Let's face it. Life as a celebrity couple can be stressful. Often, fame will take its toll on a couple, and the marriage will end. But a dissolution doesn't have to be messy, even in Hollywood.
Katy Perry and Russel Brand are getting a divorce amicably, through mediation. Vicky Gunvalson, one of the Real Housewives of Orange County, is exploring a separation from her husband Don through mediation. Camille Grammer and Kelsey Grammer are using a mediator to navigate their ongoing custody dispute. With the possible exception of the last couple, these negotiations are proceeding smoothly, and perhaps most annoyingly for US Weekly readers, without heightened animosity or drama. Perry, Brand, and Gunvalson speak of their former spouses with respect and with a sincere regard for their well-being and privacy. What a notable change from the train-wreck celebrity divorces we're all grown accustomed to watching with morbid fascination!
Even in high-profile divorces, mediation makes a collaborative, respectful marital settlement agreement possible. Imagine what it could do for couples who aren't targeted by the paparazzi?!
Showing posts with label divorce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label divorce. Show all posts
Monday, February 20, 2012
Friday, July 29, 2011
Suspending Judgment: Respecting Client Autonomy
I recently met with a couple. They came to see me at one partner's request - Partner A desperately wanted to get out of their marriage, while Partner B was in total denial that A really wanted to leave them. Over the course of our meeting, I witnessed A's extreme distress, and B's repeated attempts to emotionally manipulate A into staying with B, despite A's stated misery.
We met for two hours, at the end of which I thought B was starting to understand A's perspective. We set a meeting time for two weeks later. The next week, I received a short email from A telling me that they were getting back together. My initial reaction was shock. It was all I could do to keep myself from calling A to ask what had changed their mind so completely, but I forced myself to sit still and respect A's stated wishes. I wrote back, wishing A the best of luck.
As a mediator, this was an extremely difficult action of restraint, and another excellent reminder that I must table my own judgments in order to better serve my clients. I met with this couple for several hours. They had a much deeper insight into their internal dynamic than I could ever have. What looked like emotional abuse to me may not have been that at all. On the other hand, it may have been exactly that.
However, I need to afford A the respect they deserve as a competent adult to make their own decisions, without my own assessment of the situation clouding any outcome. As a mediator, I'm not pushing any agenda (certainly not my own), and I can't facilitate a conversation that the parties do not want to have. I sincerely wished them the best of luck with their marriage, and I did so with a clear conscience, knowing that I did not allow my judgments to stand in their way.
We met for two hours, at the end of which I thought B was starting to understand A's perspective. We set a meeting time for two weeks later. The next week, I received a short email from A telling me that they were getting back together. My initial reaction was shock. It was all I could do to keep myself from calling A to ask what had changed their mind so completely, but I forced myself to sit still and respect A's stated wishes. I wrote back, wishing A the best of luck.
As a mediator, this was an extremely difficult action of restraint, and another excellent reminder that I must table my own judgments in order to better serve my clients. I met with this couple for several hours. They had a much deeper insight into their internal dynamic than I could ever have. What looked like emotional abuse to me may not have been that at all. On the other hand, it may have been exactly that.
However, I need to afford A the respect they deserve as a competent adult to make their own decisions, without my own assessment of the situation clouding any outcome. As a mediator, I'm not pushing any agenda (certainly not my own), and I can't facilitate a conversation that the parties do not want to have. I sincerely wished them the best of luck with their marriage, and I did so with a clear conscience, knowing that I did not allow my judgments to stand in their way.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Crafting a "Graceful End" to a Marriage
In last Thursday's New York Times "Home" section, one of the articles on the front page, "Within Arm's reach," discussed a recent divorcee's quest to remodel her tiny (600 square feet!) new apartment to maximum effect.
Now that's charming, and it's fun to see how her team of interior designers helps her to achieve a beautiful end-result, but for me the really interesting part of the article is here:
I couldn't agree more. Often, when I'm mediating a marital settlement agreement, I want to ask the parties, "Don't you want to honor what you had?!? You married this person for a reason, right? They were there with you for how many years? Don't you want them to walk out of here with dignity and respect intact?"
Usually, the answers to those questions are yes. Most people will choose mediation when they are still able to have a conversation with the other party, when they want to end things kindly and fairly. While it's true that some folks end up in mediation because it is cheaper (and that's true), it also requires a baseline of respect and the ability to compromise and forgive. And what better way to celebrate the graceful end to your marriage then, oh I don't know, renovating your beautiful new private retreat with all the money you saved?
Now that's charming, and it's fun to see how her team of interior designers helps her to achieve a beautiful end-result, but for me the really interesting part of the article is here:
She also said that when she and her husband of some 20-odd years divorced a few years ago, they used a mediator because they were determined that their marriage would have a "graceful end."
I couldn't agree more. Often, when I'm mediating a marital settlement agreement, I want to ask the parties, "Don't you want to honor what you had?!? You married this person for a reason, right? They were there with you for how many years? Don't you want them to walk out of here with dignity and respect intact?"
Usually, the answers to those questions are yes. Most people will choose mediation when they are still able to have a conversation with the other party, when they want to end things kindly and fairly. While it's true that some folks end up in mediation because it is cheaper (and that's true), it also requires a baseline of respect and the ability to compromise and forgive. And what better way to celebrate the graceful end to your marriage then, oh I don't know, renovating your beautiful new private retreat with all the money you saved?
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Constructing an Effective Agreement in Mediation
What makes an agreement effective? What can the mediator include that will help to ensure that the agreement is lasting, realistic, and appropriate? What should parties seek to include to help them implement the agreement in good faith?
While each mediation is different, a good rule of thumb to follow is to make the agreement as specific as possible, so the parties know exactly what responsibilities they have accepted, and how they are expected to act in the future. Specific means including dates, times, exact amounts, methods of exchange, potential remedies, and a host of other concerns that may seem like overkill in the mediation.
However, including these kinds of details minimizes potential confusion in the future, and also makes it difficult to disagree over the meaning of certain terms in the agreement later. For example, in a divorce mediation, it's very important to specify how much support will be paid, by whom, at what point each month (every second Tuesday, or bi-weekly?), and by what method (electronic transfer or check?). These are the sorts of points that can ruin a carefully crafted agreement, simply because the parties have no clear way to move forward.
It behooves the mediator and the parties to consider exactly how the agreement will work after the mediation is over - after all, the mediation is supposed to be a forum for the resolution of issues, not the creation of new ones. A tailored, specific agreement helps to curtail future problems by clearly addressing exactly how the agreement will be implemented, and how each party will abide by the terms of the agreement.
While each mediation is different, a good rule of thumb to follow is to make the agreement as specific as possible, so the parties know exactly what responsibilities they have accepted, and how they are expected to act in the future. Specific means including dates, times, exact amounts, methods of exchange, potential remedies, and a host of other concerns that may seem like overkill in the mediation.
However, including these kinds of details minimizes potential confusion in the future, and also makes it difficult to disagree over the meaning of certain terms in the agreement later. For example, in a divorce mediation, it's very important to specify how much support will be paid, by whom, at what point each month (every second Tuesday, or bi-weekly?), and by what method (electronic transfer or check?). These are the sorts of points that can ruin a carefully crafted agreement, simply because the parties have no clear way to move forward.
It behooves the mediator and the parties to consider exactly how the agreement will work after the mediation is over - after all, the mediation is supposed to be a forum for the resolution of issues, not the creation of new ones. A tailored, specific agreement helps to curtail future problems by clearly addressing exactly how the agreement will be implemented, and how each party will abide by the terms of the agreement.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Navigating Difficult Conversations: Divorce Mediations
While many mediations are emotionally charged, divorce mediations are perhaps the most contentious. Not only is a partnership being dismantled, but the parties are often distraught, emotionally bruised, and perhaps angry. In such a mediation, it is essential to navigate with care, lest one party feel slighted or ignored. I find it challenging to honor how one party is feeling without over-validating them, and thus risking the alienation of the other party. It's a tough balancing act, indeed.
When it comes to controversial issues like spousal support, I find it's often constructive to give the parties a reality check - I insist that they consult with independent counsel to understand that the agreement we are crafting is indeed fair. Once they realize that they're neither being cheated nor ignored, and are often getting a better deal than they would in Court, a once-dissatisfied party will often become much more amenable to the process, and begin to collaborate with their ex-spouse and the mediator to build a workable agreement.
When it comes to controversial issues like spousal support, I find it's often constructive to give the parties a reality check - I insist that they consult with independent counsel to understand that the agreement we are crafting is indeed fair. Once they realize that they're neither being cheated nor ignored, and are often getting a better deal than they would in Court, a once-dissatisfied party will often become much more amenable to the process, and begin to collaborate with their ex-spouse and the mediator to build a workable agreement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)