Mediation is not "easier" on WAS than litigation. You get a rep, s/he gets a rep. The difference between collaborative divorce and mediation is that in collaborative divorce you both make all the agreements and the lawyers simply do the mumbo-jumbo, but there's no advisory relationships; in mediation, THE mediator (who is the one in the middle), along with each person's legal representative, can advise you as to what the law is (mediators are often retired judges).
If a collaborative process collapses, especially in California, everyone who was a party to it has to resign by law, and nothing that was agreed-to or said in the meetings can be introduced into the subsequent litigation -- the whole thing goes back to Square 1. If a mediation collapses, it's usually only over one or two issues, and those can be litigated with the court accepting all of the outcomes of the mediation and rendering a judgment on whatever issues are "irreconcilable."
Mediation isn't "pro-Walkaway." The advantage is that it is less contentious and cheaper -- the more you and Spouse can agree to, the less the lawyers have to do, and the less time the mediator spends mediating, which = less money.
Go to litigation and every fax, e-mail, and phone call is a cost. Every meeting, filing, status conference is a cost. At my friend's law firm, they charge clients $1 per minute on the phone bill, along with the billing rate of the attorney. He had a 1/2-hour conversation with his lawyer the other day, which cost him $30 for the phone call and $175 for the lawyer. There have been about 50 phone calls so far. Do the math.
And remember -- if you litigate, YOU pay your own guy's fees except in very rare cases.
So take it for what it's worth, but I just had this conversation yesterday.
