Neutrality and the divorce mediation process

When a Massachusetts resident hires an attorney to manage his legal matters he is asking that professional to be his counselor and advocate. Many legal matters can and often migrate toward litigation when they cannot otherwise be resolved; for this reason individuals utilize the services of legal professionals to give them assistance in clearing up their disputes. Family law is one area of the law where disputes often arise and when a divorce goes to court each party generally has his or her own legal representative.

As previously discussed on this blog, divorce mediation does not involve a litigious environment in which opposing parties spar off with their own counselors. Mediation is done in an environment ofneutrality and with a mediator who does not take the side of either party. During a divorce or family law negotiation a mediator hears what the parties have to offer and provides information to them regarding the laws relevant to their particular cases.

Another duty that a divorce mediator will often adopt is to give parties options for how they may find resolutions to their pending or disputed issues. A mediator will not make the decision for divorcing individuals on how to settle their quarrels. Instead, the mediator will offer the parties different ways of reconciling their differences in order to bring about closure to their marriages.

A goal of mediation is to avoid the contentiousness that can occur during a litigated divorce. However, mediation and collaborative divorces are not always the right choices for all couples. Attorneys who work in the divorce and mediation fields can provide their clients with more information on whether mediation may be right for their marital dissolutions.

Choose mediation to alleviate the strains of divorce

The nature of divorce is contentious. Any Suffolk County resident who has gone through a marital dissolution knows that conflict is often the reason for the divorce and that divergence often perpetuates through the legal termination of the marriage. Constant quarrels between separating spouses can leave divorcing parties exhausted, depleted of money and worn out by the process.

However, individuals in the area who choose to divorce have other options. Mediation is a way for parties interested in ending their marriages to work together to find agreeable solutions to their divorce matters. Professionals trained in divorce and family law mediation can help such parties talk through issues related to their divorces and find ways around conflict by offering neutral, unbiased guidance to those spouses who can responsibly work together.

Divorce mediation is not for all couples and some people do prefer having judicial settings for managing the details of their separations. When partners to a marriage cannot put their feelings toward each other aside they may not be able to find success through a participant-driven mediated divorce. For those that are able to work together, however, mediation can save them time, money and emotional resources often overspent in courtroom divorce hearings.

It is important that divorcing parties find mediators who they can work with and who understand the important steps couples must take to legally end their relationships through such a process. The Walters Law Office provides complete divorce mediation services to partners looking for just such opportunities. To learn more about the firm’s practice in this area, please visit its website on divorce and family law mediation.

Mediation and collaborative law are different divorce processes

This family law blog has included posts about the benefits divorce mediation could have for couples dissolving their marriage. However, another form of cooperative negotiation can also bring about a supportive end to a marriage. Collaborative law, and its applicability to collaborative divorce, is an alternative method of litigation to reaching the legal end of a marriage.

Both mediation and collaborative law hold as hallmarks the compliant nature of negotiations between the parties. They attempt to take the adversarial nature of divorce out of the equation by letting couples talk out issues to establish their custody, support and property division decisions. Though they share many commonalities, there are differences between the mediation and collaborative law divorce processes.

For example, in mediation the parties do not always choose to have their own legal representatives. While a mediator may be an attorney, that individual does not advocate for either one of the partners to the divorcing couple. In a collaborative divorce, the parties usually do have their own lawyers.

Additionally, mediation focuses on getting couples to the ends of their marriages and may not require the full exchange of information between the parties that is achieved through discovery in a litigated divorce. Collaborative divorce has a more formal information gathering process, and with their attorneys, divorcing couples can ask each other for more data in that legal environment than in a mediated setting.

There are other factors that make the mediated divorce and collaborative law divorce routes different, but at their cores, they are both committed to keeping the divorce process respectful and concerted. Couples who are planning to divorce and are interested in possibly pursuing collaborative or mediated methods may decide to research further the commonalities and differences that exist between the two processes.

When should divorcing couples choose mediation?

Divorce mediation is a process through which a Massachusetts couple may end their marriage without resorting to litigation in court. A mediated divorce typically takes less time to complete than courtroom litigation because in most cases the parties to the mediation are willing to work together to end the marriage. However, when couples cannot work together to reach their common goal of divorce they can opt for a traditional litigated divorce.

If one spouse desires mediation and the other prefers to go to court, the parties may want to have a look at the pros and cons of mediation and the traditional courtroom route.

First, Mediated divorce may be faster and less expensive than litigated divorce. Second, mediation can help keep a lid on the kind of anger and resentment that so often goes along with a divorce in the adversarial courtroom setting. A more peaceful end to the marriage can be especially important for divorcing couples who have young children.

However, there are advantages to the courtroom setting, as well. For one, a court can compel testimony from a party who doesn’t wish to speak. Additionally, although a judge typically approves the agreement after a mediated divorce, a litigated divorce ends with a judge formally determining the outcome. based on the merits of the case.

Mediation requires a commitment from each party to work toward a fair settlement. In a highly acrimonious divorce, in which the parties can’t agree to even a place and time to negotiate, mediation is probably not going to work. In these cases, a judge may have to make decisions for the parties.

If the divorcing spouses can at least agree that they’d like to save time and money, they should at least investigate the possibility of mediation or other alternative dispute resolution methods. Attorneys skilled in mediation and collaborative law can help Massachusetts residents to understand their options.

Ratings and Reviews

Mas. Academy of trial attorneys