Collaborative Law & Mediation

Maryland collaborative law and mediation lawyer

Mediation and collaborative dispute resolution offer the greatest benefits to parties involved in family law disputes, where litigation can be the most destructive. A divorce is a time of great financial and emotional strain on a family.  Litigation is destructive to the relationships and emotional well being of couples and their children at a time when they are already struggling with the break up of the family.  Contentious litigation may be far more costly than mediation and collaborative dispute resolution at a time in when families are least able to afford the expense.

Collaborative law

Collaborative law is a non-adversarial process in which each party is represented by an attorney and a combination of other collaboratively trained professionals as needed (divorce coaches, financial specialists and child specialists). I have received advanced, interdisciplinary team training in collaborative law.  Collaborative law is, at its essence, a method of group problem solving.  The collaborative approach requires that the parties and their attorneys agree to full disclosure in all dealings with each other.  They must sign an agreement providing that, so long as they engage in the collaborative process, they will not pursue any litigation in court. Collaborative law provides a forum for the parties not only to control the outcome of the matter, but also to deal with the emotional disruption that accompanies every divorce. The collaborative process enables clients and their families to move beyond a separation or divorce without destroying their relationships along the way.

Benefits of collaborative law

The collaborative process fosters and encourages mutual respect between the parties; emphasizes the needs of the children; maintains decision making control between the parties; fosters and encourages open and positive communication between the parties in recognition of the fact that, for better or worse, the relationships remain even after the divorce; emphasizes interest-based negotiating where the interests of both parties are identified and met, as opposed to positional negotiating where a party may take a position without regard to whether the needs of the other parent, or children, may also be met. These are just a few of the benefits of collaborative law.

It would be a mistake to assume that collaborative law can be effective only for couples that communicate well and have low levels of conflict.  The collaborative process is designed to help individuals communicate more effectively and deal with their emotions more productively.  By helping individuals identify the underlying interests that shape their positions and by helping manage emotions that can often derail efforts to reach common ground, the collaborative process provides a dispute resolution model that is specifically designed to allow the attorneys and parties to manage and explore these high-conflict situations without the fear of the other party running to court out of anger, fear or frustration. Managing conflict and emotion through the collaborative process allows the parties to preserve relationships and marital assets, and to arrive at solutions that could never be obtained through litigation.

Mediation

Mediation, like collaborative law, is a dispute resolution technique that offers a better and more productive alternative to litigation. Like collaborative law, mediation allows the parties to control the outcome of their dispute.

I have received over 40 hours of mediation and related dispute resolution training in the mediation of civil disputes generally and divorce matters specifically, including property disposition in divorce matters.  As a dispute resolution technique, I find that mediation is better suited to disputes where the parties are less likely to be emotional in their dealings. Mediation involves a series of meetings between the parties and me, where I assist the parties in identifying issues and reaching solutions and compromise that may benefit each party.  In the context of mediation it is not my role to represent either party in the usual attorney-client relationship.  Rather I work with both parties to facilitate their own negotiation of their dispute. 

Mediation of family issues and disputes that arise in divorce or business can be less expensive than traditional dispute resolution or collaborative law techniques. When a conflict is mediated, the parties work together with me to frame their disputes and develop solutions. This can be an excellent way of devising solutions that would not be possible were the parties to submit themselves to the ruling of a judge or jury.  Like the collaborative process, mediation can result in outcomes that are far closer to what the parties desire than those achieved by traditional litigation.  However, alternative dispute resolution techniques such as these are not for every situation. When the parties are not able to deal with each other openly and with trust, traditional approaches may work better. But when the two parties are able to focus on resolving their conflicts, either mediation or collaborative law is preferred over litigation.

Litigation

I have been litigating in courts in Maryland, the District of Columbia and across the country for almost 20 years.  In my experience litigation is supremely ill suited to meeting the needs of individuals and families involved in separation and divorce, and where the financial and emotional effects of such litigation are typically devastating on the family.  The parties have little or no control over the final decisions, which are made by a judge. In many instances, litigation results in consequences and outcomes that may be unintended and undesired by either party.

The litigation process itself is defined by each side fighting vigorously for their own needs and wants, in opposition to and often times in reaction to the positions of the other party.  For example, in litigation a client may find him or herself fighting for sole physical custody of the children in response to the other party doing the same thing, despite the client’s belief that shared custody would really be in the best interests of the children. I equate litigation with a tug of war: When one side pulls on the rope the other side is forced to pull equally hard in the opposite direction simply to avoid being pulled into the mud.  At the end of the day, litigants find themselves and their resources exhausted, often with nothing to show for their efforts.

While litigation is never my first choice, I understand that there are instances where mediation or collaborative law is not an option. While my initial approach is to pursue an alternative method of dispute resolution, when an opposing party or attorney is unwilling or unable to work toward mutually agreeable ends, I bring to bear my extensive litigation experience to meet the needs and interests of my clients.

Contact a lawyer certified in collaborative law

In order to practice collaborative law techniques, one must be trained and certified. I have taken over 70 hours of training in collaborative and mediation techniques. In addition, I am a member of the Collaborative Dispute Resolution Professionals (CDRP), a collaborative law group that seeks to educate its members on issues related to this method of dispute resolution. For more information about mediation and collaborative law, contact me, Steven M. Weisbaum, Esq. From my Rockville law firm, I serve Maryland communities such as Rockville, Gaithersburg, Germantown, Bethesda, Potomac, Wheaton, Silver Spring, Chevy Chase, Laurel and Frederick.
 

Back to Top