The term “Disney Divorce” is often used to describe a post-divorce family situation in which one parent, usually Dad, isn’t involved in day-to-day parenting but shows up on infrequent occasion to do something spectacular with the kids, like visit Disneyland.  This is not that story.  This is the story of a real Disney divorce, the collaborative divorce of Roy Disney and his wife Patty.
Last year, the Disneys filed papers with the Los Angeles County Superior Court in which they agreed to “to devote their efforts to attempt to reach a negotiated settlement in an efficient, cooperative manner.”  Each was represented by a collaborative attorney and pledged to comply with the principles of collaborative law.  The case proves a number of important points about collaborative divorce:

•    Collaborative divorce is not just for couples without a lot of money.   Roy Disney is director emeritus of the Disney Company and holds 16 million shares.  Forbes has estimated his fortune at $1.2 billion.

•    Collaborative divorce is not just for couples with minor children.  The Disneys have four children, all adults.

•    Collaborative divorce is not just for young couples who have had short marriages.  The Disneys were married for 52 years.  Roy is 77, Patty is 72.  They were married shortly after the opening of Disneyland in Anaheim, California.

The Disney Company has many devoted followers who were surprised by the news.  According to Clifford A. Miller, managing director of the Disney family investment company, "This has been in the works for a long time. They've just decided to move forward with their lives."  Notably, they decided to do so in a way that respects their many years together, preserves their family relationships, and protects their privacy.  

Governor Gibbons evidently made a mistake common among those who have finally decided to seek a divorce:  he moved first and asked questions later.  Many family law specialists warn against that.

While we’re on the subject of governors(see “Being Ugly in Public, posted on July 27, 2009), another who is in the midst of a difficult divorce is Nevada Governor Jim Gibbons, who filed for divorce in late April after abruptly moving out of the governor’s mansion in Carson City and back to the family’s private residence in Reno.  And therein lies the problem.  The mansion is the official residence that Nevada provides for its governor, but he’s not the one living there.  He’s not even living in the State capitol.  Realizing his dilemma, the governor asked First Lady Dawn Gibbons to trade accommodations with him, but she declined.  She says she needs access to her office at the mansion to carry out her duties and that she’s interested in maintaining the 22-year marriage.  So in addition to the divorce filing, the Governor is also suing to get his official residence back.

Leaving Home

Governor Gibbons evidently made a mistake common among those who have finally decided to seek a divorce:  he moved out first and asked questions later.  Many family law specialists warn against that, pointing out that it can be construed as abandonment.  They advise first negotiating a separation agreement that spells out each party’s living arrangements and filing it with the court, particularly if you have an interest in retaining title to the property after the divorce.  Obviously, title won’t be a problem for Governor Gibbons, though the embarrassment of being more or less locked out of the official house may be.

Separate Lives

Figuring out separate living arrangements can be a vexatious problem for divorcing couples, but it’s one of many more easily solved in a collaborative divorce process.  One of the basic premises in a collaborative divorce is that the couple will work together to arrange their finances so that each has the resources to live independently.  In cases where finances are tight, that can require creative problem solving.  Fortunately, collaborative attorneys are trained to work with one another toward solutions that are mutually beneficial for their clients, so they are much more likely to produce a reasonable outcome than litigators who are pledged only to win.  And if it’s financially necessary for both parties to continue living under the same roof while the divorce proceeds, that’s more likely to be workable if the spouses have committed to a collaborative process in which they’ve agreed to treat one another with respect and courtesy.  

A separation agreement may not be necessary in a collaborative divorce process.  Since the couple agrees not to litigate, they may skip the interim step of a separation agreement and simply work out their divorce agreement with the help of their collaborative attorneys and coaches.   Your collaborative attorney can best advise you which course is best in your case.

That’s the thing about a contested divorce:  it’s often ugly and it’s public. There’s no better example than the drama being played out between former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey and his estranged wife Dina Matos McGreevey.

 

An old friend who thought he was quite the wit (and sometimes was) used to say, “She can’t help being ugly, but she doesn’t have to go out in public.”   That’s the thing about a contested divorce:  it’s ugly and it’s public.  There’s no better example than the drama being played out in the pages of the Trenton Times between former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey and his estranged wife Dina Matos McGreevey.

The Shocker that Started It All

In one of those scenes to which we’ve become accustomed, Mrs. McGreevey stood stoically by his side as her husband confessed to an extra-marital affair and announced that he would resign his office.  The only twist was that he also proclaimed, “I am a gay American.”  In an article in Oprah magazine, Mrs. McGreevey says she learned that fact one hour before the news conference and that in part she was emotionless because she was in shock.

The Battle is Engaged

Now the McGreeveys are reporting to court for an estimated six weeks to battle over some of the ugliest allegations imaginable.  He says they had three-way sex with a male staffer. She denies that, but accuses him of duping her into marriage to conceal his homosexuality and advance his political career.  He says he’s broke.  She says he’s conspiring with his millionaire boyfriend to conceal assets.  Another front in the war zone was custody of their six-year old daughter, but the judge mercifully sealed the records in the custody portion of the case.

Privacy Equals Dignity

Granted, the McGreevey divorce is pretty high on the ugliness scale.  And maybe (but not necessarily) the uglier the issues between the spouses, the greater the temptation to seek vindication through public accusations.   But is it worth it?  Do other people really need that much detail about what went on in your marriage?  What’s the impact on your children of detailing their parents’ failings in open court?
Here’s the thing: what happened, happened.  You can’t change it now.  You can’t help it if it’s ugly.  But you can keep from making it public.  Through the collaborative divorce process, spouses – even spouses with deeply hurt feelings – are helped by their coaches and collaborative lawyers to create a mutually acceptable and confidential agreement ending their marriage.  With that, it’s over, it’s private, and everyone can move on with their lives with their dignity intact.

“Whatever you do, try to keep your divorce out of divorce court,” says Judge Roderic Duncan.   That seems like strange advice from a man who’s ruled on 25,000 divorce cases.

When a judge who’s spent years hearing divorce cases offers you advice about divorce, you should listen.  That’s just what Judge Roderic Duncan does in his book A Judge’s Guide to Divorce: Uncommon Advice from the Bench.  And what is the judge’s advice?  Stay out of divorce court. 

Judge Duncan estimates he ruled on 25,000 cases as a divorce judge.  He’s also been divorced himself.  He understands that not every marriage will endure, and he’s not telling unhappy couples to stay married.  But he begins his book with the warning, “Whatever you do, try to keep your divorce out of divorce court.”   The first chapter cites several reasons that hiring a “bomber,” the term Judge Duncan uses for an aggressive divorce attorney, and suing your spouse for all the marbles is a very bad way to get divorced. 

 Check back soon for more details and a summary of his 6 main points.

When you think of a labor dispute, what comes to mind?  The two sides can’t agree, things are at a stalemate.  Maybe one side has walked out, or maybe the other side locked them out.  Harsh words are spoken.  Finally an arbitrator is brought in.  Each side makes demands.  The arbitrator considers the case and decides who gets what.  Neither side walks away happy.

Striking Out

Doesn’t that sound a lot like a contested divorce?  Certainly litigating couples may argue over property division and residency in the family home.  Angry words are not uncommon.  And the bottom line is that in a contested divorce, the judge essentially acts as an arbitrator, considering the position presented by each party’s attorney and handing down a settlement decision.  The couple doesn’t decide, the judge does.

Keeping Control

Couples who choose collaborative divorce retain control over the decisions in their case.  They jointly decide everything:  from how to handle their equity in the home, to who gets the dining room set, to who will provide health insurance for the children.  Although they will work with various professionals on the collaborative team, no one will make decisions for them.  
Joint decision-making can be hard when a couple’s relationship is strained.  Committing to the principles of collaboration at the outset helps keep discussions on track, and the coaches and collaborative attorneys provide support and guidance.  
The decision each spouse must make individually is whether to collaborate and work through the decisions that will shape their future, or litigate and let someone else make those decisions.  

Suze Orman's October advice column in Oprah magazine touches on the costs of divorce for couples.  Orman recommended collaboration (or collaborative divorce) as a way for couples to "divorce with dignity."  Collaborative divorce allows for parties to create their own solutions regarding spousal support, division of property, child custody and other issues facing couples as they separate.  The parties explore what each person envisions as his or her post-divorce life and consider different possible solutions with their attorneys (and sometimes other professionals such as financial planners and mental health professionals).  The group works together dynamically to assist the family members reach individual and family goals.

Rather than having individuals getting locked into positions, everyone agrees to consider what each person's interests are.  Simply put, rather than saying, "I have to have the Volvo (positional negotiation)," a person would say, "I need safe transportation for me and the children (interest-based negotiation)."

Collaboration is often exemplified by a fictional argument between a brother and sister over the last remaining orange in the fruit bowl.  Each asks the parent for it, simply saying he or she wants the orange (positional negotiation).  A simplistic approach would be to either split the orange or to flip a coin.  A collaborative approach would ask each child why each wants the orange.  If we find that one needs the rind to make a cake, and the other wants to eat the orange, each child can have his or her interests met by a creative division of the orange.  Simplistic, positional thinking would not allow for either child to have his or her interests met.  Interest based negotiation allows for each to be satisfied.

Ask your attorney about collaborative divorce as an alternative to contested litigation.  You can also learn more about collaboration at www.collaborativedivorce.com.

What exactly is a “collaborative divorce?”  We all know what divorce is and what it means to collaborate, but how can the two go together considering that the decision to divorce usually is the culmination of conflict and frustration? With the help of specially trained professionals, couples can approach divorce in a cooperative spirit that helps them complete their separation respectfully and move forward with their lives without excessive emotional turmoil, even though they are not getting along.
Let’s clarify at the outset that a collaborative divorce produces a legal document that specifies how the couple’s assets and debts will be allocated and makes provisions for the care of any children they may have.    In this regard, it is the same as a traditional divorce.  Whether you collaborate or litigate, at the end of the process, you will be legally divorced.  The difference is in how you get to that point.
In a traditional divorce, each spouse works with his or her own attorney, who is trained to “get the best deal possible.”  Disagreements over how property is divided are often bitter. Battles over the children can greatly disrupt the family dynamic.  Divorce attorneys may advise their clients to have limited communication with one another and may probe for complaints about the spouse that can be used in court.  Many a parent has been astonished at the charges leveled against her in a child custody dispute.
Couples who want a less divisive alternative can opt for collaborative divorce.  Husband and wife will each hire their own attorney.  The wife’s attorney will be her personal counsel and will be accountable to her.  The husband’s attorney will serve him in the same capacity.   But each spouse will choose an attorney who has been trained to negotiate in a collaborative manner and to be engaged with a team of other professionals to work through the legal, financial and emotional issues of the separation.
The couple will be asked to agree to some basic principles of collaborative divorce.  They will promise not to litigate, but to settle their differences through the collaborative process.  They will promise to treat each other with respect.  They will promise full disclosure of the information needed to make informed decisions, including financial information.  They will promise to put the interests of their children first.
Husband and wife will meet together with members of the team, called “coaches” because they coach the couple through the range of decisions that need to be made to end the marriage.  The most important fact is that the couple will make all decisions for themselves.  A financial counselor will review their situation with them and help them to decide how to divide their assets so that each can live independently.  A child specialist will help the parents craft their co-parenting agreement.  To facilitate this joint problem-solving process, a licensed mental health professional or social worker may help the couple work on their negotiation or communication skills.
It may seem that the involvement of so many support professionals would make collaborative divorce more expensive than the traditional route.  But because the process is not adversarial and the couple is working together to decide their future arrangements, collaborative divorce usually proceeds more quickly and costs less than litigation.



 

Matt Maupin was a 20 year old Army reservist captured by insurgents in Iraq when his fuel convoy was ambushed four years ago.   A video released by his captors showed him surrounded by masked men with automatic rifles.  Subsequently, another video emerged showing what the captors claimed was Maupin’s execution by gunfire.  The Pentagon, however, ruled that the poor quality video was inconclusive.  Matt’s parents were steadfast that it did not depict their son.  And so they began their four-year wait for news of Matt, four years during which this divorced couple put together an incredible network of support not just for him but for all Americans serving  overseas.  
Cincinnati Enquirer reporter Howard Wilkinson says of Keith and Carolyn Maupin that they “divorced years ago, but they have been inseparable partners and each other’s best friend over the past four tough years.”  Together, they met with Pentagon officials, Congressmen and President Bush.  They helped start the Yellow Ribbon Support Center (www.yellowribbonsupportcenter.com), which ships care packages to troops.  They organized a campaign to create the Matt Maupin Computer Lab at Camp Anaconda in Iraq, which provides computer access for soldiers to keep in contact with their families.  They created a college scholarship program in Matt’s name and the names of other soldiers from the Cincinnati region who died in Iraq.   Each year on the anniversary of Matt’s capture, they host a dinner dance to raise scholarship funds; it attracts over 1,000 people.  
The Maupins adopted the phrase, “Love never loses its way home,” and printed it on thousands of buttons, posters and cards with Matt’s picture.  Each care package included the picture and a note urging the recipients to keep looking for him.  In late March 2008, the Maupins received the word they dreaded: Matt’s remains had been found and positively identified.   They pledge to continue their work in support of U.S. troops abroad.  “It’s never been just about Matt,” says his father.  “It’s about all of them over there, 140,000 of them.  We’ll work just as hard for them.”
No parent wants to contemplate suffering through an ordeal such as the Maupins have endured.  And many divorced or divorcing couples can’t contemplate ever having the kind of interaction with one another that Keith and Carolyn Maupin do.  But while marriages end, parenting partnerships go on, including after the children are grown.  Even absent a family crisis, there will be birthdays, holidays, graduations, weddings and perhaps eventually grandchildren.  The time to lay the groundwork for a cooperative parenting relationship is during the divorce process.  Through collaborative divorce, couples can not only reach agreement on immediate parenting issues but can develop mutual problem-solving skills that enable them to work together for the benefit of their children through the years.