Shaping Trends
Our institute studies and shapes divorce trends in order to promote best practices regarding the ways that divorce and relationship dissolution occur.
For many years the divorce process was synonymous with hiring litigation attorneys and going to court where Judges made rulings. This process assumed quarrel and anchoring to positions, and was often needlessly expensive, both financially and emotionally. Gradually within the 1960’s context of social change and the way conflict was traditionally resolved (at least in the USA), the possibility of using mediation as a means for divorce was introduced.
Built around the concept of seeking compromise not judgment, this framework involved the hiring of 1 family law attorney who could work as a neutral professional with both parties to complete a divorce.
While remaining a viable option for divorce to this day, in 1990 an additional non-litigation approach to divorce was introduced by Minnesota family law attorney, Stuart Webb. Known as collaborative divorce, this brought together 2 family law attorneys, 1 representing each party, who were disqualified from going to court. It was expanded later to include an interdisciplinary team of 2 family law attorneys, 2 mental health professionals called divorce-coaches, a neutral child specialist when necessary, and a neutral financial professional. The premise behind this team approach was to usher the parties through their divorce while bearing in mind that divorce was a legal, emotional, and financial issue. Often rife with conflict, professionals within their chosen fields were needed to simultaneously attend to all of the challenging areas.
The trend of utilizing mediation and collaborative divorce was eventually given the “umbrella name,” alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and then consensual divorce resolution (CDR). And where it was more rigidly defined as a mediation or a collaborative divorce process, this trend, especially over the past 15 years, moved toward flexibility. For example, a mediator might enlist the assistance of 1 neutral divorce coach (and possibly a child specialist when necessary) yet not a neutral financial profession. Or the other way around, depending on the needs of the parties and the complexities of the case. Likewise, a collaborative divorce while always including a family law attorney for each client (in order to represent the interests and concerns of their client) would also work within a teamwork mindset. And yet like mediation this CDR process may include a neutral financial profession but not necessarily a divorce coach/coaches or a child specialist. This would be dependent on the needs of the parties and the complexity of their case.
We at the California Institute for Consensual Divorce (CICD) continue to study and shape the best practices for divorce and other forms of relationship dissolution; ways that take into account what is best from a financial and family-child-focused perspective. From our years of experience in this area we know how difficult the divorce process can be. We continue to build on the ideas and the trends of CDR which assume the positive affect of flexibility and teamwork.