Although Mediation Stratford and cooperation are both alternate approaches to addressing conflicts between couples who are divorcing or in the process of separating, there are significant differences between the two approaches.
Although all mediators have some sort of education, not all of them are also attorneys. Attorneys who have received training in collaborative practise are first and foremost lawyers, but they have also received training on how to make the paradigm change away from the adversarial approach.
What exactly is mediation?
In the process of mediation, a single, independent, and unbiased arbitrator works with the parties involved to encourage them to reach a settlement of their differences through a series of meetings.
What exactly does “collaborative law” mean?
Again, the parties and their own collaboratively trained solicitors participate in the collaborative process, which takes place over the course of a series of meetings. At these meetings, other trained professionals, such as professional counsellors, accountants, or independent financial advisers, may be invited to participate.
In the same vein as mediation, collaborative law makes use of trained specialists in the field of conflict resolution who are dedicated to assisting the parties in reaching solutions to divorce-related conflicts that are uniquely suited to each of them.
What sets collaborative legal apart from other dispute resolution methods, such as mediation?
Both procedures provide the parties greater influence over the outcome, allowing for more individualised solutions to be found in a manner that is far more amicable than going via the divorce courts.
In contrast to mediators, however, collaborative attorneys work as active legal advisors and negotiators alongside their clients during the conflict resolution process, rather than sitting on the sidelines. This places them at the centre of the action rather than on the periphery.
This is the only distinguishing feature between the two.
Which of these options is the best fit for you?
The clients are not allowed to receive advice from the mediator during the Mediation Stratford process, which might lead to complications. There is frequently an imbalance of power in the relationship between the client and the business. For example, one side may seek to purchase peace at any cost, while the other party may dictate the result they desire to obtain.
On the other hand, when collaborative law is used, these structural vulnerabilities are eliminated since counsel, representation, and advocacy are at the centre of the process. When it comes to ensuring that all sides are competing on an equal playing field, two qualified legal advocates may go considerably further than a neutral mediator can.
To the same time, two expert legal brains are completely involved in the process of assisting both parties in arriving at original, “win-win” solutions whenever and wherever they are viable.
In the field of collaborative law, both parties are represented by seasoned family lawyers; nevertheless, none of these attorneys is required to maintain a neutral stance. During the four-way settlement discussions, the parties and their attorneys collaborate to jointly ask questions, share information, generate ideas, analyse options, and present suggestions.
Each and every session is developed, both in the Mediation Stratford and collaborative law designs, to give space and time to the trying to settle whatever issues the parties have – to reach a compromise that both parties can live with – not necessarily be happy with. This is accomplished through the use of settlement meetings, which are also incorporated into mediation sessions.
However, it is common for one of the parties in Mediation Stratford discussions to be more determined than the other, which might result in a compromise that is not always fair to both parties involved. A mediator is unable to communicate that information to the parties involved; however, lawyers who are working together are not only capable of saying so, but they will most definitely say so.
If going with a collaborative strategy doesn’t work out, both parties will have to part ways with their respective attorneys and begin the process all over again, which is arguably the most significant possible drawback of using this method. On the other hand, this frequently serves as an extra motivation to arrive at a consensus.
Are you thinking of separating from your spouse?
You may learn the six most important choices you need to make by downloading our free guide and reading it.