What is Collaborative Divorce?
                     
A More Thorough Explanation       

The following information is a client handout many of our members use.  It was prepared by Attorney Pauline H.
Tessler for use with her book Collaborative Law.  Please note that Attorney Tessler's information is designed to
discuss Collaborative Divorce in a general manner and does not attempt to be specific to Connecticut.  You should
consult with  a trained and experienced Collaborative Divorce attorney, to understand how this process fits into family
laws of Connecticut and the specifics of your particular situation.



Collaborative Divorce

Below are the choices for obtaining professional legal services in divorce that are available in most localities today.
The list moves from choices involving the least degree of professional intervention, and the most privacy and client
control, to choices involving greater professional intervention and the least privacy and control.

Unbundled Legal Assistance: The client in this model acts as a "general contractor" and takes primary responsibility
for the divorce, making use of legal counsel on an "as needed" basis for help in resolving specific issues, drafting
papers, and so forth. The lawyer doesn’t take over responsibility for managing the case.

The client in this model acts as a "general contractor" and takes primary responsibility for the divorce, making use of
legal counsel on an "as needed" basis for help in resolving specific issues, drafting papers, and so forth. The lawyer
doesn’t take over responsibility for managing the case.
Mediation: A single neutral person, who may be a lawyer, a mental health professional, or simply someone with an
interest in mediation, acts as the mediator for the couple. The mediator helps the couple reach agreement, but does
not give individual legal advice, and may or may not prepare the divorce agreement. Few mediators will process the
divorce through the court. Retaining your own lawyer for independent legal advice during mediation is generally wise.
In some locales the lawyers sit in on the mediation process, and in other locales they remain outside the mediation
process. Mediators do not have to have to be licensed professionals in most jurisdictions.

A single neutral person, who may be a lawyer, a mental health professional, or simply someone with an interest in
mediation, acts as the mediator for the couple. The mediator helps the couple reach agreement, but does not give
individual legal advice, and may or may not prepare the divorce agreement. Few mediators will process the divorce
through the court. Retaining your own lawyer for independent legal advice during mediation is generally wise. In some
locales the lawyers sit in on the mediation process, and in other locales they remain outside the mediation process.
Mediators do not have to have to be licensed professionals in most jurisdictions.
Collaborative Law: Each person retains his or her own trained collaborative lawyer to advise and assist in negotiating
an agreement on all issues. All negotiations take place in "four-way" settlement meetings that both clients and both
lawyers attend. The lawyers cannot go to court or threaten to go to court. Settlement is the only agenda. If either client
goes to court, both collaborative lawyers are disqualified from further participation. Each client has built-in legal advice
and advocacy during negotiations, and each lawyer’s job includes guiding the client toward reasonable resolutions.
The legal advice is an integral part of the process, but all the decisions are made by the clients. The lawyers generally
prepare and process all papers required for the divorce.

Each person retains his or her own trained collaborative lawyer to advise and assist in negotiating an agreement on all
issues. All negotiations take place in "four-way" settlement meetings that both clients and both lawyers attend. The
lawyers cannot go to court or threaten to go to court. Settlement is the only agenda. If either client goes to court, both
collaborative lawyers are disqualified from further participation. Each client has built-in legal advice and advocacy
during negotiations, and each lawyer’s job includes guiding the client toward reasonable resolutions. The legal advice
is an integral part of the process, but all the decisions are made by the clients. The lawyers generally prepare and
process all papers required for the divorce.
Conventional Representation: Each person hires a lawyer. The lawyers may be good at settling cases, in which case
they work toward that goal at the same time that they prepare the case for the possibility of trial. If the lawyers are not
particularly good at, or interested in, settling the case all lawyer efforts are aimed solely at preparing for trial, though a
settlement may still result at or near the time of trial. Either way, the pacing and objectives of the legal representation
tend to be dictated by what happens in court. Cases handled this way generally involve higher legal fees, and take
longer to complete, than collaborative law cases or mediated cases. The risk of a high conflict divorce is higher than
with mediation or collaborative law.

Each person hires a lawyer. The lawyers may be good at settling cases, in which case they work toward that goal at
the same time that they prepare the case for the possibility of trial. If the lawyers are not particularly good at, or
interested in, settling the case all lawyer efforts are aimed solely at preparing for trial, though a settlement may still
result at or near the time of trial. Either way, the pacing and objectives of the legal representation tend to be dictated
by what happens in court. Cases handled this way generally involve higher legal fees, and take longer to complete,
than collaborative law cases or mediated cases. The risk of a high conflict divorce is higher than with mediation or
collaborative law.
Arbitration, Private Judging, and Case Management: In some states, it is possible for clients and their lawyers to
choose private judges or arbitrators who will be given the power to make certain decisions for the clients as an
alternative to taking the case into the public courts. Case management is an option available from private and some
public judges, in which the judge is given the power to manage the procedural stages of pretrial preparation, as well as
settlement conferences, by agreement of the clients and their lawyers. These options can reduce somewhat the
financial cost and delays associated with litigation in the public courts. The financial and emotional costs may still
remain high, however, because positions are polarized and the lawyers have no particular commitment to settlement
as the preferred goal, and continue to represent the client whether the case settles or goes to trial.

In some states, it is possible for clients and their lawyers to choose private judges or arbitrators who will be given the
power to make certain decisions for the clients as an alternative to taking the case into the public courts. Case
management is an option available from private and some public judges, in which the judge is given the power to
manage the procedural stages of pretrial preparation, as well as settlement conferences, by agreement of the clients
and their lawyers. These options can reduce somewhat the financial cost and delays associated with litigation in the
public courts. The financial and emotional costs may still remain high, however, because positions are polarized and
the lawyers have no particular commitment to settlement as the preferred goal, and continue to represent the client
whether the case settles or goes to trial.
"War": One or both parties is motivated primarily by strong emotion (fear, anger, guilt, etc.) and as a consequence the
parties take extreme, black and white positions and look to the courts for revenge or validation. Reasonable
accommodations are not made. The attorneys often function as "alter egos" for their clients instead of counseling the
clients toward sensible solutions. This is the costliest form of dispute resolution, emotionally and financially. It is always
destructive for the children involved. Such cases can drag on for many years. Few clients report satisfaction with the
outcome of cases handled this way, regardless of who won.

One or both parties is motivated primarily by strong emotion (fear, anger, guilt, etc.) and as a consequence the parties
take extreme, black and white positions and look to the courts for revenge or validation. Reasonable accommodations
are not made. The attorneys often function as "alter egos" for their clients instead of counseling the clients toward
sensible solutions. This is the costliest form of dispute resolution, emotionally and financially. It is always destructive for
the children involved. Such cases can drag on for many years. Few clients report satisfaction with the outcome of
cases handled this way, regardless of who won.
2. Can you say more about Collaborative Law?

Collaborative law is the newest divorce dispute-resolution model. In collaborative law, both parties to the divorce retain
separate, specially trained lawyers whose only job is to help them settle the case. If the lawyers do not succeed in
helping the clients resolve the issues, the lawyers are out of a job and can never represent either client against the
other again. All participants agree to work together respectfully, honestly, and in good faith to try to find win-win
solutions to the legitimate needs of both parties. Four creative minds work together to devise individualized settlement
scenarios. No one may go to court, or even threaten to do so, and if that should occur, the collaborative law process
terminates and both lawyers are disqualified from any further involvement in the case. Lawyers hired for a
collaborative law representation can never under any circumstances go to court for the clients who retained them.

3. Is Collaborative Law only for divorces?

Collaborative lawyers can do everything that a conventional family lawyer does except go to court. They can negotiate
non-marital custody agreements, premarital and postnuptial agreements, and agreements terminating gay and lesbian
relationships. Collaborative Law can also be used in probate disputes, business partnership dissolutions, employment
and commercial disputes—wherever disputing parties want a contained, creative, civilized process that builds in legal
counsel and distributes the risk of failure to the lawyers as well as the clients.

4. What is the difference between Collaborative Law and mediation?

In mediation, there is one neutral professional who helps the disputing parties try to settle their case. Mediation can be
challenging where the parties are not on a level playing field with one another, because the mediator cannot give
either party legal advice, and cannot help either side advocate its position. If one side or the other becomes
unreasonable or stubborn, or lacks negotiating skill, or is emotionally distraught, the mediation can become
unbalanced, and if the mediator tries to deal with the problem, the mediator may be seen by one side or the other as
biased, whether or not that is so. If the mediator does not find a way to deal with the problem, the mediation can break
down, or the agreement that results can be unfair. If there are lawyers for the parties at all, they may not be present at
the negotiation and their advice may come too late to be helpful. Collaborative Law was designed to deal with these
problems, while maintaining the same absolute commitment to settlement as the sole agenda. Each side has legal
advice and advocacy built in at all times during the process. Even if one side or the other lacks negotiating skill or
financial understanding, or is emotionally upset or angry, the playing field is leveled by the direct participation of the
skilled advocates. It is the job of the lawyers to work with their own clients if the clients are being unreasonable, to
make sure that the process stays positive and productive.

5. How is Collaborative Law different from the traditional adversarial divorce process?

• In Collaborative law, all participate in an open, honest exchange of information. Neither party takes advantage of the
miscalculations or mistakes of the others, but instead identifies and corrects them.

• In Collaborative law, both parties insulate their children from their disputes and, should custody be an issue, they
avoid the professional custody evaluation process.

• Both parties in collaborative law use joint accountants, mental health consultants, appraisers, and other consultants,
instead of adversarial experts.

• In collaborative law, a respectful, creative effort to meet the legitimate needs of both spouses replaces tactical
bargaining backed by threats of litigation.

• In collaborative law, the lawyers must guide the process to settlement or withdraw from further participation, unlike
adversarial lawyers, who remain involved whether the case settles or is tried.

• In collaborative law, there is parity of payment to each lawyers so that neither party’s representation is disadvantaged
vis-a-vis the other by lack of funds, a frequent problem in adversarial litigation.

• In Collaborative law, all participate in an open, honest exchange of information. Neither party takes advantage of the
miscalculations or mistakes of the others, but instead identifies and corrects them.

• In Collaborative law, both parties insulate their children from their disputes and, should custody be an issue, they
avoid the professional custody evaluation process.

• Both parties in collaborative law use joint accountants, mental health consultants, appraisers, and other consultants,
instead of adversarial experts.

• In collaborative law, a respectful, creative effort to meet the legitimate needs of both spouses replaces tactical
bargaining backed by threats of litigation.

• In collaborative law, the lawyers must guide the process to settlement or withdraw from further participation, unlike
adversarial lawyers, who remain involved whether the case settles or is tried.

• In collaborative law, there is parity of payment to each lawyers so that neither party’s representation is disadvantaged
vis-a-vis the other by lack of funds, a frequent problem in adversarial litigation.

6. What kind of information and documents are available in the collaborative law negotiations?

Both sides sign a binding agreement to disclose all documents and information that relate to the issues, early and fully
and voluntarily. "Hide the ball" and stonewalling are not permitted. Both lawyers stake their professional integrity on
ensuring full, early, voluntary disclosure of necessary information.

7. What happens if one side or the other does play "hide the ball," or is dishonest in some way, or misuses the
Collaborative Law process to take advantage of the other party?

That can happen. There are no guarantees that one’s rights will be protected if a participant in the collaborative law
process acts in bad faith. There also are no guarantees in conventional legal representation. What is different about
collaborative law is that the collaborative agreement requires a lawyer to withdraw upon becoming aware his/her client
is being less than fully honest, or participating in the process in bad faith.

For instance, if documents are altered or withheld, or if a client is deliberately delaying matters for economic or other
gain, the lawyers have promised in advance that they will withdraw and will not continue to represent the client. The
same is true if the client fails to keep agreements made during the course of negotiations, for instance an agreement
to consult a vocational counselor, or an agreement to engage in joint parenting counseling.

8. How do I know whether it is safe for me to work in the Collaborative Law process?

The collaborative law process does not guarantee you that every asset or every dollar of income will be disclosed, any
more than the conventional litigation process can guarantee you that. In the end, a dishonest person who works very
hard to conceal money can sometimes succeed, because the time and expense involved in investigating concealed
assets can be high, and the results uncertain. However, far greater efforts to track down concealed assets and income
can be expected in conventional litigation than in collaborative law, which relies upon voluntary disclosure.

You are generally the best judge of your spouse or partner’s basic honesty. If s/he would lie on an income tax return,
he or she is probably not a good candidate for a Collaborative Law divorce, because the necessary honesty would be
lacking. But if you have confidence in his or her basic honesty, then the process may be a good choice for you. The
choice ultimately is yours.

9. Is Collaborative Law the best choice for me?

It isn’t for every client (or every lawyer), but it is worth considering if some or all of these are true for you:

a) You want a civilized, respectful resolution of the issues.

b) You would like to keep open the possibility of friendship with your partner down the road.

c) You and your partner will be co-parenting children together and you want the best coparenting relationship possible.

d) You want to protect your children from the harm associated with litigated dispute resolution between parents.

e) You and your partner have a circle of friends or extended family in common that you both want to remain connected
to.

f) You have ethical or spiritual beliefs that place high value on taking personal responsibility for handling conflicts with
integrity.

g) You value privacy in your personal affairs and do not want details of your problems to be available in the public
court record.

h) You value control and autonomous decision making and do not want to hand over decisions about restructuring
your financial and/or child-rearing arrangements to a stranger (i.e., a judge).

i) You recognize the restricted range of outcomes and "rough justice" generally available in the public court system,
and want a more creative and individualized range of choices available to you and your spouse or partner for resolving
your issues.

j) You place as much or more value on the relationships that will exist in your restructured family situation as you place
on obtaining the maximum possible amount of money for yourself.

k) You understand that conflict resolution with integrity involves not only achieving your own goals but finding a way to
achieve the reasonable goals of the other person.

l) You and your spouse will commit your intelligence and energy toward creative problem solving rather than toward
recriminations or revenge—fixing the problem rather than fixing blame.

10. My lawyer says she settles most of her cases. How is collaborative law different from what she does when she
settles cases in a conventional law practice?

Any experienced collaborative lawyer will tell you that there is a big difference between a settlement that is negotiated
during the conventional litigation process, and a settlement that takes place in the context of an agreement that there
will be no court proceedings or even the threat of court. Most conventional family law cases settle figuratively, if not
literally, "on the courthouse steps." By that time, a great deal of money has been spent, and a great deal of emotional
damage can have been caused. The settlements are reached under conditions of considerable tension and anxiety,
and both "buyer’s remorse" and "seller’s remorse" are common. Moreover, the settlements are reached in the shadow
of trial, and are generally shaped largely by what the lawyers believe the judge in the case is likely to do.

Nothing could be more different from what happens in a typical collaborative law settlement. The process is geared
from day one to make it possible for creative, respectful collective problem solving to happen. It is quicker, less costly,
more creative, more individualized, less stressful, and overall more satisfying in its results than what occurs in most
conventional settlement negotiations.

11. Why is collaborative law such an effective settlement process?

Because the collaborative lawyers have a completely different state of mind about what their job is than traditional
lawyers generally bring to their work. We call it a "paradigm shift." Instead of being dedicated to getting the largest
possible piece of the pie for their own client, no matter the human or financial cost, collaborative lawyers are dedicated
to helping their clients achieve their highest intentions for themselves in their post-divorce restructured families.

Collaborative lawyers do not act as a hired guns, nor do they take advantage of mistakes inadvertently made by the
other side, nor do they threaten, or insult, or focus on the negative either in their own clients or on the other side.
They expect and encourage the highest good-faith problem-solving behavior from their own clients and themselves,
and they stake their own professional integrity on delivering that, in any collaborative representation they participate in.

Collaborative lawyers trust one another. They still owe a primary allegiance and duty to their own clients, within all
mandates of professional responsibility, but they know that the only way they can serve the true best interests of their
clients is to behave with, and demand, the highest integrity from themselves, their clients, and the other participants in
the collaborative process.

Collaborative Law offers a greater potential for creative problem solving than does either mediation or litigation, in that
only collaborative law puts two lawyers in the same room pulling in the same direction with both clients to solve the
same list of problems. Lawyers excel at solving problems, but in conventional litigation they generally pull in opposite
directions. No matter how good the lawyers may be for their own clients, they cannot succeed as Collaborative
Lawyers unless they also can find solutions to the other party’s problems that both clients find satisfactory. This is the
special characteristic of collaborative law that is found in no other dispute resolution process.

12. What if my spouse and I can reach agreement on almost everything, but there is one point on which we are stuck.
Would we have to lose our Collaborative Lawyers and go to court?

In that situation it is possible, if everyone agrees (both lawyers and both clients), to submit just that one issue for
decision by an arbitrator or private judge. We do this with important limitations and safeguards built in, so that the
integrity of the collaborative law process is not undermined. Everyone must agree that the good faith atmosphere of
the collaborative law process would not be damaged by submitting the issue for third party decision, and everyone
must agree on the issue and on who will be the decision maker.

13. What if my spouse or partner chooses a lawyer who doesn’t know about Collaborative Law?

Collaborative lawyers have different views about this. Some will "sign on" to a collaborative representation with any
lawyer who is willing to give it a try. Others believe that is unwise and will not do that.

Trust between the lawyers is essential for the collaborative law process to work at its best. Unless the lawyers can rely
on one another’s representations about full disclosure, for example, there can be insufficient protection against
dishonesty by a party. If your lawyer lacks confidence that the other lawyer will withdraw from representing a dishonest
client, it might be unwise to sign on to a formal collaborative law process (involving disqualification of both lawyers from
representation in court if the collaborative law process fails).

Similarly, collaborative law demands special skills from the lawyers—skills in guiding negotiations, and in managing
conflict. Lawyers need to study and practice to learn these new skills, which are quite different from the skills offered
by conventional adversarial lawyers. Without them, a lawyer would have a hard time working effectively in a
collaborative law negotiation.

And some lawyers might even collude with their clients to misuse the collaborative law process, for delay, or to get an
unfair edge in negotiations. For these reasons, some lawyers hesitate to sign on to a formal collaborative law
representation with a lawyer inexperienced in this model. That doesn’t mean your lawyer could not work cordially or
cooperatively with that lawyer, but caution is advised in signing the formal agreements that are the heart of
collaborative law where there is no track record of mutual trust between the lawyers. You and your spouse will get the
best results by retaining two lawyers who both can show that they have committed to learning how to practice
collaborative law by obtaining training as well as experience in this new way of helping clients through divorce.

14. Why is it so important to sign on formally to the official Collaborative Law Agreement? Why can’t you work
collaboratively with the other lawyer but still go to court if the process doesn’t work?

The special power that Collaborative Law has to spark creative conflict resolution seems to happen only when the
lawyers and the clients are all pulling together in the same direction, to solve the same problems in the same way. If
the lawyers can still consider unilateral resort to the courts as a fallback option, their thought processes do not
become transformed; their creativity is actually crippled by the availability of court and conventional trials. Only when
everyone knows that it is up to the four of them and only the four of them to think their way to a solution, or else the
process fails and the lawyers are out of the picture, does the special "hypercreativity" of collaborative law get
triggered. The moment when each person realizes that solving both clients’ problems is the responsibility of all four
participants is the moment when the magic can happen.

Collaborative law is not just two lawyers who like each other, or who agree to "behave nicely." It is a special technique
that demands special talents and procedures in order to work as promised.

Any effort by parties and their lawyers to resolve disputes cooperatively and outside court is to be encouraged, but
only collaborative law is collaborative law.

15. How do I find a collaborative lawyer?

You can check the yellow pages and contact your local bar association to see if there are listings of collaborative
lawyers in your area. You can contact the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (web site: http://www.
collabgroup.com) to inquire about collaborative lawyers near you. Find the best collaborative practitioner that you can;
interview several, and ask for resumes. Ask how many collaborative cases the lawyer has handled and how many of
them terminated without agreements. Ask what training the lawyer has in Collaborative Law, alternate dispute
resolution, and conflict management.

16. How do I enlist my spouse in the process?

Talk with your spouse, and see whether there is a shared commitment to collaborative, win-win conflict resolution.
Share materials with your spouse such as this handbook and articles that discuss collaborative law. Encourage your
spouse to select counsel who has experience and training in collaborative law and who works effectively with your own
lawyer: lawyers who trust one another are an excellent predictor of success in dispute resolution.

17. How long will my divorce take if I use collaborative law?

The collaborative law process is flexible and can expand or contract to meet your specific needs. Most people require
from three to seven of the four-way negotiating meetings to resolve all issues, though some divorces take less and
some take more. These meetings can be spaced with long intervals between, or close together, depending on the
particular needs of the clients. Once the issues are resolved, the lawyers will complete the paperwork for the divorce.
Time limits and requirements for divorce vary from state to state; ask your lawyer.

18. How expensive is collaborative law?

Collaborative lawyers generally charge by the hour as do conventional family lawyers. Rates vary from locale to locale
and according to the experience of the lawyer.

No one can predict exactly what you will pay for this kind of representation because every case is different. Your
issues may be simple or complex; you and your partner may have already reached agreement on most, or none, of
your issues. You may be very precise or very casual in your approach to problems. You and your partner may be at
very different emotional stages in coming to terms with separating from one another. What can be said with confidence
is that no other kind of professional conflict resolution assistance is consistently as efficient or economical as
collaborative law for as broad a range of clients. While the cost of your own fees cannot be predicted accurately, a rule
of thumb is that collaborative law representation will cost from one tenth to one twentieth as much as being
represented conventionally by a lawyer who takes issues in your case to court.

19. Isn’t mediation cheaper because only one neutral, instead of two lawyers, has to be paid?

No, mediation is not usually cheaper. Because there is nobody in a mediation negotiation whose job it is to help the
client refine issues and participate with maximum effectiveness in the process, mediation can become stalled more
easily than collaborative law does. Mediations can take longer, and can involve more wheel-spinning, than
collaborative law negotiations. They also can be at greater risk for falling apart entirely, since the mediator must
remain neutral and cannot work privately with the more disturbed client to get past impasses. In either event, the
resulting inefficiencies can be costly.

Also, most mediators strongly urge that independent lawyers for each party review and approve the mediated
agreement. If the lawyers have not been a part of the negotiations, the lawyers may be unhappy with the results and a
new phase of negotiations or even litigation may result. If the lawyers do participate, then three professionals are
being paid in the mediation.

Lawyers who do both mediation and collaborative law typically see collaborative law as the model that offers greatest
promise of successful outcome for the broadest range of divorcing couples. Of course, if two calm and reasonable
people whose issues are not complex go to a mediator, they can usually achieve agreement efficiently and often at low
cost. Generally, it is only after the fact that we know that a couple was well-suited for mediation. Strong feelings arise
unexpectedly; issues become more complicated than anyone anticipated. Collaborative law can usually deal with these
predictable happenings more readily than can mediation.

Many people genuinely believe that they will have a very quick and simple divorce negotiation, but life can be
surprising. Many people prefer to have a process in place from the start that is well-equipped to deal with unexpected
problems rather than to have to terminate a mediation and start over with litigation counsel.

20. How does the cost of collaborative law compare with the cost of litigation?

Litigation is, quite simply, the most expensive way of resolving a dispute. By way of illustration, it is common for litigated
divorces to begin with a motion for temporary support. The result is exactly that—a temporary order, not any final
resolution of any issues. It is not uncommon for a single temporary support motion to cost as much or more in lawyers’
fees and costs as it costs for an entire collaborative law representation.









--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Articles About Collaborative Divorce and Related           
                                      Topics

CHILD SUPPORT IN CONNECTICUT:
UNDERSTANDING THE CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES

The determination by the Court of an appropriate child support payment to be made by the non-custodial parent to
the custodial parent is calculated in accordance with a set of guidelines and procedures created by a special
commission under the authority of the state legislature. It is important for parents to understand that these guidelines
are, for the most part, concerned only with the income of the parents and not with expenses. This key concept is very
difficult for many of those parents who must pay support to understand because most individuals determine what
they can afford to pay after reviewing both income and expenses. In Connecticut, however, the Courts have ruled
that the expenses of a parent must, for the most part, be secondary to the needs of supplying support for the child.

The Guidelines are based on the number of children to be covered and the combined net income of both parents.
For the purposes of calculating net income in the support context many items normally considered payroll deductions
are not allowed and added back into a parents income. The most common items which are not considered allowable
deductions include contributions to 401K plans, payroll deductions for credit union accounts and other payroll
savings plans such as United States Savings Bond plans. In general, the Guidelines only permit mandatory payroll
deductions which include tax withholding, medical insurance deductions, FICA/Medicare taxes and union dues.
Custodial parents may also deduct not reimbursed day care expenses for the children being considered and non-
custodial parents may deduct prior court orders to pay child support or alimony.

Using a special worksheet, the net income of each parent is determined and combined. The appropriate basic
support obligation is obtained from the guideline chart. The cost of medical/dental insurance coverage for the child is
added to the basic obligation to obtain the total support figure. Each parent’s percentage of the combined net
income is calculated and applied to the total support figure. The parent who is paying for the child’s medical/dental
coverage is given a credit for that payment before determining each parents specific obligation. Generally, a non-
custodial parent with a net income of less than $1,000 weekly can expect to pay roughly twenty-five (25%) percent of
net income in child support for one child and thirty-five (35%) percent for two children.

Deviations from the Guidelines are permitted in special circumstances such as a child with special medical or other
needs or extraordinary expenses of either parent. In order to obtain a deviation, the court must made a specific
finding on the official court record as the reasons why the deviation is appropriate under the circumstances. Child
support payments can be modified at anytime during the pendency of the case or after judgment is entered as long
as the child is still a minor and there has been a significant change in circumstances. A significant change in financial
circumstances is usually defined as a increase or decrease in income of at least fifteen (15%) percent.

A skilled attorney can assist either the custodial or non-custodial parent to be sure that the support determination is
fair and all appropriate items are included. Weekly payments for as long as eighteen years involves a great deal of
money even at the lowest income levels, competent legal representation is important because the computation is
precise and the procedure is complex.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frequently Asked Questions About Divorce Mediation

What is Divorce Mediation?
Divorce Mediation is an alternative process for dissolving a marriage that allows the separating couple to decide all
the major decisions necessary in such an important life decision. Couple who mediate create a parenting plan that is
workable for them and beneficial to their children. They decide how to divide their assets and their liabilities and what
to do with their personal property. Mediation is usually less expensive than the tradition adversary proceedings and
helps to foster a good working relationship between the divorcing couple who must still function as parents.

How does it work?
Couples often ask how they can mediate when the entire reason their marriage failed! The answer is simple. With the
help of a trained and skilled mediator the couple is guided through a process that allows them to focus on the needs
of their families and themselves rather than dwell on past arguments and disappointments. Mediation is not counseling
and there is no attempt to access blame or responsibility on any party; the emphasis is entirely on how to make the
future arrangements work best for everyone. Mediation allows couples to divorce without destroying families.

Do you still need to go to court?
If you want to dissolve your marriage in the State of Connecticut, you must obtain a judicial decree which involves the
commencement of a legal action commonly known as a divorce. With successful mediation, however, you will probably
only have to make one court appearance at the very end of the process and that will be a brief one. Your case will be
categorized as "uncontested" and only require very simple testimony as when and where you were married, the names
of any children and how long you have lived in the state. The judge will review your written agreement (see
Memorandum of Agreement below), decide that it is fair and enter a decree dissolving the marriage. Most such
hearing take ten minutes or less.

Do I need to hire an attorney?
Most mediators will suggest that have legal representation during the mediation process, but that is certainly not
necessary. If you are the plaintiff—the one who is bringing the legal action—you will need to file certain documents
and forms and it would be helpful to have an attorney to do that. Some people decide to represent themselves or
appear Pro Se before the court. It is also helpful to have an attorney to help guide you through some of the decisions
you will be making in the mediation process. An attorney can explain your options under the law in your specific
circumstances and offer expert opinions on possible outcomes. The mediator can help explain the law, but can not
offer legal advice. Finally it is important to have an attorney review your final agreement to be sure that all of your
rights have been addressed. Frequently an attorney will charge a much lower fee if you are involved in mediation
because the amount of time that attorney must spend on your case will be considerably less than in a tradition divorce.

Can mediation be successful if the parties are not "equal"?
What if the husband is a highly successful executive with a great deal of experience in negotiating big business deals
and the wife has been a full-time mom? How can the wife mediate against her husband? The answer is that the couple
is mediating together. One of the jobs of the mediator is help keep "the playing field level" so that the parties can deal
with one another despite differences in professional experiences or education. Also by focusing on the future needs of
the family, the couple are working for a common goal despite the fact that they are separating. Remember, mediation
is not arbitration in which a third party listens to both sides and then hands down a decision. In mediation the third
party is there to assist the couple in reaching decisions with which they both can agree.

Does mediation always work?
No. There are couples who for whatever reason that are not successful in mediation. They are in the minority and
process works for the great majority of those who attempt it. Even if the process does not work, neither party is at any
greater risk because courts usually will not consider evidence of unsuccessful mediation offers in reaching its own
decision. Therefore any settlement offer or discussion that might have been made in the spirit of compromise could
not come back to haunt its maker later on.

A recent article in USA Today indicated that "several studies have shown that 60% to 65% of couples who mediate are
able to hammer out lasting agreements".

Are all mediators lawyers?
Many mediators are experienced family law attorneys, but certainly not all mediators are lawyers. Many are mental
health practitioners such as therapists and some have no other training at all. Presently there are no state laws
regulating mediation and anyone can call himself a "mediator".

How can I be sure I have a competent and well trained mediator?
Although there is presently no state certification or licensing of divorce mediators, there are reputable organizations of
mediators. You should ask if the person you are dealing with is a member of the Academy of Family Mediators ,the
Association of Family and Conciliation Courts or the Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution all of which are
national organizations. In Connecticut, most reputable mediators are members of the Connecticut Council for Divorce
Mediation. These organizations usually require their members to have a certain level of professional training, to follow
a code of professional responsibility and to participate in continuing education. Finally, you should only deal with
mediators who are fully insured.

How long does mediation take?
While the specifics of each couple’s situation will dictate the complexity and the length of their mediation, it is not
unusual for the process to take 8-12 sessions most of which will be two hours long.

What does mediation cost?
The cost of mediation varies with the mediator but most charge an hourly fee payable at the end of each session.
Typically, an additional two hour fee is charged for administrative work including the drafting of the couples’
Memorandum of Agreement. In central Connecticut mediators charge anywhere from $100 an hour to $250 an hour.

What is the Memorandum of Agreement?
The Memorandum of Agreement is a detailed written document of all the many agreements the couple has reached
throughout the mediation process. It is this document that will form the basis for the divorce decree entered by the
court. It is important that the Memorandum cover all the essential areas in sufficient detail so that the court can clearly
understand what the parties have agreed and want to be made the orders of the court.

Why is mediation a better alternative to litigation?
Mediation is a better alternative for many reasons. It is usually quicker and less expensive. Litigation intensifies the
animosity between the parties; frequently people say things during a nasty divorce that they may regret later but the
words are preserved as official court testimony. Mediation encourages the parties to work together and focus on the
future of their now two family units. Finally, mediated dissolution's tend to hold together longer and require far fewer
future court actions. Due to the fact that the mediated divorce is the product of the parties, they feel invested in the
decisions and strive to make them work. Orders handed down by courts often are resented by one or both parties.