|
|
Collaborative Practice
Collaborative Practice is the newest form of ADR, (alternative dispute resolution). It is a hybrid process which exists between litigation and mediation, and is most often used in cases which involve complex issues. It is for this reason that collaboration lends itself particularly well to divorce and family issues. However, like mediation, collaboration can be effectively used in non-family based dispute cases. It is particularly useful in disputes involving sensitive or emotionally charged issues, or in situations where the Court does not have an adequate remedy at its disposal to effectively resolve the dispute. For example, when a simple apology would serve to mend the largest divide in a dispute, the Court is powerless. In some ways collaboration is very similar to mediation. In many ways, however, it is very, very different.
It is important to be aware that Mediation and Collaborative Practice each require specialized training and/or certification by an appropriate training or certification agency. |
 |
Similarities Between Collaboration and Mediation |
 |
|
The Collaborative Process involves professionals specially trained and certified in Collaboration.
The Parties remain in control of decisions which effect them.
Respect is a focus of the process.
Collaboration is used to preserve some form of ongoing relationship between the parties after their dispute has been settled.
All participants sign a Participation Agreement.
Any participant may stop the process.
The Collaborative Process takes place as a series of meetings conducted outside of the court room setting.
Agreements reached may form the basis of the binding resolution to the dispute. |
|
 |
|
| |
|
Differences Between Collaboration and Mediation |
|
|
There is no Mediator in the room; there is no Judge in the room. The decision makers are the parties themselves.
The Collaborative Process required the participation of specially trained collaborative legal counsel.
Collaboration allows legal, financial and psychological collaboratively trained professionals to work with the parties and their attorneys.
Finally, in Collaboration if any participant decides to stop the process and move the dispute into the Court system, all attorneys must walk away - the lawyers who participated in the Collaboration may not represent the parties in the Court system.
Unlike in mediation, if the Collaborative Process does break down, any Agreements reached do not become part of the Settlement. They must be brought forward again and decided in the Court process. |
|
|
|
 | | |
| What are the Advantages of Collaboration? |
|
Privacy |
|
Maintain Control of Settlement Terms and  |
|
|
Preserve Ongoing Relationships
Ensure Respectful Solutions
Access to Representation by Counsel throughout the Process.
Less formal and more comfortable surroundings.
The Process is flexible.
|
|
|
Other features of Collaboration to Consider:
Agreements made during the process are not enforceable if the process fails.
If the process breaks down, the lawyers must walk away leaving the Parties to find new counsel.
The Process is not necessarily less expensive than traditional litigation.
|
|
|
Initial consultation is provided at no cost to the client. For further information call
(508) 603-0048, click Online Inquiry form,
Please Note: Information contained on this page is presented for purposes of explanation and comparison only. It is not to be construed as advice of any kind and should not be relied upon. Additionally, in accordance with Massachusetts Code of Professional Responsibility DR 2-105(B) (1997): When a Massachusetts lawyer holds himself or herself out as certified in a particular service, field or area of law by a non-governmental body, the certifying organization is a private organization whose standards for certification are not regulated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. | | |
