Verified by 
"Only people who have what you want can take you where you say you want to go."
~ Pauline Tesler
Although most of us still respect doctors and the medical profession, we have learned to not take one doctor's word as gospel and to advocate for ourselves (i.e. push to have the CA-125 cancer screen done or get second opinions when given a not-so-good diagnosis). People have taken doctors off the pedestal they were once on and see them more as the fallible humans they are.
When it comes to divorce lawyers, however, it seems that the majority of people still deify them and relinquish the fate of their case to these seemingly all-knowing professionals. Very few of those going through a legal process question the tactics, advice or information their attorneys give them. This may be especially true when it comes to the dissolution of a marriage. People reorganizing their family are vulnerable and look to their attorney for good legal counsel and direction.
I recently had lunch with Pauline Tesler, internationally known Family Law Attorney and co-author of Collaborative Divorce. She had an interesting forecast for the legal profession (at least the Family Law sector of the legal profession). She believes that law will soon be going the way of the medical profession: that is, people will begin to question the role the lawyers and legalities play in the ending of their marriage.
According to Tesler, "If you ask someone when their divorce began and ended, they will never say, 'it began the day I walked in to my attorney's office," or, 'it ended the day I received the divorce decree in the mail.' In most cases, they will say the breakdown began long before talking to a lawyer and divorce ended long after the legalities were finalized."
While marriage is a legal contract, Tesler says that the dissolution of a marriage is first and foremost an emotional issue and parenting passage, and secondly, it is a financial reorganization. Although there are laws in place to assist those who are often emotionally distraught decide who gets what, most people have no reference point to the legal realm in divorce.
"It's lawyers," Tesler contends, "who bring the matrix of the court to resolve issues of parenting and money." She goes on to say that it is a "reductive process" and generally doesn't bring out the best in anyone.
Indeed, not only do spouses have to divide time with children as well as their assets, the legal system is set up to be adversarial so people are often operating from their most fear-based levels with survival and safety being their primary concerns. Tesler boldly stated that "an attorney's office is not a safe place to make most of the decisions people have to make in divorce. Lawyers are trained to be efficient and scan for facts, but they need to also look at the narrative their clients bring."
Hoping to see some major changes in the way divorce is handled, Tesler predicts that, in 25 years, the process will look quite different. She likened these changes to a medical experience her mother had three or four years ago. Upon visiting her mother in the hospital, Tesler expected to see one self-important doctor handing down the information to her about her mother's case. Instead, she was pleasantly surprised by an entire team of medical professionals - doctors, nurses, specialists and assistants - who were all apparently equally involved in discussing the case and in creating the treatment plan.
Integrated medicine decreased the incidents of errors made by one doctor determining the diagnosis based solely on his or her training. Tesler believes that an integrated team approach in the judicial system has an equal benefit to those involved in legal proceedings.
Perhaps that's one reason she has continued to be such an advocate of the Collaborative Process - a relatively new paradigm that utilizes two cooperative attorneys, two mental health professionals known as divorce coaches, a financial neutral and, when necessary, a child specialist who is also a neutral.
Tesler predicts that some day, all divorces - Collaborative and otherwise - will be handled by a professional team as a matter of course (not as an exception to the rule).
While Tesler obviously advocates for the Collaborative process, she concedes that it's not for everyone. "But," she adds, "divorcing people need to begin to demand service for what they need, not for what attorneys know. With a team approach, attorneys (and all the professionals involved in the case) would be more accountable to hold what's best for the client in the forefront of the case.
To further prove her point, Tesler suggests that those ending their marriage think about how they are on the best day of their divorce and the worst day and consider which professional would best serve them on those different days. At some points along the way, it may well be the attorney who would be the most helpful, but on other days it would be a therapist, child or co-parenting expert or a financial professional.
Although it sounds cumbersome and expensive to have more people involved, it actually tends to be less costly and more expeditious because each aspect of the divorcing couple's needs are addressed and less money is spent on exorbitant attorney's fees. Rather that lawyers being held as the sun in the solar system, Tesler feels they need to be seen as a sun in the vast Milky Way.
No part of this publication may be reproduced without the express written permission of the author. Failure to comply with these terms may expose you to legal action and damages for copyright infringement.
