Relationships are often plagued by disagreements, extramarital affairs, silent tensions or overt arguments which can lead to feelings of unhappiness and dissatisfaction and which often result in divorce or break-up. Many marriages face issues that prove too difficult to resolve without outside assistance. Because couples rarely sit down and directly negotiate with each other about what they find frustrating in the other person’s behavior and what behaviors could be substituted to ease the friction, marital mediation offers an approach to resolving conflict and to build a better relationship by using dispute resolution techniques in a cooperative, problem-solving way to reach an understanding to avoid future misunderstandings or inaccurate assumptions.

Couples may use marital mediation to enter into a written post-marital contract resolving issues such as how much of joint funds can each spend without checking first with the other, who owns what marital assets or how to cooperate in preparing a joint tax return. Other common marital mediation issues include her needs vs. his needs, intimacy issues, extramarital affairs, financial management, parenting practices and responsibilities, personal health and hygiene, religious practices and conflicts, living arrangements, career plans and expectations, relationships with family and friends and division of household labor and tasks.

For a family mediator, marital mediation is a way to expand your practice to offer mediation to help couples stay married. One of the major challenges for a marital mediator is to remain effective without losing neutrality.  As a marital mediator, there can be deep professional satisfaction in working with couples to help create a more enduring marriage.

Marital mediation is similar to divorce or separation mediation in many respects, yet the entire tone and energy of the couple is different. It looks for ways to strengthen a relationship through better communication and new behaviors. Please note that in Texas, marital mediation focuses more on the divorcing or separating couple rather than the marriage couple looking to strengthen their relationship. Marital mediation in the context of the divorcing couple is helpful because it provides an opportunity for constructive communication to help make the transition from confliction spouse to cooperating parent.

The mediation process is empowering to couples because it is so client-driven: the emphasis is always on the clients themselves, respecting their ability to recognize their own issues and craft their own solutions whether that is to strengthen a marriage or to strive for a cooperative divorce.

Sources: www.mediate.com; www.maritalmediationworks.com; www.achievingresolution.com

Dick's words of wisdom follow:

Over the years, a number of prospective clients have asked about how mean a lawyer I can be. I used to tell them that I could be as mean as I needed to be. Now, I prefer to discuss some other, related issues.

1. What is the client's overall objective in getting (or getting through) the divorce? Is it punishment for perceived wrongs? Is it to end up with adequate resources to be comfortable after divorce? Is it to have primary custody of the kids or to have a way to share time and responsibility for raising the kids? Is it to end up with certain valuable assets? Is it to come out debt free? Or something else? There's no right or wrong answer. It just helps the lawyer to know what the target is.

2. What kind of relationship does the client want to have with his/her ex-spouse? No relationship, a good one, best friends, neutral relationship or a bad relationship? Again, there's no right or wrong approach. The attorney just needs to know in order to work out the appropriate strategy.

3. What "mean" actions would the client want to take? Some actions are not permissible because they are illegal or unethical for a lawyer to do, and the client needs to understand that. Some actions are legal and ethical, but could be considered "mean" in some circumstances. Within that limited category, what would the client want?

4. How does the client think "meanness" will advance his/her cause? Some clients don't realize that being mean to the other side leads to more hostility and less cooperation. Will that help the client meet his/her needs or achieve his/her objectives?

5. Is the client willing to spend the extra money required to be mean? Unfortunately, for the client, "mean" isn't cheap. The attorney's fees increase dramatically when the attorney sends out numerous letters complaining or demanding action, files numerous pleadings complaining or requesting actions, sets hearings, conducts numerous depositions, demands voluminous discovery and so on. Also, the "tit for tat" strategy comes into play, meaning that whatever one side does to the other is returned again to the first party. The result: more letters, pleadings, hearings, depositions, discovery, etc. Being mean keeps the attorney busy, but it also increases the cost of divorce for both parties.

Often, the desire to hire a mean lawyer is just the natural reaction to pain,anger or fear the client is experiencing. There are certainly times when an attorney must act aggressively and firmly, but most clients just don't need or want a really mean lawyer when they learn how that will affect the case and their lives. And many or most clients can't afford or won't want to pay for a mean lawyer. Having the discussion about taking the mean approach can really be surprising to the client, but it can lead to planning for a better divorce.

To obtain a copy of the Standing Order, please utilize the following link to the Montgomery County website: http://www.co.montgomery.tx.us/dcourts/standingorder.pdf

Today’s post in Lipman’s State Your Case column highlights an important consideration for spouses who decide to separate and part ways without first seeking divorce or a post-marital property agreement. 

Just because a married couple separates does not mean that their finances are also separate. As long as the parties remain married, they accumulate community assets and liabilities. 

The lady in today’s column had been separated from her spouse for 22 years. During that period of separation, she purchased a home. Even though her husband’s name is not on the deed, the husband can claim a community property interest in the home. This was probably a huge shock and unintended consequence. 

When courts order that a parent(s) have supervised visits with a child, it is usually for good reason. Depending on the circumstances, the court may permit (or the parties may agree with the court’s approval) that visits be supervised by another family member, one of the parents, or a third party agency. 

A recent story from The Houston Chronicle discusses the abduction of a child during a supervised visit arranged by the child’s conservators. The child’s conservators likely presumed that a restaurant like Chuck E. Cheese was a safe place to allow the child interaction with her parents. However, the child’s biological parents took the five year old child during the supervised visit. Thereafter an Amber Alert was issued. 

While the SAFE Program through the Harris County Victim’s Assistance Center is not the most ideal setting to visit with one’s child, it is designed to prevent tragic situations like this one. Whether you are a custodial parent or managing conservator seeking to have visits with a child’s parent(s) supervised, the SAFE Program can assist.   

In my family law practice, an increasing number of people ask me about Collaborative Law. While some clients are delighted about having a mental health professional (MHP) on the team, other clients express apprehension over the role of the MHP. 

The MHP’s role is NOT to analyze the parties or children, provide therapy, give legal advice, diagnose, or solve mental health issues of the parties or the parties’ children.  

The MHP is a 3^rd party neutral on the collaborative team. His/her job includes:

1.      keeping the parties (and counsel) focused on the defined objectives and goals;

2.      facilitating communication;

3.      managing the emotions of the parties; and

4.      working preventatively.

The parent stated he was one of hundreds of people laid off from his job, and he has been unable to find other employment. As a result, the parent is unable to make any child support payments. The parent asked whether he could get his child support payments lowered or suspended until he finds work. 

Though Lipman’s answer (which was “Maybe”) is a good one, I would go a little farther in my commentary. 

Before a judge grants a motion to reduce an obligor’s child support, he/she must find that it is in the child’s best interest. Think for a minute or two about how you would argue that. It’s tough to say that providing the custodial parent with less money to support the child meets the best interest standard. Additionally, the court will want to know what assets are available to provide for the child, such as savings accounts and/or assets that can be liquidated to provide support. 

The prevailing attitude of many judges is that parents meet obligations to support their children. If that means your child eats before you do, then so be it.   

My comments are not intended to discount the plight of folks having legitimate financial difficulties. I merely suggest that you be elegantly prepared before asking the court, a caseworker at the Texas Office of the Attorney General, or the custodial parent to consider a reduction. Be prepared to show that you cannot pay for your rent/mortgage, car note, and other essential items. Be prepared to show how you’ve tried to gain other employment. Be prepared to show that you are attempting to pay something every week. Something is better than nothing. Be prepared to demonstrate that you are making an effort, and that you are sacrificing to meet child support obligations. 

To learn more about this practice area, tune in on Sunday, December 21, 2008 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. to hear Mr. Hiller discuss this new frontier in family law.  He will be interviewed by Barry Kilgore on KSEV 700AM Radio.