Questions about possibilities and outcomes with actual "collaborative divorce"

[SamwizeGamgee]

Greetings,
I hope that everyone reading this is doing well.  What an interesting time to be "trapped" (aka stay home order) at home with a spouse while in a rocky relationship!

I am almost certainly heading towards a divorce from a mostly high-functioning (to the point of being indistinguishable to a casual observer, I think) wife, who would fit the Wait type of BPD.  It's been 23 years in the making. My previous posts have lots of details. 

Earlier this week we had our first couples session with a T who is a member of a collaborative divorce team.   And by collaborative divorce, I don't mean just a divorce in which both parties try to cooperate and mediate, but, this is an actual psychologist / lawyer licensed in "Collaborative Divorce."  I am looking this option over.  I'm a little unsure this is a good choice, since it's possible - in a mediated divorce, for example - to spend time and money working as a team, and then reach some trigger, or some other sticking point that will make us both retreat to using Ls in a traditional litigated divorce.  In this fashion, I would have attempted a divorce, played my cards, negotiated down to some solution, then have to re-fight everything.  Paid probably double for all the trauma I meant to avoid.

At present, I kind of feel that both my wife and I are exhausted from all the years of hardship, and raw emptiness in the marriage.  I think we could probably meet with an agreement.  I'm pretty sure however, that as actual separation sets in, and, heaven forbid, she doesn't get everything she wants, how she wants, it could blow things up. 

With a true collaborative divorce as advertised, as I understand, the two lawyers sign on, and agree to resolve the divorce and only get paid if it doesn't go to court - and I'm probably over-simplifying things.

Has anyone had experience with the official format of the collaborative divorce?
(I should add this pertains to the USA)
How did it go?
Can BPD types follow through with this, or does it blow up in the end?

Thanks, and stay well everyone!

[mama-wolf]

Hi Samwize,

I didn't go the collaborative divorce route, but I can tell you my uBPDxw really wanted to pursue that option.  She is (was) also very high functioning and able to hide quite a bit of her symptoms.  She is an attorney herself (doesn't practice family law, though), and I am convinced that she believed she could continue to manipulate me and the situation in order to get more.

From my understanding, in a collaborative divorce situation there is no one actually looking out for your interests...except you.  And that gets really tricky because the FOG gets very thick while going through the divorce process.  In the collaborative approach, there is no fall-back to an expert who will critically evaluate the pros and cons and present them to you in a way that lets you decide what you want to do for you.  They just want to get you both to agree to something that will keep it out of court.  This is why my ex wanted to go that route...it meant I couldn't set and enforce my boundaries without being painted as stonewalling and being intractable, and she would have more help to pressure me into accepting conditions that were not in my (or my kids') best interests.

I recommend that if you are seriously headed towards divorce, you might at least have a consultation with an attorney of your own even if you don't sign on for their services through the whole process.  There are some that will do this consultation at no charge, though even paying their rate for one hour of their time is well worth it.  You can still do mediation without going to court, which is what we did.  I just had more solid footing in that mediation because I had an effective shield between me and a highly triggered (at that point) uBPDw who could barely hold herself together.

I'll be interested to hear what others have to say here about whether the collaborative approach worked with a BPD partner.  I can't see it going well...

Side note:  Not choosing the collaborative divorce approach doesn't mean you can't/won't collaborate.  It just means you get more of a say on what is negotiable...and what's not.  You can still be kind, generous, non-adversarial, etc.  Just on your terms and not hers.

mw

[SamwizeGamgee]

Thank you.  I'm hopeful but leery.  It's ironic to me, that about the same time as my wife went to go see a divorce attorney, I had resigned myself to living as best I could and stay married for another five years or so.  Nevertheless, the prospect of divorce, though scary, is also invigorating - a chance at having a home established that's free of the manipulation, and dark side, would be life-changing.

In response to you, I know that I'm basically a negotiator, but, you make a good point, that I'll feel a lot of pressure to be the nice guy.  It would be easy to prey on my desire to get along, avoid conflict, be the white knight (again).  Sitting at a table in which everyone is looking at me to give in, would be intimidating.  another element of danger, is that my wife, as Dr. Jekyll, is very persuasive, emotional, and has an ability to FOG like few others.  The Mrs. Hyde gets saved up for me later. I could see her leading the emotional atmosphere of the room easily. 

That said, I've already been in couples therapy and meetings with clergy, where she's gone through casting me in all kinds of bad ways, and I've withstood all her manipulations in these settings.  I have really reached a self-awareness of what I can and can't accept.  Knowing myself and understanding her tends to equal the scales.

I do like the idea of a "forced" negotiation by having an incentive to stay out of court, and settle all matters on our own, and in our own way.  But, a lesson from the military is that no plan survives contact with the enemy.

[MeandThee29]

My attorney was very well thought-of as a collaborative lawyer. He wrote a lot about it and gave seminars. He also did a lot of mediation, difficult litigated cases, divorce malpractice, etc. etc. In other words, a very well-rounded lawyer. In collaborative cases, he always worked out ahead of time with the client what was non-negotiable, what might be negotiated, and what definitely could be negotiated. Preparation was formalized so that good decisions could be made there. He was always available for private consultation, so the client was never in a legally vulnerable position.

However, mine strongly recommended against anything but a negotiated agreement or a litigated case in my case. In his opinion, my ex had not shown signs of being willing to fairly negotiate and exhibit self-control under pressure. My ex wanted to control, and in collaboration, the control is evened up. My lawyer predicted total failure if we went that way. He also was concerned about my tendency to give in and said lawyer-to-lawyer or lawyer-to-judge would put the law on my side. In my state, if collaboration fails, you have to start over with another lawyer. But if everyone is willing to work on things and be relatively even, it can be great.

As I've said here before, my lawyer ultimately proved himself to be much more discerning than I was over-and-over, so I let go of the reins more over time. And he indeed got it settled. If you have a very experienced team, I would tend to go with their recommendations.

[ForeverDad]

Some here started with a collaborative divorce but I don't specifically recall any members reporting their attempt succeeded.  The lawyers may be reasonable, but it also takes two spouses who can be reasonably normal too.  If both can't find a middle ground...

A typical divorce almost always starts with ordered mediation attempts.  Some state laws allow mediation to report which items were successfully mediated so the court handled the rest.  Then later in the case there can be settlement conferences.

In my case we were ordered to have up to 3 mediation sessions.  At the first session we went through and agreed to all but a few material or financial issues.  We stalled on custody and a parenting schedule.  Ex was determined our son was "her" child, that's how things were in her native culture.  Factoid:  She was born and raised half her childhood in the state I resided in when I met her.  Mediator countered, "We're in the USA, not there."  (Another factoid, but I failed to mention it in the session:  Her mother let her father raise her two older brothers, her mother and the abuser SF raised her and her sister.  Well, I was the father of our male child, according to her parents' example then shouldn't I raise our son?)  Mediator saw we were at an impasse, ended the session and said "Come back when your positions change."  (We didn't go back.)  She didn't want to leave at the same time as me, still posturing as the fearful stbEx, so I stayed behind until she had driven away.  As she walked out the door the mediator commented to the air, "This woman has issues."  After one session.  Mediation failed as expected but at least I tried with good faith efforts.

If you take this path I encourage you to reserve the right to declare it Failed and redirect it to a standard divorce process.

[formflier]

I would recommend that each professional be asked who or what their "professional" and "ethical" duty is to.

The issue of who is looking out for your best interests and understanding who the professionals are "duty bound to" is very VERY important.

I also am not aware of anyone that has successfully completed a "collaborative" divorce process on these boards.  (I wouldn't let this stop you from trying, but I would hope it encourages you to "lean forward" into the process with eyes WIDE open).

Best,

FF

[livednlearned]

My H successfully went through a collaborative divorce with his uBPD high-functioning waif-ish ex wife.

He had consequential leverage that was instrumental to his success. H's ex-wife had an affair and left email proof on the shared family computer that she had a "paramour." In our state, proof of a paramour during the marriage meant H wouldn't have to pay alimony to her. Since that was a significant amount of money and she was in a low-paying job with runaway spending habits, she complied with H's fair offer. Which, like a lot of white knights, was above and beyond what was considered reasonable.

My L was a good litigator but took pride in settling cases out of court. She had stats that I can't remember off the top of my head, but were something like 84 percent cases settled in mediation.

Are you certain that collaborative lawyers don't get paid if they can't reach an agreement? That doesn't sound like lawyers. In my state there is a retainer whether you work with a collaborative lawyer or not. If they can't reach agreement, then like you said, you flush out of their process and have to start all over with another attorney and another retainer.

BPD traits can show up as stonewalling and obstruction. Is that what you anticipate from your spouse? Those traits can play out the same whether it's collaborative or not.

And like mama-wolf said, you can find lawyers who are assertive and collaborative, but they'll take things to litigation if that's more likely to get you the outcome that's fair.

Being in front of a judge was not nearly as awful as being in the marriage for me. It started off intimidating, but then it became businesslike.

[SamwizeGamgee]

Thanks everyone.  I hope that we are all adjusting to the world health issues well enough.

I agree with the above. There's something that seems to not fit what we all can sense with BPD-ish people. LnL brings positive news - and although I don't have that kind of leverage, I have some hope that when we both sense the time of marriage is over, we can work out a divorce. What's prompting this is a T we are working with.  I sought out a couples therapist who specializes in dissolving marriages if that is the direction it needs to go.  that was an apt description of my situation. This T is part of a collaborative divorce team, although too far away to represent us in court, the T understands this form of mediation.
https://vacollaborativepractice.com/what-is-collaborative-divorce/

I am happy to have this guidance.  I think it's odd that the "team" of his and her lawyers, financial adviser, and child advocate won't get paid if it goes to court.  I can see this collaborative divorce process being useful to hammer out 80% of the issues, but, it seems to me there will still need to me the threatening hammer of a court date to get things done, and keep wife realistic - and a L who is prepped and ready for court.

However, I know that when my W feels listened too, she's much more tractable.  Perhaps meeting in a collaborative conference setting, we can all create enough energy to come up with a good agreement.

Nevertheless, I have that feeling that anyone outside the marriage has only seen Dr. Jekyll.  I know I keep referring to this, but, given the right combination of alienation, looming loss, and rejection, and losing her enmeshed status with the kids could trigger a switch in behavior to Mrs. Hyde. That would not be the right person in a collaborative divorce.  I don't think outsiders know how much "abuse-proofing" an agreement will require.  IMHO.

[formflier]

 
I would suggest that you work on approaching "abuse proof" from the following point of view.

Stay away from "proving" that it is needed.

Let her be heard and then assume the stance  of "I'll agree to that and I certainly want there to be accountability for what I agree to.  (then in an oh by the way kinda thing)  "Of course same standards for both..right?"

Hopefully you get the vibe. 

Why would someone be reluctant to embrace consequences/accountability/oversight for an agreement they intend to keep?

Best,

FF

[livednlearned]

For me, in my divorce, the triggering part was not the process or the lawyers involved so much as it was the language in the paperwork: the complaints, the motions, and the subpoenas, which came later.

If the collaborative process involves explaining the legalese as it rolls out, that might prevent the scenario of her reading this stuff without someone to explain it.

[SamwizeGamgee]

Right now, what will be valuable is a contained space with a professional couselor leading us through the divorce emotions and legalities.   I believe that the beginning might set the tone positively - and tone down W's entitlement and fears of rejection, and fears about poverty.  (and my fears of a controlling, enmeshed W assuming she gets the kids). 

What it can't do is get deep in the layers of PD - and end the blame, projection, subliminal programming, and toxicity.  But, staying married did nothing to help that either, so, maybe we all are healthier on the other side of divorce. 

Prayers and hopes!