Divorce

The Best Interest of the Pets – Divorcing with Dogs

April 24, 2023 By Diana L. Martinez, Esq.

I recently moved to Long Beach, California, from the Inland Empire and I’m amazed at how dog-friendly this town is. I can pretty much take my dog everywhere: stores, restaurants, cafes. Watching dogs interact, you notice unique personalities – the introverts, the hippy-dippy free spirits, the rambunctious ones. This reminded me of just how aware and connected dogs are to the people and events around them.

I once had to travel internationally and leave my pup behind. We adopted my sweet pup as a rescue when he was about two years old. A couple of years later, we had to take this trip for a week. I checked in with the sitter each night, and all was going great, until our last night away. The sitter called to report that she had to take him to emergency for vomiting and had blood in his stool. Of course, my greatest fears realized, I approved whatever the ER vet recommended. I picked him up the next day straight from the airport, paid the $1,000+ vet bill, and followed up with my regular vet. All the tests came back negative (thankfully), and my vet said it was most likely stress. This got me thinking about my divorcing pet-parent clients. So, I dug a little deeper.

Animals are emotionally affected when a couple divorce or separate; they can suffer from anxiety and depression, most often seen in dogs. They feel stressed when couples argue, when there are loud noises (slamming doors), when their routines are disrupted, and when one or the other parent is away from them for prolonged periods of time. The stress can show itself in unexpected ways, typically aggression, excessive barking, loss of appetite, or other behavioral changes, or health issues such as stomach problems or skin rashes and hair loss. The resulting costs of training and vet bills for a newly divorced person can be overwhelming, and, in the end, can lead to, at best, rehoming or, at worst, abandonment. According to the ASPCA and AKC, kennels house a large number of pets who have been left after major life events, including divorces.

While you may want to keep your pet as a source of comfort, it is important to consider the needs of your pet as well. Some parents want the pet to go with the children, to lessen the damage of the separation on the kids. While this may sound like a good option, it ignores the potential impact on your pet of shuffling between two homes rather than allowing her to settle into one residence, or living with a person who is not best suited to care for her. And once the stresses show themselves as aggression or illness, vet and training costs go up, as does the chance of rehoming or abandonment.

Since 2019, California courts have the legal ability to assign sole or joint ownership of a pet based on the care of the pet. The judge looks at each parent’s ability to provide veterinary care, food, water, and a safe and protected shelter, among other factors. But why would you allow a stranger to make these decisions for you? You know your pet best. You know how your pet adjusts to different environments, to being alone for prolonged periods of time, and to other areas of sensitivity that can affect her health and behavior.

In creating your own co-pet parenting plan, couples who are uncoupling tend to have greater success in transition their fur babies through mediation and collaborative processes. They can slowly introduce new routines, allowing the pet to adjust or make adjustments themselves when they see something is not working. They can even bring in specialists to address problems as they arise. Depending on your situation, for your pet’s health, and yours, we recommend the following:

Keep your pet’s schedule as normal as possible.
Talk with your co-pet parent about extraordinary and basic expenses. Pet insurance can be helpful for medical care, and many employers are now offering this option. Don’t forget smaller expenses like training, daycare/dog-walker, kenneling, flea and tick treatments, and grooming as these can also add up. General day-to-day expenses are normally covered by the pet parent in charge at that time.
Talk about diet together and try to keep the food consistent. Nothing can be as upsetting to a pet’s tummy than frequent food changes; it can also result in your pet preferring the food at one parent’s home and not eating at the others. Stick to the same brand and the same plan.
If he will not be seeing his other parent again, or for some time, give your pet extra love and attention.
Don’t express your frustration for your former partner at your pet. Instead, take her for a walk – good for you and your pet.
If you have a joint pet parent plan, make sure those visits are positive for your pet.
Travel can be difficult, especially if flights are necessary. Depending on the size of your pet, he may be able to travel in cabin or may need to be in cargo. Research other shipment options and talk about care during travel and costs of travel.
While keeping a routine is important, as your pet ages, remember that certain activities and diets may become more difficult. Be ready to have that conversation with your co-pet parent.
Medical care can be a tough conversation. How far to go with treatment often depends on the views you each hold as to the impact on the pet and what’s warranted at certain ages or certain costs. It may also be necessary to give one pet parent or a neutral person you both trust the final say on euthanasia.
Watch for signs of depression or anxiety. These include a change in appetite, loose stool, aggression, excessive barking, and destroying furniture. Consult with your vet and/or a trainer as necessary.

The best you can do for your pet in a divorce or separation is the best you can do for yourself, your children, and your pocketbook: keep it peaceful. Life is too short to spend years in court; when your pet’s average life span is only 10-13 years, even more so. Now go give Fido a well-deserved belly rub.

Arbitration and Mediation in California: What’s The Difference in These Forms of Dispute Resolution?

June 28, 2017 By CDSOC

by Diana L. Martinez Collaborative Lawyer and Mediator, Law and Mediation Office of Diana L. Martinez

As a family law lawyer, I really look forward to my time on duty to volunteer at Riverside County Superior Court for VSC (Voluntary Settlement Conference) day. It is offered two Fridays per month and is THE most successful mediation program in the nation with an over 90 percent success rate!

Why? Because, in order to be a mediator on this panel, you must have the highest training and qualifications as both a family law lawyer and as a mediator. Not only do we donate our time, we must be in practice at least 10 years and have hundreds of hours of mediation training and practice under our belts. Other family law mediation programs that either do not have a structured program with high mediator qualifications, or that pay retired judges to do this work, enjoy a success rate below 60 percent.

Judges have an incredibly difficult job. It takes very specific skill sets to be a good judge. But being a talented judge does not, in and of itself, make you a good mediator.

I also volunteer as a fee arbitrator in attorney-client fee disputes for the California State Bar and for the San Bernardino County Bar Association. My role as an arbitrator is that of a judge: to listen to testimony, review the evidence, and make a ruling based on the law. There is no facilitation or brainstorming to help the parties create agreements together. As a result, the parties tend to stay polarized, hoping I will rule in their favor.

In contrast, a mediator works to find common ground, and assists the parties in bridging gaps, focusing on their goals and the reality of the benefits and risks of resolving versus litigation.

During a recent mediation in Riverside*, I had to use my skills as an arbitrator to attempt to resolve a divorce dispute in mediation. In this particular case, the husband was represented by counsel. The wife was not. The couple was married in the Netherlands and moved to California two years prior to the divorce. They had been married for 15 years. They had already agreed to the division of their assets and debts. The final item preventing them from resolving their divorce for nearly two years (yes, they had been divorcing for two years) was spousal support. The wife was not a legal U.S. resident and had struggled finding employment. During the marriage, she worked as a babysitter. The husband ran his own consulting business and was always the higher income earner.

As an arbitrator, looking at the evidence presented, the ruling is quite simple. Based on California law, Husband would be required to pay spousal support until one of the normal, terminating factors in a long term (over 10 years) marriage: 1) death of either party; 2) remarriage of wife; or 3) further order of the court. Wife, however, would have to make reasonable, good faith efforts to become self-supporting, in order to continue to receive support.

As a mediator, it is important to help both husband and wife craft an agreement that factors in wife’s financial needs and goals, as well as husband’s sense of unfairness of having to pay for so long a time. In this case, wife appreciated this and proposed that husband pay her only what she was short in rent each month ($200) for five years. This would give her time allowing her to get her legal resident papers in order and find a stable job, as she explained it, after which she would agree to “terminate” support.

Relying on a judge for a “fair” decision on your financial settlement during divorce is an expensive roll of the dice.

In a long-term marriage, courts do not, generally, terminate support; they may reduce it to zero dollars, but they will leave open the ability to request it in the future. This proposal, legally, put a lot of value on the table for the husband. As a neutral, and especially given that wife was unrepresented, I did have to educate both parties about that legal value and the implications of a spousal support termination. To all knowledgeable in family law, this proposal was golden.

Husband’s attorney instructed him to reject the offer as completely unreasonable. His argument? In the Netherlands, his wife would not have received spousal support at all. Since the parties lived there for most of their marriage, wife should not be allowed to benefit from California spousal support laws. They argued the wife should agree to no more than six months of spousal support, which would then end. This sounded logical to husband.

Sadly, the husband’s “logic” is not the basis upon which family law judges issue orders. My inner arbitrator asked husband’s lawyer to explain the legal basis for this argument. It was a novel argument to me, and I’ve been in practice for nearly 20 years. His response: “Yes, it is a case of first impression, so I have to research this more.”

Excuse me? You have no legal basis for this argument, which means your client will be paying you for research that will very likely not result in the expected outcome. In addition to this expense, Husband’s lawyer planned on having a vocational evaluation done on wife to determine how much she could reasonably be earning. Really? She’s undocumented, and lawyer wants to do a vocational evaluation. Husband, as the sole income earning, would have to front this cost.

The court had already told the litigants prior to sending them off with their mediators that, if they do not resolve their matters, the next available court date would not be for another six months. This meant that husband will continue to pay his lawyer during that time, for research on an issue that has no support in law. If we calculate the legal fees at $1,750/month (lawyer rate of $350/hour, at five hours of legal work per month, including research on the foreign marriage issue, gathering information on wife’s earning ability, history of income during the marriage, and so forth), for six months, it will cost the husband $10,500 prior to his trial readiness conference. This is not the trial itself. It is a court hearing to confirm you are ready for trial.

The trial would likely be set within the following one or two months after that hearing, and trial preparation by his attorney would be far greater than five hours. But let’s keep it conservative for this discussion and add only another $1,750 to finish this case through trial. Now we have $11,750 in legal fees for the husband, in the hopes the judge will side with him and terminate spousal support, despite the law.

Let’s compare this with the wife’s proposal to resolve their case through mediation, six months before trial readiness. She proposed $200/month for five years = $12,000, and a signed, binding, agreement to terminate spousal support. That’s a guarantee, folks. Remember, by terminating, no court, in any state, would have the legal ability to order more support, ever!

Sadly, husband trusted his lawyer in the above mediation. The parties will end up going to trial, based on his lawyer adding to husband’s sense of unfairness, rather than educating his client as to the reality of the law. Logic would dictate that it would be better to take a sure bet for $250 more, than pay almost the same amount and risk the judge applying the law, as they are required to do.

In mediation, husband had the ability to cut his losses and be done. As a judge, there is no such flexibility. The judge or arbitrator (same function) is required to apply the law. But when emotion (that sense of unfairness) takes over, and a lawyer creates a false hope by feeding into that emotion, the only “winners” are the lawyers. There is no benefit to either spouse. There is no benefit to their families. The court battle continues.

If you expect a judge or arbitrator to “do the right thing” because he or she will see and understand the unfairness of it all, you will be disappointed. A judge does not have that kind of flexibility. They may find one argument more persuasive than another, but that means it follows the law more closely than the other. It does not factor in emotion or “fairness.”

In the above example, the law does not look at where you were married and apply the rules of a foreign country. If you lived in California six months prior to filing your petition for divorce, you fall under the laws of California – no exceptions based on “it’s not fair.” A judge must render decisions based on the law and the evidence properly presented. Don’t forget to factor in the financial and family relationship costs of the continued battle.

*I’ve changed certain facts of the case to protect confidential information, but have kept the substance the same.

Diana L. Martinez and Tracy McKenney Receive Eureka Award

June 7, 2017 By CDSOC

Statewide award honors Collaborative Practice professionals

Media Contact: Gayle Lynn Falkenthal, APR 619-997-2495 or gayle@falconvalleygroup.com

(Irvine, California) – Family law attorney Diana L. Martinez and financial professional Tracy McKenney were honored as recipients of the 2017 Eureka Award, bestowed annually by Collaborative Practice California. Martinez and McKenney received their awards at Conference XII held in Redondo Beach, California. McKenney’s award was bestowed posthumously; she served as CDSOC president before her death due to cancer in September 2016.

*Eureka Award winners for 2017 Diana L. Martinez (left) and Scott McKenney for his late wife and former CDSOC board president Tracy McKenney at the 2017 Collaborative Practice California conference.*

The Eureka Award recognizes and honors those who “have made significant contributions and demonstrated an abiding dedication to establishing and sustaining Collaborative Practice in California.”

Diana L. Martinez is a committed Collaborative professional who has tirelessly served the California Collaborative community for many years. Ms. Martinez has devoted 100 percent of her family law practice to out-of-court dispute resolution including Collaborative Practice since 2007. She is passionate about educating others about the benefits of Collaborative Practice through personal contact. Ms. Martinez is a noted trainer and educator for legal, financial, and mental health professionals locally and nationwide on family law topics including Collaborative Practice, confidentiality, cultural competency, and ethics and best practices. She has presented to state and local bar associations and legal organizations, law schools and practice groups.

Ms. Martinez is a frequent guest lecturer for community Divorce Options and Divorce Recovery programs and a volunteer mediator for multiple county superior courts. Ms. Martinez has served on governing boards of Collaborative Practice regional groups in three counties, multiple statewide Collaborative Practice committees, and is a past president and current board member of CDSOC. Her dedication has resulted in “Super Lawyers” recognition and a perfect 10/10 rating in peer and client online reviews.

Eureka Award winner Diana L. Martinez at the 2017 Collaborative Practice California Conference with keynote speaker Brian Miller. Martinez also served as Conference Chairperson.

Upon receiving her honor, Martinez said, “it was an incredible surprise, and humbling honor, to receive the award this year; especially to receive it at the same time as my friend and colleague, Tracy McKenney. I’m so fortunate to have connected with those whom I consider as leaders in Collaborative Practice, education, and awareness, including previous Eureka Award winner Carol Hughes, who presented me with my award. I have so much support from the Orange County practice group, and am surrounded by so many dedicated professionals, that it makes it easy to be passionate about this work.”

Tracy McKenney was a Certified Divorce Financial Analyst and Certified Financial Planner with a passion for training and education in Collaborative Practice. Ms. McKenney devoted her professional efforts to helping families during the divorce process make informed decisions. Ms. McKenney helped couples determine how their decisions would affect their family’s future including sending children to college, property ownership, and retirement.

McKenney supported Collaborative Practice as treasurer and later as President of CDSOC. She was instrumental in bringing the “Divorce Options” workshop program into Orange County colleges and guiding CDSOC toward improved training and higher standards of practice. McKenney was a member of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals, Association of Divorce Financial Planners and the Financial Planning Association of Orange County.

Tracy McKenney at a CDSOC planning meeting in 2016 prior to her illness. Photo: Leslee Newman

McKenney lost her battle with cancer in September 2016 while serving as CDSOC President. Her husband, Scott McKenney, accepted the Eureka Award on her behalf from her colleague and fellow recipient Diana L. Martinez.

“My children and I want to thank CP Cal and Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County for posthumously awarding my wife, Tracy McKenney, with the Eureka Award for her efforts in Collaborative education. I was honored to accept the award on her behalf,” said Scott McKinney.

“At her core, Tracy loved helping people. It’s what she was all about, it was her calling. Tracy was deeply passionate about the Collaborative Divorce process as a way of getting through one of life’s most difficult challenges in any couple’s life with the least amount of stress and breakage: both family and financially.

“Tracy believed so much in the power of the Collaborative Process, and that it was her mission to spread the word throughout Southern California. She developed educational classes and led them with her professional teammates at local community colleges throughout Orange County. Her desire was to educate and raise awareness that there are alternatives to litigation for divorce that reduces pain and suffering for all involved.

“Tracy would be deeply honored and humbled with this award, and I know she is smiling with thanks to be recognized in the field she felt so strongly about and worked so hard to nurture. On behalf of the McKenney family, thank you very much from the bottom of our hearts,” said McKenney.

In her own words, McKenney described why it was important for her to be involved in CDSOC. She said, “Collaborative Divorce represents a significant advancement in resolving divorce respectfully. Going through a divorce is in some ways harder than dealing with the death of a loved one. It worsens when the process is dragged out through contentious, time-consuming and costly litigation in court. In so many cases, couples can avoid the damage of a court battle, even when they aren’t sure they can cooperate. Our approach makes it possible.

“Collaborative Divorce keeps decision-making in the hands of the couple. It spares them and especially their children the duress from an acrimonious divorce, preventing lasting harm, and preserving the family relationships for a healthier future,” said McKenney.

The Eureka Award is not limited to those in any particular practice or career. Previous honorees include members of the core disciplines – mental health, financial, and legal – as well as those who are not licensed in these professions.

Martinez and McKenney join a distinguished list of previous recipients from Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County, including Leslee Newman (2009), Carol Hughes (2011), Bart Carey (2012), Brian Don Levy (2013), and Cathleen Collinsworth (2015), making Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County among the three most honored regional practice groups in California.

The Eureka Award was established in 2006 as part of the very first Celebration of Collaborative Practice in Sonoma, California and actually pre-dates the founding of CP Cal. In its first two years, the Eureka Award Committee chose to play “catch up” and honored several recipients each year. In 2008, the CP Cal Board chose to limit the Eureka Award to three to five Honorees.

About Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County

Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County (CDSOC) was founded in 2003 to advise couples in Orange County about out of court options to traditional divorce litigation. Our group consists of experienced family law attorneys, licensed mental health professionals, and credentialed financial professionals, all of whom are specially trained in Collaborative Practice, mediation, and conflict resolution. Working under the Collaborative Practice model, the result is a divorce guided with respect and compassion in a non-adversarial way so families can make the best possible decisions about their future.

John Denny takes Collaborative Practice leadership role

May 18, 2017 By CDSOC

Will serve as 2017-2018 Collaborative Practice California Board President Media contact: Gayle Lynn Falkenthal, APR, Fellow PRSA 619-997-2495 or gayle@falconvalleygroup.com
(Irvine, California) – Orange County family law attorney John Denny, member and past president of Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County, was installed as president of Collaborative Practice California (CP Cal), the statewide organization for Collaborative Practice groups, at its annual conference in Redondo Beach, California on Sunday, April 30.

John Denny speaks to delegates at the 2017 Collaborative Practice California conference. Photo: David Kuroda

Individual members of the practice groups include Collaborative lawyers, mental health practitioners, financial specialists, and other professionals. The Collaborative Process is being used in family law, probate law, trusts and estates, and other civil law areas.

CP Cal’s mission is to unify, strengthen and support the Collaborative Practice community and to increase public awareness of the Collaborative Process throughout California.

“My goal during my tenure as Board President is to spread the word about the many benefits of Collaborative Practice in family law, civil matters, and trusts and estates,” said Denny. “Californians who must address legal or financial matters will benefit knowing about their Collaborative options for working through these critically important and sometimes contentious issues. They can resolve even the most difficult disputes while still preserving personal relationships with family members or business colleagues,” explained Denny.

John Denny graduated from UCLA (B.A., Economics, 1980) and Loyola Law School (J.D., cum laude, 1994). He was admitted to the California Bar (1994), U.S. District Court, Central District of California (1994), and the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (1995). Denny is a Certified Specialist in Family Law by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.

Denny is a member of the Orange County Bar Association, State Bar of California, Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County (CDSOC), and the International Association of Collaborative Professionals (IACP).

Denny co-authored “Ethical Issues Involving Minor’s Counsel,” published in OC Lawyer (2009), and “Some Benefits of Mediation and Collaborative Law,” OC Lawyer (2011). He served on the Board of Trustees of the Los Angeles County Bar Association and the Lawyers Club of Los Angeles County, including a term as President. Denny is a past President of CDSOC. He is a Founding Fellow of the Society of Fellows of the Orange County Bar Foundation.

John Denny is of counsel to Hittelman Strunk Law Group and limits his practice to Family Law Litigation, Mediation and Collaborative Law.

About Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County

Why Is Divorce So Stressful?

May 9, 2017 By CDSOC

by Dr. Carol R. Hughes, Ph.D., LMFT

“There are few blows to the human spirit so great as the loss of someone near and dear.” ~ John Bowlby, M.D.

The Holmes-Rahe Stress Scale indicates that divorce is the second highest stressor for humans, second only to the death of a spouse. Why is divorce so stressful?

When we view divorce through the lens of British psychologist, psychiatrist and psychoanalyst John Bowlby’s attachment theory, it helps us understand the reason why divorce is so stressful. Attachment theory states that we humans have a biological predisposition to form attachment bonds (strong emotional ties) with significant others to have a secure haven and safe base where we can thrive and return for support and comfort during times of need, stress, and crisis.

We form these attachment bonds via our relationships with other human beings who are of primary importance to us. Indeed, Dr. Dan Siegel, Professor of Psychiatry at UCLA Medical School, states, “Relationships are the most important part of our having well-being in being human. It’s that simple. And it’s that important.”

From birth to death, throughout the human life cycle, attachment bonds ensure our safety, security and even survival, and these emotional ties are strong and enduring. It is understandable then that we humans tenaciously cling to our attachment bonds, both consciously and unconsciously. Divorce disrupts and often destroys one of the most significant and powerful attachment bonds that we adults form – the bond with our marriage partner, thus also threatening the feelings of safety, security and survival this attachment bond has ensured. As author Pat Conroy lamented, “The greatest fury comes from the wound where love once issued forth.”

The disruption and destruction of this powerful attachment marital bond become even more significant when we view each couple member’s psychological and physical health during and post divorce. In the least case divorce causes the disruption and restructuring of the marital attachment bond and in the severest case, it causes the severing of the marital attachment bond, resulting in the attachment needs of the couple members no longer being met. When this happens, the couple members have lost their secure haven and safe base where they can thrive and return for support and comfort during times of need, stress, and crisis. They become more distressed and thus vulnerable to both physical and psychological stress, while at the same time being less able to deal with the stress and distress.

Researchers have consistently found that, except when compared to those in the most unhappy marriages, separated and divorced individuals suffer higher rates of physical and mental health concerns than married people in general, and often higher rates than widowed individuals. In contrast, researchers have found that those in the unhappiest marriages often feel a sense of relief and hopefulness that their future can be happier apart from their spouse.

“Divorce is deceptive. Legally it is a single event, but psychologically it is a chain – sometimes a never-ending chain – of events, relocations and radically shifting relationships strung through time, a process that forever changes the lives of the people involved.” – Judith Wallerstein and Sandra Blakeslee, Second Chances

The impact of divorce reaches far beyond the disruption, restructuring, and rupture of the marital attachment bond. Divorce affects relationships in every aspect of the couple’s lives – the relationships with their children, both minor and adult, with extended family members, friend and community support systems, both in the present time and into the future. As the author Pat Conroy wrote, “Divorce has many witnesses, many victims… Each divorce is the death of a small civilization.”

We know that grief is part of dealing with the excruciating loss that overwhelms us in death’s wake. Grief is our response to this loss. Divorce is the death of a marriage, the death of a couple or a family living together in one residence, often the death of extended family, friend, and community gatherings, the death of hopes, plans and dreams for the future. Grief is the invisible companion of divorce. Whether we are the one who is leaving the marriage, or the one being left, grief will be accompanying us on the journey called divorce.

Grief will also be the travel companion of our children, both minor and adult, our extended family members, and our friend and community support systems. This grief is inevitable. To many it is also invisible because most of us experiencing divorce, whether it is our divorce or the divorce of our parents, do not think of what we are experiencing as grief. We most often say that we are feeling shocked, angry, sad and powerless, all of which are feelings that arise during grief.

During separation and divorce, both members of the couple are experiencing significant losses. Yet both are often unaware of their invisible companion called grief.

It is common that the one leaving the marriage has already endured months and even years of agony, assessing whether to leave or stay. For the one leaving, the divorce grief process began many months ago as he or she began thinking about less contact with the children, extended family, friends and community, the loss of and even longing for the happier days of the marriage, the possible loss of the family home and financial security, and the loss of hopes, plans, and dreams. So, the one leaving has a head start in the grief cycle of divorce.

When the one leaving says, “I want a divorce,” the one being left is immediately catapulted into the grief cycle of divorce. Often the one being left swings topsy-turvy through feelings of shock, deep hurt, intense sadness, anger, even rage, love and longing for the spouse and grieving the same losses as the one who is leaving the marriage. All of these feelings are part of the grief cycle of divorce.

“Some people think that it’s holding on that makes one strong; sometimes it’s letting go.” ~ Author unknown

Researchers have also found that even when adults have experienced such losses, physical and psychological disturbances, and grief, after a period of time most adults cope successfully with divorce.

How can you best ensure that you are one of the adults who successfully cope with divorce?

Acknowledge that you are experiencing an overwhelmingly stressful life event. Assess where you are in the divorce grief cycle. Ask for professional assistance. Work with a team of divorce professionals who are experienced in Collaborative Divorce and Mediation and who understand your needs as you move through this major life crisis. These divorce options are confidential, out-of-court, non-adversarial and respectful. They offer you the opportunity to identify your goals, interests and concerns and craft agreements that are both individual and family focused.

Orange County Collaborative Professionals Contribute Expertise at California Conference

May 1, 2017 By CDSOC

Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County members Diana L. Martinez (left) and John Denny will serve on the Collaborative Practice California Board of Directors for 2017-2018. Martinez is a board member; Denny will serve as President. *Photo: Courtesy Cathleen Collingsworth*

Twelve members of Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County contributed their professional expertise to the annual Collaborative Practice California (CP Cal) Conference XII, held in Redondo Beach, California from April 28 – 30.

Cathleen Collinsworth, a CP Cal Delegate for 2017-2018 and a workshop presenter, said, “This year’s theme of ‘Harnessing the Energy’ came true. The energy was very evident throughout the entire weekend. It is my hope those of us who attended can keep that energy going throughout the coming year.”

Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County member Scott Cramer (left) believes it’s important to work hard and play harder! Seen here with San Diego practice group member Mark Hill in a "guest appearance" with Hill’s band "No Country For Old Men." — Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County associate member Scott Cramer (left) believes it’s important to work hard and play harder! Seen here with San Diego practice group member Mark Hill in a “guest appearance” with Hill’s band “No Country For Old Men.” *Photo: Courtesy Cathleen Collingsworth*

Also presenting workshops were Bart Carey, Patrice Courteau, Dr. Carol Hughes, and Diana L. Martinez.

CSDOC member and Orange County based family law attorney John Denny received the gavel from outgoing CP Cal President Lisa Zonder, and will serve as CP Cal President for 2017-2018. Also serving with Denny on the board of directors is Diana L. Martinez.

CDSOC member John Denny will serve as Collaborative Practice California President for the 2017-2018 term. — Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County member John Denny will serve as Collaborative Practice California President for the 2017-2018 term. *Photo: Courtesy Cathleen Collingsworth*

Collinsworth expressed her desire on behalf of the conference attendees to continue collaborating together in their daily work, as well as their daily lives, and continue to educate all they meet on the value of peacemaking.

Why a Collaborative Pre-nup Makes Cents

April 24, 2017 By CDSOC

by Suanne I. Honey Attorney at Law, CFLS, Mediator and Collaborative Attorney

Sorry for the silly pun when this is such a serious topic. Seriously, though, pre-nuptial agreements are hot topics which give rise to many emotions.

“It paints the Devil on the wall.”

“It is anticipating failure of the marriage.”

“If he or she really loved me, this would not be necessary.”

“I am uncomfortable talking about finances.”

The list can go on and on. Sometimes emotions are an unnecessary waste of energy. Other times emotions have some benefits, even negative emotions. For example, fear in a dark alley in a dangerous neighborhood will cause you to be zealously vigilant about your surroundings which will lead you into taking appropriate steps for your safety … much like the pre-nuptial agreement itself.

Unfortunately, statistics today are not favorable for a lasting marriage. If and when there is a decision to get divorced, the person you once loved turns into the enemy. There is often a total lack of trust at the time of a divorce. There are fights over money, property, and other issues creating stress for both partners. This stress almost always filters down to the children.

Collaborative Law is a process where couples work with a team of expert professionals.

The mental-health professionals work individually with each partner to a marriage (or a potential marriage). They help curb their emotions and phrase their individual needs and wants in a positive, cooperative and logical way, allowing those needs and wants to really be heard and understood by the other partner.

The financial professional will be able to identify and sort out the financial and property issues of concern to the couple in a transparent and logical way.

The Collborative Practice attorneys will help guide their clients through the legal quagmire. This can all be done in a much less stressful, more cooperative way in the collaborative arena.

While important, none of that is the real reason that Collaborative pre-nups make the most “cents.”

The biggest reason for marriages to fail is the breakdown in communication. Having gone through a divorce in the Collaborative law process, many (if not most) participants say if they’d gone through this process before the marriage, the divorce would be much less likely.

So it makes “cents” to have your pre-nuptial agreement created in the Collaborative setting. Because of the communication skills learned by the couple during the process, it may help avoid a future divorce altogether. This saves a great deal of “cents” paid to attorneys and litigation, or future Collaborative Divorce costs.

Even if the unthinkable happens and there is a future divorce, you will come out ahead. Having learned how to conduct difficult conversations in a way that allows your spouse to hear and understand your position, even discussing issues in the divorce process that were not part of the original prenup will save many “cents.”

Most importantly, the stress level exposed to any children during your divorce will be significantly reduced. This is an outcome which is “priceless.”

Experts Contribute to Best Practices at Collaborative Practice California Conference

April 12, 2017 By CDSOC

Orange County Collaborative Practice professionals will share their expertise with colleagues in April at the annual Collaborative Practice California Conference XII in Redondo Beach.

Members of Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County (CDSOC) are in demand as professional education panelists and seminar leaders throughout Fall 2017 due to their expertise and experience working with a diverse array of Orange County clients in the Collaborative approach to divorce.

“Many collaborative professionals are committed to continuing professional education in order to provide the best service to our clients,” said Dr. Carol Hughes, CDSOC member and workshop leader. “The annual conference of Collaborative Practice California is one venue for us to do this.

“We CDSOC members are honored to be contributing to the further growth of our Collaborative colleagues throughout the state. Ultimately, the reward is offering better options to clients who want to avoid the trauma, time and expense of a litigated divorce or other disputes,” added Dr. Hughes.

Collaborative Practice California presentations include:

Left to right: Cathleen Collinsworth, Carol Hughes, Bart Carey

Collaborative Family Lawyer and Mediator Bart Carey, Divorce Coach and Child Specialist Dr. Hughes, Ph.D., LMFT, and Financial Specialist Cathleen Collinsworth, CDFA™, MAFF™ will facilitate an advanced seminar titled “Grand Rounds for Collaborative Practitioners.”

The workshop format introduces the “Grand Rounds” concept used in the medical profession. A supervising physician-professor and small group of residents visit individual patients in their hospital rooms, diagnosing their symptoms and discussing together how best to help each patient through collaborative problem-solving.

In a similar way Bart, Carol and Cathleen will apply their expertise to analyze individual case challenges presented by participants. The team will “diagnose” and assess the symptoms and prescribe the best course of action.

As a result of the workshop, the attendees will learn how to analyze case challenges presented by their own clients, and then design and implement creative solutions on their behalf.

Collaborative family lawyer and mediator Diana L. Martinez will present a workshop on diversity and cultural issues in divorce.

Collaborative Family Lawyer and Mediator Diana L. Martinez, will co-present a seminar with other California Collaborative professionals discussing cultural competency in family law practice, “Becoming Culturally Competent and Ethically Responsible: Beyond Basics.” Professionals working with families going through divorce and separation need to increase awareness and skills to discern the complex aspects of culture, world views, and communication patterns of the families they interact with during the legal process.

Participants will also learn to identify sociopolitical aspects of racism, power and privilege, and how these may impact issues of trust and create barriers while navigating the legal process. Being able to empathize and navigate these challenges will lead to greater understanding of client needs and achieve a successful outcome without resorting to litigation.

Patrice Courteaum M.A., LMFT, Divorce Coach and Child Specialist

Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist, Divorce Coach and Child Specialist Patrice Courteau, MA, LMFT, will participate in a panel discussion about effective Collaborative Practice outreach in a digital age.

Orange County families who are considering a Collaborative approach to their divorce can be confident in the guidance and qualifications of CDSOC members, who not only uphold high standards in their personal practice, but who are called upon to help California’s Collaborative professionals develop the highest standards in this area of family and civil law.

CDSOC members are available to speak to groups of professionals and to any interested organization or program about the Collaborative Practice approach to solving dispute in family law matters or any civil dispute instead of resorting to time consuming, costly litigation that destroys ongoing relationships. Contact CDSOC at 949-266-0660.