Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the gd-system-plugin domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114
Process Options - DISRUPT DIVORCE

Your address will show here +12 34 56 78
Process Options

You Have Options

Find the option that best suits your family’s needs. 

SELF-REPRESENTED

Kitchen Table Agreement

Description: The idea that a problem or conflict can be resolved in a reasonable “kitchen table” style, where parties sit and compromise to terms that are both amicable and desirable to both parties in disagreement. Pros: amicable, preserves relationships, inexpensive, convenient, no legal bills. Cons: only works if both parties agree to process; difficult if complex situation or not organized, lacks structure and legal representation

LAWYER OR SELF-REPRESENTED
Mediation

Description: It's a dynamic, structured and interactive process where a neutral third party assists disputing parties in resolving conflict or the process of hiring a third party that’s neutral and provides assistance in resolving conflict. Can be a psychologist, financial professional, lawyer, retired judge. Pros: structured, provides a third party, relevant facts, mutual agreements, common ground. Cons: can be biased, expensive, might not work for all, only works if both parties agree to process

LAWYER OR SELF-REPRESENTED

Arbitration

Description: Another structured process that involves a 3rd party to make decisions if parties are unable to come to a conclusion. They are to settle disputes and prevent any more conflict, their job is to take agreeance into another level past a mediator. Pros: can select arbitrator, legally bound, structure, findings from arbitrator can be converted to court orders for MEP. Cons: expensive, can be biased; if arbitrators unregulated, can be tailored to specific situation; problematic if arbitrator lacks skills and experience for the specific situation

LAWYER OR SELF-REPRESENTED
Court

Description: the act of taking the matter to court for resolution Pros: bound by law, public records Cons: time consuming, expensive, problematic if judge lacks skills and experience relevant to the specific situation

Disclaimer:

All views expressed on this site are of the authors only and do not represent the opinions of this website or its owners.  The information contained herein does not constitute legal advice.

Except as expressly provided, you may not use, copy, photocopy, print, translate, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, post, transmit, distribute or reduce to any electronic medium or reduce to any electronic medium or machine readable format, any materials or forms available on the Disrupt-Divorce website, in whole or in part without prior written consent.

Copyright © 2019 Disrupt-Divorce, All rights reserved.