Mediation vs. Litigation: “A Superior Alternative to Court” — Family Law as a Case in Point
Do you know anyone who has been through the traditional adversarial, lawyer vs. lawyer divorce process who had anything good to say about it? There are no satisfied customers!
Divorces rarely involve legal issues – just problem solving issues involving finances and parenting. On average, only about 2% of the traditional divorce cases proceed to a full trial. People in the traditional adversarial process settle after exhausting themselves emotionally and financially, and to avoid “rolling the dice” with a judge. Sadly, they sign settlement agreements that they don’t like, just to put an end to it.
If you’re going to settle, why not use a process designed for agreements, rather than a system preparing for a trial that almost never occurs?
I became a mediator over 25 years ago out of a desire to help people find a better way to resolve disputes. I am passionate about mediation. Whenever possible, I refuse to participate in the destructive, expensive, adversarial, lawyer versus lawyer divorce process. Around the United States, Western Europe, Australia, Israel, New Zealand, Australia and Canada, millions of couples have turned to mediation instead of court. Judges would be the first people to urge you to mediate instead of litigating. In many states and other nations, couples must mediate before setting foot in court, except in an emergency. You’ll rarely find a divorce lawyer volunteering to use the adversarial process to resolve his or her own divorce.