he is primary wage earner, history of mental health issues, sleep issues (cant ge to work on time), not a close relationship with the kids. it seems he would get more custody this way than through the courts. Is this true? I see no benefit to myself. I believe any guardian or
mental health person looking out for the kids rather than being a neutral would agree. collaboration is so neutral it brushes this short comings under the rug. is my intuition correct here?
arent collaborative attorneys required to look out for kids best interest as well?
Collaborative law attorney are settlement partners not trial lawyers. They typically as much as trial lawyers but help you avoid the uncertainly and stress of court
In my very humble opinion, a "collaborative law" approach can be helpful and cost-efficient in cases where BOTH Parties come to the table with good faith, and the best interests of their children at heart. However, often times the "contentious" divorce cases (i.e.: full-blown custody disputes or cases involving domestic violence or cases involving extensive hidden assets) do not fit best with that approach. My advice: retain a Family Law lawyer who is fully capable of effectively handling both types of cases. They can review all your case issues and concerns in detail, to advise you as to whether a "collaborative law" approach is the best fit for you. I wish you all the best of luck Warmest regards, Matt Catchick.