Over the Shock and GALing 6

[Heartbroken20]

Thanks TRB,

Now I was thinking, for the shock factor to have the most effect would it be better to go right in and file no bs, no talking, just file?

I am thinking that if you walk her through it step by step like you are doing there will be no shock factor at all and she will go with it. seem’s like you are making it easy for her.

We've agreed that neither of us is going to "file" - we are going the mediation path - cheaper, better for the future coparenting R, etc. So I am not going to file and drop it on her.

I Agree, however, that scheduling a mediation appointment doesn't have the same ring of "I have decided" finality that filing does.

T - Your current "status" is very similar to mine. Your "summarizing post" above is spot on and a big 2x4 for me.

Sorry to see you have arrived in this place, and for all of us who are right there with you, especially having DB'd the best we could to try to improve things.

One thought. Have you considered the Collaborative Law approach?

In CL, all four people (S's & L's) meet together to settle the D as quickly/easily as possible (if there IS such a thing). No discussion/decisions regarding various issues are made outside of the meetings. That way each party has legal advice present every step of the way so someone doesn't feel "cheated" later. The parties also legally agree to waive their right to sue later on, presuming no major changes in circumstances have occurred (loss of job, remarriage, etc.) so what you settle on is what you get.

To me, the downside of mediation is that it is not legally binding and once everything agreed upon is reviewed by respective lawyers for legality, etc., issues/revisions inevitably come up that will then have to be negotiated all over again.

With CL, everything is negotiated once, legally agreed to, and then on to the next topic. If a specialist is desired (i.e., child psych, financial expert, etc.) only one is hired for both parties and meets only with all parties present, avoiding the he-said/she-said discussions/posturing.

If, at any time, the lawyers feel someone is not negotiating in good faith or is otherwise trying to disrupt/delay the process, they are required to recuse themselves and neither party can use them again for any legal advice, etc., and everything has to start over. This means it's in both part parties best interest to cut through the BS and be done with it.

I see it as a compromise between cut-throat traditional divorce and the mediation approach. Might be the "finality" ring you are looking for and create a water temperature just hot enough to lift some fog????

It's the approach my W and I about to undertake, unfortunately, as it seems to be the least destructive to post-D relations, co-parenting, etc. Also, it is not tied to the court system's schedule, etc. Once everything is signed, a judge and Fam Court judge sign off on it to make it a done deal.

For more info, just google it, there a national organization of lawyers who specialize in it. Shouldn't be done with just any D lawyer, as they are accustomed to going for the throat.

Anyway, fwiw.