mediation in the workplace:

"In announcing the grant, Mediation Services noted that unresolved conflicts affect profitability because they can cause stress, employee turnover, absenteeism, sabotage and lawsuits. The workshops can show the cost-reducing benefits or collaborative problem-solving." (emphasis added)

"Mediation Services of Maui is a nonprofit, community-based organization established in 1982 to provide, teach and facilitate dispute resolution. It helps all age groups and in settings such as family, neighborhood, business and government. The process is meant to bring people together to find their own best solutions in a process that promotes respect, communication and peace."

Here is a link to the full article.

Thursday, August 13, 2009

"Economy causes surge in family-law mediation, collaborative work"


An article in the Journal Record today highlights the financial benefits of avoiding a costly divorce by choosing divorce mediation or collaborative law over a litigated divorce. Given the state of our economy, many couples who have decided to divorce are searching for less expensive options which will still result in a fair, complete and enforceable agreement.

This is the link to the full article written by Correy Stephenson. And below is an excerpt from the article:

"Driven by the economy, divorcing couples across the country are increasingly using mediation and the collaborative process – for a fraction of what it costs to litigate a family law case.

For couples who are divorcing and losing some of their assets anyway, cost savings is especially important, said Henry Gornbein, a partner at Gornbein Smith Peskin-Shepherd in Bloomfield Hills, Mich.

“Litigation is so expensive and clients want to keep things as cost-effective as possible, without being in and out of court every week,” he said.
Gornbein recently finished mediating a divorce, with a series of meetings and no court appearances, saving the couple “several thousands of dollars” over the cost of litigation.

“I often ask my clients, ‘Do you want to spend your children’s college education (in court) to resolve your problems, or do you want to keep the money for your family’s future?’” Gornbein said.

Although no statistics are available, Howard I. Goldstein, a partner at Rosenberg, Freedman & Goldstein in Newton, Mass., said that anecdotally, collaborative lawyers are much busier these days.

Compared to just a year ago, his firm has doubled the amount of mediation and collaborative law work in family law cases, he estimated.

“It’s really on fire,” Goldstein said.

Reducing cost
In many cases nowadays, the parties are dividing debt and not equity, which means they need to spend as little as possible to get the process done, Gornbein said.
Other ways to resolve a divorce are attractive because it is “shocking how expensive litigating a divorce can be,” said Goldstein, who just litigated a case that culminated in a two-day trial and cost his client $150,000 – and the client’s ex-wife paid twice that.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

When Mediation Doesn't Work

Two observations: 1) I think optimism is a required personality trait for mediators; and 2) when mediation does not solve the problem, the optimistic mediator may be devastated.

Not everyone is cut out to be a mediator. Similarly, not everyone is cut out to be a teacher or a police officer or a therapist or long distance truck driver, etc. We all have natural abilities which can be enhanced with skills training and there are some things, no matter how much training we have, that we just can't be taught. I think irrational optimism is one of them. And I have to confess that I am an irrational optimist. Yes, I think it makes me a good mediator and it has some other upsides in the rest of my life that I can't complain about, but it also has a downside (that would be the "irrational" part).

As an irrational optimist, I truly believe that anything is possible in mediation despite a history between the parties of a complete
inability to reach an agreement - on anything. Not all couples are unable to reach agreements on anything. Some mediating couples just need help and guidance through the divorce process or to come up with a good parenting plan in a separation. Other mediating couples are able to reach agreements on certain things but just need some help in generating creative options for settlement and to figure out what feels fair between them. And other mediating couples are not able to agree on anything and it's often amazing that they both agreed to use my services in the first place.

So there are low-conflict couples and there are high-conflict couples and everything in between. But even the high-conflict couples are usually able to reach agreements in mediation because they were able to work together at least to get themselves to my office. This means I generally have the pleasure of working with couples who, despite a difficult situation, want to maintain some level of civility in working through their divorce and I am happy to help them accomplish that even when they have not been able to agree on anything (sometimes since well before their separation).

I think it's this irrational optimism that results in a feeling of incredulity and something like emotional devastation when one of my cases "falls out of mediation." This does not happen very often. In the last five years of solely mediating family law matters, I have had only a couple cases fall out of mediation. One of those happened this week. In fact, I have had more couples end mediation because they are reconciling than I have had couples end mediation because there was no hope of reaching an agreement.

In an earlier case, I agreed (for the first time in my 10 years as an attorney) that mediation was no longer appropriate even though an agreement had been reached. They were a high-conflict couple and they truly needed more mental health support than mediation typically provides. Although we are able to deal with the emotional aspects of divorce in mediation, some couples need far more support, which is when I recommend the Collaborative Law Process which includes a divorce coach and mental health experts as well as attorneys who all agree to stay out of court. It's not a cheap option, but it is much kinder and supportive (and yes, less expensive) than traditional litigation. Even though I agreed mediation was no longer right for them, I was still shocked that it came to that, particularly since they had reached an agreement through mediation and it was only afterward that the agreement fell apart.

In this more recent case, I'm not convinced that the couple can't continue their work together in mediation to reach a settlement but it has fallen out of mediation nevertheless. Maybe this is my irrational optimism or maybe it's what I know from practicing law for 10 years and spending more time in a courtroom than I care to remember. But if 90% of cases settle before trial, and if all along the way to trial, settlement discussions and conferences are required, why not short circuit all that pre-trial and trial work and focus efforts on reaching a settlement now? It's not easy - it's still a divorce and it's still an emotionally and financially complex situation that nobody wants to find themselves in and there are going to be ups and downs and hard decisions that need to be made. And it only works if both parties want to reach a settlement and do the work needed to get to that point.

Mediation is a voluntary process and I can't make anyone continue with something that isn't working for them. I can only wish them the best of luck and keep my door open in case there's a chance I can help in the future. Because that's the other personality trait needed for a mediator: a sincere desire to help others to get through a difficult time with as little pain and scarring as possible under the circumstances.

Wednesday, June 03, 2009

Family Court called "Needlessly Adversarial"


More good news about family law from Canada's Telegraph-Journal. Well, it's good news and bad news really. The bad news is that the family court systems in Canada seem to be as poor a place to resolve divorce and child custody issues as the family courts in the U.S. The good news is that their government appears to recognize this problem and is working on providing mediation services for couples and parents who wish to work together in a more civilized and less litigious way.

Here is an excerpt:

FREDERICTON - The Liberal government is launching a pilot project that will give families the option of using mediation services to settle disputes outside of the family court system. The announcement came on the heels of a report released Tuesday that found New Brunswick's family court system was "needlessly adversarial, frustratingly slow and much too expensive."

Here's the link to the full article: http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/front/article/687434

Tuesday, June 02, 2009

Divorce Mediation vs. Collaborative Law

Here's an interesting article out of Alberta indicating that the family law attorneys in Lethbridge have moved from the traditional litigation model of divorce litigation (each party has an attorney and the judge decides everything through hearings and court trials) to the collaborative divorce model which is a team approach using mental health and financial professionals in addition to the attorneys and everyone signs agreements to stay out of court.

The article is titled "Mediation a Team Effort." However, the article is not about mediation at all but is about the Collaborative Law divorce process. Other than the titling error, it is great PR for the collaborative process, which I think of as a close sibling of mediation. Both processes allow the client to have more control over the outcome and both processes are focused on keeping the family out of court and doing what is best for the individuals and their children.

Here is an excerpt:
“It’s a client-centred process,” [Collaborative Family Law Attorney Janis Pritchard] said Monday. “And they needed more than what I could offer.” Divorce, she reminded an audience from a variety of professional fields, is more than a legal issue. Finances are at stake, too, and so is the emotional and mental health of both parties. And during all that trauma, the real needs of children caught in the crossfire are sometimes overlooked. That’s why involving people with counselling or mental health training is essential — right from the start. “They have way better skills,” she said, and helping with the client’s emotional needs may be the first priority.

And here is the link to the article:
http://www.lethbridgeherald.com/content/view/63409/26/

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Custody Litigation Damages the Children


Most parents know that custody litigation is not an ideal place for parents or children and is something to be avoided if possible. Custody litigation is both financially costly as well as emotionally costly. And while parents may recover from the financial impact of a drawn out custody battle and move on with their lives, when do the children recover from being put in the middle of their parents' fight?

As a San Francisco divorce mediator, I encourage parents to work together for the health and future well being of their children. Regardless of the status of the intimate relationship between the parents, they will always be parents. While the relationship between the parents changes, it does not change the fact that the children still need both of their parents in their lives. It can be hard to put aside anger and other strong emotions following a difficult separation, but is a task made easier when both parents are committed to putting the best interests of their children first. Working with a mediator can help make this possible.

(Tug of War image from: The Child Center and Adult Services, Inc. - Shady Grove Professional Building, 16220 Frederick Road, Suite 502, Gaithersburg, MD 20877-4022
(T) 301-978-9750 - (F) 301-978-9753 - E-mail: info@ccascounseling.org)

Saturday, February 28, 2009

SelfhelpMagazine Articles: Marriage - 10 REASONS TO TRY DIVORCE MEDIATION

I have pasted below a link to an article in Self Help Magazine that provides 10 short but important reasons to try divorce mediation. Here is the introduction to the article:

"You've decided to seek a divorce. Your nerves are frayed; the in-laws are asked pointed questions; the children are beginning to act up in all-too-transparent ways; and your pleasantness is in the midst of an earthshaking landslide. What can you do? Clearly, you can hire legal advice. But who? Here's a checklist of reasons why working with a trained mediator can often help:"

SelfhelpMagazine Articles: Marriage - 10 REASONS TO TRY DIVORCE MEDIATION

Posted using ShareThis

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Is Mediation Binding?

This is a confusing question given how mediation works. If the question is posed as: "Is an agreement reached through mediation binding?" then the answer is "Yes!"

But because the mediator is not making decisions for the parties, when someone asks the more common question: "Is mediation binding?" I have to first unravel the question in order to make sure that my answer explains that the question doesn't make sense. And when I read articles from various online sources stating that "mediation is not binding" it has a tendency to drive me crazy because that is inaccurate and misleading.

In arbitration, where an arbitrator is hired to make a decision for disputing parties, the arbitrator's decision can either be binding or nonbinding. This means that the parties in the beginning of the case decide whether the decision reached by the arbitrator (who basically sits as a judge) is going to be the final decision in the case or whether the parties will keep their right to bring the dispute to trial if they don't like the decision imposed by the arbitrator.

But mediation is different from arbitration. In mediation, the mediator is hired to help the parties reach an agreement that works for them. There is no deciding whether the agreement reached through mediation is going to be binding or nonbinding because the goal of mediation is to arrive at an agreement everyone can live with. Once the parties reach their agreement, there is an agreement and therefore an end to the dispute. The agreement reached by the parties is put in writing and signed by the parties (creating a binding contract) and is submitted to the court and turned into an order of the court (just as if the judge had made the order directly to the parties).

So, yes, an agreement reached through mediation is binding because that is the purpose of mediation. Anyone who says mediation is not binding is mistaken and most likely does not understand how mediation works.

Friday, January 02, 2009

Why Isn't Mediation More Common on TV and Movies?


Happy New Year! At a recent social event, I was engaged in a conversation with a well-educated and informed individual ("Pat") who was curious about my chosen profession as a family law mediator. Pat wanted to know more about the types of clients I work with, how people find me and how I help couples in a different way than traditional attorneys do. I explained to Pat that as a neutral mediator, I do not take sides in a dispute, but instead help couples work together in what I see as a more civilized manner than what litigation often requires.

I told Pat that the family courts require couples to "meet and confer" to try to reach informal resolution at every step along the way even in a fully contested court dispute, and that the vast majority of court cases settle before trial. I also told Pat that it made more sense to me to start couples off in a less antagonistic and more collaborative way, to start working together toward informal resolution right from the start and avoid the time, expense and stress of unnecessary litigation to get to the same point that almost all divorcing couples get to at some point which is a settlement.

My logic made much sense to Pat and Pat added that it seems couples who reach their own agreements are more likely to feel satisfied with the win-win results over the more traditional win-lose results from a court battle (although I think those results are more like lose-lose for everyone, including children who are caught in the middle of such battles!)

In asking how clients find me, (which I said is through referrals from past clients and also from attorneys and from the Internet). Pat was curious to know why we don't hear or see more about mediation in the media. Pat said that every divorce portrayed in television or movies includes one side battling the other side, both armed with attorneys and neither of the disputing individuals even talking to each other; Pat and I both searched our memories for divorce mediation having a starring role in such shows. I agreed that the traditional model of battling litigants is much more prevalent despite the fact that it does not make good sense on any level. The way I see it, a couple knows their own finances and their own circumstances and history and issues relating to their own children better than anyone so why would we not want this couple to communicate directly with each other? And why would we want a stranger (the judge) to make decisions about their personal lives rather than trying to assist the couple in finding their own solutions that actually work for everyone involved?

I recognize that circumstances surrounding the end of a marriage or partnership are generally not ideal, but my goal is to help couples who have decided not to stay together to still communicate with each other productively to get through the difficulty of a divorce in a more civilized manner and to maintain control over the decisions made about their own children, retirement plans, stock options, intellectual property, real estate, support and anything else that is related to each couples' situation.

All of this means that mediation is less dramatic than a court battle that takes a year or more and tens of thousands of dollars. Although drama makes for good television and movie scripts, it does not make for peaceful resolution of issues in most couples' divorces. So that is my theory as to why we don't see mediation much on TV or in movies. Any other ideas?

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Gilbert Guide-Resources for Seniors


The Gilbert Guide is an online resource which caters to seniors. http://www.gilbertguide.com/ provides information on finding long-term care, (assisted living, skilled nursing, hospice, adult day care and at-home care) in addition to information on all types of issues affecting seniors. These include legal issues affecting seniors, (family law, estate planning, probate, elder abuse, etc.) nutrition, real estate, medical issues, caregiving, technology, etc.

There are learning centers, expert columns, product and service recommendations and other interesting resources. As of last week, I am one of their experts, writing a column on Family Law & Mediation.

If you or someone you know has a need for information relating to seniors (health, lifestyle, legal, etc.) be sure to check it out!


Monday, October 13, 2008

Premarital Mediation can be almost ... fun

In most of the cases I mediate, my clients tell me how glad they are that they chose to mediate (whether it's a divorce mediation or premarital agreement mediation). Most of my clients also tell me how surprised they are that I was able to help them resolve issues they were not able to resolve themselves and/or how thankful they are that I made the process so easy.

Here is a thank you I recently received by e-mail from clients (names changed) who worked with me to create their own unique and balanced premarital agreement:

"Back in July you mediated a pre-nup for my now-wife, Sally, and me. Now that the wedding dust has finally cleared, I'm writing to thank you. Sally and I really felt like the mediation experience helped us not only to get our financial house in order, but to prepare for marriage in a larger sense, in that the process encouraged open communication and healthy realism. So, thank you for facilitating that. After working with you, we felt intensely glad that we did not subject ourselves to the traditional, adversarial process; little did we know that working out a pre-nup could be almost . . . fun."

Sunday, September 14, 2008

Real Estate Woes and Divorce

The current mortgage crisis has a severe ripple effect, reaching out and impacting most people's lives in some way or another. One of the impacts I am seeing as a divorce mediator is that divorcing couples are struggling more than ever to figure out what to do with the family home. Couples are continuing to live together despite their pending divorce and desire to not be living together and couples are remaining on the mortgage and the title to the house together because there is no way to split it up when a refinance is impossible and a sale would leave the couple owing money to the bank. Creative solutions are needed in these situations but it's not an easy issue for anyone.

Here is an article from the San Diego Union Tribune - "Unable to sell homes, split-up spouses stay put, postpone divorce" - which tells the stories of three different couples facing this difficult situation. The link to the full article is here and I have pasted an excerpt below:

"Getting divorced is one of life's most difficult passages, and the housing market meltdown is making it tougher. With home prices plunging and foreclosures soaring, divorcing couples are finding it harder to rid themselves of jointly owned property –and as a result, each other.

Even when one spouse is willing to buy out the other and remain in the home, tighter credit means banks often refuse to refinance mortgages on properties with little or no equity.

“They used to fight over who was going to keep the house,” ...[] “Now they're fighting to get away from the house.”

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Therapy for Relationships, Divorce and Parenting

As a divorce mediator, I have quite a few resources available to help divorcing couples or individuals in various ways. I know great financial advisors for couples getting married or in a relationship, Certified Divorce Financial Analysts to help divorcing parties make good financial decisions in a divorce, CPAs for tax advice, appraisers for businesses and property, actuaries for pension and retirement plans, estate planning attorneys for wills, trusts and quitclaim deeds and therapists.

This last category - therapists - is so broad and so useful for couples in so many stages in the relationship continuum, that I thought I should share some of the ways couples and individuals can benefit from working with a therapist. Of course, I am not a therapist and I only give this information because I have seen and heard reports from my clients on so many of these benefits that I want to let others know what a valuable resource this might be in their lives. I also recognize the importance of both parties feeling comfortable with the therapist they are working with and I recognize that not all couples are in favor of any form of therapy. But if it has a chance of helping or saving your relationship, it just might be worth trying and finding the right therapist for your relationship.

Pre-marital: Couples can get marriage preparation counseling with a therapist. This generally includes a short-term plan of just a few sessions for the couple to gain valuable tools for healthy communication in their marriage together. I think of this as preventive counseling and it is designed for couples who might not otherwise be in counseling except for the fact that they are getting married. In other words, it's not counseling to "fix" something that is wrong; it is counseling to ensure nothing gets broken in the first place.

During the marriage/relationship- at the first sign of trouble: If a problem arises during the relationship and it doesn't get resolved and the couple is having difficulty communicating or overcoming the problem, a therapist can help get the couple back on course. I think of this as fixing a fixable problem before it becomes a much bigger problem and a threat to the relationship.

During Marriage - Beyond the First Signs: I know many couples' therapists who wish they could have started working with some couples months or even years before the couple finally ends up in their office. If the problems have become insurmountable and have affected the relationship so negatively, this presents the biggest challenge to therapists and the couple who are fighting to save their relationship when it is so far beyond the first signs of trouble.

At the End - Decisionmaking: Some couples specifically enter counseling to get help to decide whether their relationship is beyond repair or can still be saved. Therapists can help a couple work through this and make decisions that are right for each of them and for their family as a whole.

Divorcing Couples: Therapists can help couples or individuals deal with the emotional difficulties of what is sometimes called the death of a relationship. Getting help to manage this often-traumatic experience, regardless of the reasons for a divorce, can be a very important part of the healing process.

Divorced or Divorcing Parents: Some therapists specialize in working with parents who have decided to end their relationship with each other but who must continue to have a healthy relationship for the benefit of their children. As a divorce mediator, I work very closely with parents to ensure that their children's needs and interests are met and that the parents understand how important having positive relations and communication with each other is to the health of their children. Parents who continue to work on their revised relationship as parents who are not together but are both still parents are doing their children the biggest favor of all.

Not all therapists specialize in each of these areas and it's great to find one who specializes in the area that you need help with. Many therapists have their areas of expertise outlined on their websites. If not, call them to find out if they specialize in the things you would like help with. Good luck!

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Protecting Credit During Marriage


Kathleen Pender's "Net Worth" column in the San Francisco Chronicle's Business section is one of my favorite columns. She frequently discusses issues like retirement plans/benefits, mortgages, credit, investments and estate planning that are directed to all of us and not just the Fortune 500 business people out there. She's great at taking complex issues and distilling the important pieces for regular people.

Her recent article "Protect Credit After 'I Do'" provides some very useful advice for couples to protect their credit scores once they are married. She dispels the myth that once you get married, your credit scores are combined, and she gives tips for couples to keep their accounts separate in order to not have one person's negative credit history affect the other person's clean credit history.

Although there are great tips in the article, my biggest concern is that the article does not tell readers that once you get married, your debts are joint because principles of community property apply to debts as well as assets. That means that even if a debt incurred during marriage is only in one person's name, both individuals are legally responsible for that debt. That comes as quite a shock to many people, particularly couples who have divergent ideas of how to manage money and debt.

The other concern I have is that someone is quoted in the article as saying that you should keep separate accounts during marriage so that "'The individual account is entirely under your control. If there is a divorce, those joint accounts could be in dispute.'"

The problem with that statement is that just because you put funds into a separate account, that does not mean those funds are not in dispute in a divorce, that they are not community assets and that the account is entirely under your control. If money that you earn during marriage (i.e., community funds) is deposited into an account solely in your name, that is a community asset and it does not matter who earned it or whose name the account is in - each person owns it 50/50. And, in a divorce, if you use, transfer or move around money in this kind of "separate" account that holds community money, you may be paying all or some of that back to your spouse since it is not technically your own separate money.

There are many things couples can do to set up their financial partnership together and to maintain control over their assets during marriage as well as in the event of a divorce. The smartest thing a couple can do is to get premarital legal and/or financial counseling to know what their rights and obligations are during marriage and in the event of divorce.

Thursday, July 31, 2008

"We Agree On Everything - Do We Still Need Mediation For Our Divorce?"

Answer: Maybe; and it might be a great idea!

I often receive calls from couples who have decided to work together to dissolve their marriage amicably and they are not certain whether it's a mediator or a lawyer they need to help them accomplish this goal. Because I provide both services, I explain the differences and the situations in which one might be preferred over the other.

Mediation is a great option when parties are unable to communicate and negotiate directly with each other to find a resolution of their disagreements or disputes. A mediator assists the parties by asking the right questions, directing the discussions in a productive manner and helping the parties make reasonable and rational decisions based on all the information and to reach settlement and finalize a case efficiently.

In divorce mediations, mediators usually prepare not only the Marital Settlement Agreement that results from the mediation sessions, but the mediator also assists the parties in getting the divorce action filed and finalized in the court (although attorneys are involved in reviewing and finalizing the settlement agreement).

In the case of a divorcing couple who have already agreed on how they will divide their community property assets and debts, whether, how much and for how long spousal support will be paid, and all issues regarding children (custody, visitation and support) and taxes, there may be no need for a neutral third party to facilitate discussions, but the mediator can still be extremely valuable in preparing a balanced agreement which meets the needs and desires of both parties equally instead of being drafted by one party's attorney and then getting shuffled back and forth between attorneys trying to balance it back out.

So, while a divorcing couple with agreements on all issues may not need a mediator, but may find a mediator to be quite useful in getting a fair agreement drafted up quickly, some divorcing couples with agreements may instead choose to simply use one party's lawyer to get the job done.

In that case, one party can hire a lawyer to file the divorce action and to prepare the draft settlement agreement and remaining judgment paperwork. The second party will hire their own lawyer to review and make any needed changes to the settlement agreement and will prepare that party's financial disclosures. The attorneys will gather all signatures and get the paperwork filed with the court in order to finalize the divorce.

This assumes there is agreement on all issues. If the parties discover there is disagreement on some or even just one issue, a neutral mediator can be called in for the limited purpose of helping to resolve the remaining issues and/or to draft up the agreement.

If the parties are unsure whether they have agreements on all issues, mediation is a great place to start productive and organized conversations to identify the issues and figure out where the parties are in agreement and where the parties may need assistance in reaching their agreements. Or, if the parties meet with their own attorneys first and then decide to mediate their agreement and work together collaboratively to reach their settlement, they still have that option at any time.

In divorce mediation, the couple can start with mediation before filing anything with the court, they can start mediation after the case is filed, and can also mediate their divorce whether or not the parties have their own attorneys involved in the case. Mediation can always be used as a powerful tool for the parties to stay out of court, reduce their attorney's fees and the time spent fighting; so no matter where you are in your case, mediation is still an option to be considered to help you both get to where you want to be.

**This post previously appeared in March 2007 and has been revised and updated**

If Your Contract Requires Mediation Before Court, Mediate!

If the contract you signed states that the parties agree to mediate any disputes, you must comply with that provision and mediate before you run off to file any type of lawsuit, or else your lawsuit will be dismissed. All types of contracts can have a mediation provision (which is different from an agreement to arbitrate), including real estate purchase agreements, lease agreements, employment agreements, premarital agreements, marital settlement agreements or any other agreement.

Here is a short article from the National Arbitration Forum, titled: "Failure to Comply with Contractual Obligation to Mediate Results in Dismissal of Case"

A California federal court determined that the failure to mediate a dispute pursuant to a contract that made mediation a condition precedent to filing a lawsuit warranted dismissal.

In Brosnan v. Dry Cleaning Station Inc., No. C-08-02028 EDL, 2008 WL 2388392 (N.D. Cal. June 6, 2008), Brosnan entered into a franchise agreement with Dry Cleaning Station. The franchise agreement included a provision, which required both parties to enter into mediation of all disputes prior to initiating any legal action against the other.

Thereafter, Brosnan filed an action against Dry Cleaning Station alleging state law claims relating to fraud and breach of contract. Dry Cleaning Station filed a motion to dismiss Brosnan's complaint based on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) on the grounds that Brosnan failed to engage in mediation of the dispute prior to filing their lawsuit as required by the franchise agreement.

In response, Brosnan sought a stay of the matter rather than a dismissal. The Court stated that a claim filed before satisfaction of a condition precedent, such as a mediation requirement, should be dismissed.

In this instance, there was no dispute that Brosnan did not pursue mediation prior to filing the lawsuit. Under these circumstances, Dry Cleaning Station opted for dismissal. The Court granted Dry Cleaning Station's motion and dismissed the case.

The Court noted that in contrast to mediation, where a plaintiff attempts to exhaust its arbitration remedy or raises issues not susceptible to arbitration or not covered by the arbitration agreement, a stay rather than dismissal of the lawsuit is appropriate.