family mediation quarterly

Vol. 10 No. 1 Winter 2011

M C F M

FAMILY MEDIATION QUARTERLYM C F M

FAMILY MEDIATION QUARTERLY

INSPIRING SETTLEMENTS SINCE 1982 • INSPIRING SETTLEMENTS SINCE 1982 • INSPIRING SETTLEM

ENTS

SINC

E 19

82 •

MCFMMCFM

The Massachusetts Council On Family Mediation is a nonprofit corporation established in 1982by family mediators interested in sharing knowledge and setting guidelines for mediation. MCFMis the oldest professional organization in Massachusetts devoted exclusively to family mediation.

PRESIDENT’S PAGE

Family Mediation Quarterly

[email protected]

Dear Mediators/Members:

I know that many of you out there, like myself, have chosen work in the challengingfield of mediating divorces in order to leave a piece of our world in a better, healthierplace than we found it. The families with whom we work want this too, for theirchildren, and often carry the burden of great anxiety over their children’s welfarewhen they find themselves in the middle of a divorce.

Part of our work as mediators is to help our clients create the best divorce possiblefor their families. We try to help them to understand and shoulder ownership of thetremendous part they play in shaping their children’s development post-divorce forthe better.

When I mediate for families with children, I always tell them that each of theirinterests are important, and their children are my clients as well. No one has everargued with me about that.

I’m always looking for resources to help families make the hard choices they have tomake in order to protect their children from unnecessary suffering in their divorce,and I want to share some wonderful resources with those of you who haven’t alreadydiscovered them.

Many of you already use UpToParents.org (for divorcing families) andProudToParent.org (for unmarried parents). Many of us have read JudithWallerstein’s books as well as E. Mavis Hetherington’s For Better or For Worse tohelp us in our work. The best book I have encountered lately for helping parents helptheir children through divorce and beyond is The Intelligent Divorce; Because YourKids Come First by Mark R. Banschick, MD and David Tabatsky (Copyright 2010,published by Intelligent Book Press).

My personal beliefs are echoed on page 145 of this book: “After examining whatthese prominent researchers have found and reflecting on all the families I haveencountered in my clinical practice, I believe we have reason to be optimistic aboutdivorce, particularly if they are orchestrated with care. When parents collaborate withsome success, their children will probably benefit. You and your ex-spouse bothdecided to bring your children into this world and now you must commit toproactively protecting their innocence. This is the recipe for a good divorce. In fact,it’s the only recipe for a humane and compassionate experience. If you really committo making an intelligent divorce happen, it can be done…. The challenge in divorceis to provide the needed structure and love to your kids so that they can flourish, andwith luck, be even healthier than you.” This easy-to-read book, full of examples andbehavioral suggestions, empowers parents and shows them what they actually haveto do to make this happen.

I wish all of us and the families we work with a new year filled with health, peace,joy, and the love of our friends and families,

CONTENTS

34 Announcements41 MCFM News

42 Join Us43 Directorate

Winter 2011 • Vol. 10 No. 1

1 ARE ALL PARENTING PLANS FOR YOUNG CHILDREN EQUAL? By Marsha Kline Pruett

10 YOU CALL YOURSELF A MEDIATOR?By Oran Kaufman

13 THE PSYCHODYNAMICS OF MEDIATION: OvercomingEgo to Resolve Conflict By Jonathan E. Fields

14 MEDIATOR DEFINED: A Brief Reminder

15 DIVORCE MEDIATIONBy Steve Manos

21 SIXTH ANNUAL FISKE AWARD HONORS GAIL L. PERLMAN Presented by John A. Fiske

23 MCFM’S 9th ANNUAL FAMILY MEDIATION INSTITUTEA Photo Array By Debra L. Smith

28 DON’T LET YOUR ATTORNEY HIJACK YOUR DIVORCE! By Laurie Israel

30 MASSACHUSETTS FAMILY LAW: A Periodic Review By Jonathan E. Fields

31 WHAT’S NEWS? National & International Family NewsChronologically Compiled & Edited By Les Wallerstein

COPYRIGHT NOTICEMCFM grants permission to reproduce and disseminate

articles & graphics provided that MCFM and the authors are credited, each author consents

and distribution is not-for-profit.MCFM © 2011

44 Editor’s Notice

1


ARE ALL PARENTING PLANS FOR YOUNG CHILDREN EQUAL?

Marsha Kline Pruett

The Meaning of Time Parentingplans are about each parent’s desirefor access to his or her children, andan opportunity to be involved in theactivities and responsibilities ofparenting. The plans are all abouttime – how much, in what schedules.What parents often forget is thatyoung children’s sense of time is verydifferent from their own adultperspective.

In their landmark book In the BestInterests of the Child” (1971; 1996),Goldstein, Freud, and Solnit were thefirst clinicians to discuss children’sforeshortened sense of time. Youngchildren have no understanding ofwhat a day or a week means. Infantshave no sense of time as long as theyget fed, diapered, and prepared forsleep when they are hungry, soiled, ortired. Days can feel like years totoddlers or preschoolers, and theydon’t understand what it means tohave one more or less day with oneparent to balance out time with theother. Moreover, children of this age“forget” about their connectionbetween visits with significant adultsin their life; they need a little time tore-familiarize themselves and feelcomfortable in a place or with aperson they haven’t seen on a regularand frequent basis. It is because ofthis sense of time and children’s needto re-establish levels of comfortduring each new encounter with a

loved one that professionals began toquestion the idea that children shouldspend most of their time with onecaregiver and see the other relativelyinfrequently.

Michael Lamb and Joan Kelly (200)suggested that, in fact, young childrenshould have more frequent transitionsbetween caregivers when they coulddo so with minimal discomfort, sothat the young child would stay morefamiliar with the secondary caregiver,experiencing him or her as a stableand predictable part of the child’scare. Though this view has beendebated by other clinicians whoprescribe to the view that having oneprimary caregiver supports secureattachments (see Family CourtReview’s special issue on YoungChildren and Overnights, 2000),research has established that even theyoungest children are capable ofdeveloping multiple importantattachments (2-3 in infancy) and thatfrequent transitions do not work wellwhen parents are in conflict with eachother. Then each transition andchange becomes another opportunityfor parents to fight in front of or overthe child, and to undermine eachother’s attempts to provide consistentcare for the child’s biological andpsychological needs, such aspredictable feeding and bedtimeroutines. In the absence of suchconflict, it is agreed upon that

2


Continued on next page

children develop best in a stableenvironment, but that stabilityincludes involvement with bothparents when they are available,interested, and nurturing caregivers.The balance of transitions versus lesscontact is one of values and nuance,based on a number of competingvariables related to the family’scharacteristics and situation.

In addition to transitions, parentingplans often become tangled up on theissue of overnights for youngchildren. My own research has foundthat particular parentingplans with overnights invarying schedules was notassociated with infant ortoddler distress as much asirregular schedules thatchanged week to week.For co-parents with low tomoderate levels ofconflict, it was not the number ofovernights that caused problems forvery young children. Mothers’ feltmore anxiety when their childrenunder the age of three did overnightsduring the week. Hypothetically,such anxiety in some cases couldspill over to the child and becomemanifested in the child’s distress, aswell. Whether Mother should behelped to manage her distress, orovernights during the week heldback until the child is older, againwould be subject to a weighing ofmyriad child and family factorsparticular to each case.

Quality Time with Fathers Asparenting plans are established, eachparent usually expresses a wish forspending “quality time” with his/herchildren. The key to devising aparenting plan that is child centeredrather than adult centered is to bearin mind what quality time actuallyentails. As the parent who tends tospend less time in direct childcareactivities, many fathers findthemselves in the position of fightingfor more time than their divorcingspouse is willing to cede. Manyresearch studies have found that is

not the amount of time a father isinvolved with his child that matters,but the quality of his involvement.Quality involvement is involvementthat is sensitive to the child’s needs,based on the parent’s understandingof the child’s developmental stageand unique personality. Research andclinical wisdom show that whatinvolvement means to many men isthat they want to be involved withdaily activities that center arounddrop-off at childcare, bedtimeroutines, sick days, and other timeswhen the care of a child requiresmore caregiving than just doing

You cannot divide a marriedfamily’s life by the same

denominator as a divorcedfamily’s life. The rules have

changed, and so has thesystem as a whole.

3


normal activities on weekend days.Such involvement appears to promotethe fathers’ sense of paternalresponsibility, his sense of authority,and his sense of inclusion – all of thesefeelings result in more nurturing andstructured caregiving that is essentialto optimal parenting. Children respondfavorably to such warm and“authoritative” parenting throughoutchildhood, but especially intolddlerhood and later school yearswhen they are struggling to achieveautonomy and independence.

There really isn’t quality time in theminds of children. They don’t talk toparents when parents have four hoursto spend with them; they talk whenthey are making transitions, feelingparticularly relaxed or anxious, orstalling to stretch bedtime out a littlelonger. If they do not see both parentson a regular and frequent (weekly)basis, they feel it deeply. But theydon’t keep track of how many hoursand whether an extra dinner isincluded. They want each parentaround to help them grow and take

delight in their daily achievements oroffer support for their small and largedisappointments.

The absolute amount of parenting timeshould be emphasized less than a planthat allows for a schedule that enablesboth parents to feel and act engagedand responsible. That typically doesrequire some extended periods ofbeing together or parenting overweekend-weekday transitions. Thenparents learn they can handle thegood, the bad, and the ugly momentsof parenting, and children develop asense of trust that each of these parentscan handle whatever “I throw athim/her”.

Because children do not count love inquantities of time, the idea that a 50-50time split is important arises out ofparents’ sense of loss from the divorce,not from children’s needs. Childrenare rarely parented “equally” in termsof time. Mothers still do the lion’sshare of housework, scheduling, andadministrative aspects of parentingamong most married (or livingtogether) couples. It is inefficient todivide such responsibilities up inhalves, when one person is generallymaking more money and one or the

other generally hasmore flexibility inhis/her job. Childrenhave never been seenor heard tos a y … ” D a d d y ’ shome, but I am moreexcited to be withMommy because she

stayed home and did my laundrytoday.” So do not get stuck onestablishing equal time. I realize it

The absolute amount of parentingtime should be emphasized lessthan a plan that allows for aschedule that enables bothparents to feel and act engagedand responsible.

4



counts for child support. But perhapsthere are other ways support can befiddled with to make it palatable toboth parties. Becoming locked into afight over an extra day or two a monthdoes not meet any child’s needs, norwould the child stop and count.

The approximation rule was designedas an idea for establishing parentplans based on how much time eachparent had spent with the child up tothe point of parental divorce. The ideais for the child’s relationship to eachparent to remain consistent with thefamily division of time and laborwhen the parents were married. Sucha concept ignores the sine qua non offamily life identified by familytherapists decades ago: that the wholeof a system is greater than the sum ofits parts. You cannot divide a marriedfamily’s life by the same denominatoras a divorced family’s life. The ruleshave changed, and so has the systemas a whole.

A cardinal rule in maintaining civilityin any family life – married ordivorced – is not to keep tabs on whois giving more to whom. Disengagingfrom counting the number of hoursand days each parent spends with achild supports optimal early childdevelopment. Here are two reasonswhy.

First, on average, children passthrough different periods ofpreference for one parent or the otherduring the first two years of life.Michael Lambs research showed that

when children were in a researchroom with both parents and theyneeded comfort, they would moretypically seek out their mother if theywere about a year old; they wouldchoose either parent and gender didnot mater so much when the child was1? years old; and they would preferthe father when the child was about 2or 2? years old. Over the course of thefirst years of life, the child emergedfrom a being that was drivenprimarily by biological needs forcomfort and psychological needs for a

parent to provide a safety net duringdistress, to a being who is excited byher venture into the wider world. Shenotices Father’s ability to come andgo from the home and haveadventures away from and aside fromMother. She wants a part of that too,and so identifies with Father’s role aslink to the world outside of mother.He has a different way of comfortingthan Mother does, and it fits with thismood and desire for explorationrather than comfort. So as the childbecame more interested in shaking offthe hurt and returning to play andmastery, the father’s way ofcomforting became more desirablethan the mother’s. For a little while.This preference will change manymore times as the child grows older.As young children become moresophisticated in social relationships,they quickly learn that mom is bestfor some needs and Dad for others.

Your child won’t keep score if you don’t.

5


Preference for one parent over theother is evident in adolescence too, asmany children in shared custodymove to the other household for asubstantial time period; it may be toget what the teen wants from the“easier” parent, but is often out of ahealthier realization that one parent’sstyle or relationship works better for

the adolescent at certain stages ofdevelopment. The strengths of eachparent may depend a bit on gender,but far more on who each parent isand what he or she does best or caresabout most. Then each parent’sparenting style can be assessed interms of who the child is and what heor she needs…maybe it is morestructure, more flexibility, morestimulation or a slower pace, to benearer or further from peer influences,and so on.

Second, in competitive relationshipslike sports, we track who has mosttouchdowns, who has the most points,and the best record. But within teams,the focus is on what each personcontributes to the group to support itsoptimal functioning. As my husbandand I discuss in our book PartnershipParenting, bean counting never offersthe solution to conflict or inequalitythat parents seek. It leads instead topetty and intense focus on “fairness.”In any family, the burdens ofparenting are unevenly distributed,especially in the early years of the

child’s life. But over time, the balancegenerally shifts and things equal out.What matters is not if the parentingplan is equal, but if your partner isresponsive when you need to make achange, and whether he/she will makeadjustments to create a sense ofoptimal sharing (not equality), nowand in the future.

If children designed anapproximation rule instead ofparents, they would count what

each parent offers them in terms ofnurturance and understanding,guidance, discipline, and play – nothours or days. Their rules would bebased on what each parent representsto their care, their interests, and theirdreams as they get older. If we usedyour children’s interests as theyardstick, ask yourself whether adifferent parenting plan would becreated at the end of the day.

Parenting Plan ConsiderationsBased on “Real” Time Where timematters most in parenting plandevelopment is in the speed at whicha plan is put into place so that familymembers are not twisting in the windwhile the court process grinds slowlyforward. It is fine to make atemporary plan with built-in re-examination time in which the planwill be assessed for which aspectswork well and which do not. It is afallacy that a parenting plan can andshould be permanent; again that isignoring a cardinal rule of childdevelopment, children change rapidlyand unpredictably. Rather than use

Don’t confuse equal timewith equal relationships.

6



rigid schedules to keep families out ofthe court system, it is best to make aplan that has “room to grow” butincludes very specific ways the familycan make modifications withoutreturning to court. This includeschoosing a therapist or mediator tohelp the family adjust the plan to theirchanging dynamics. It helps to havesomeone both parents trust alreadydesignated, and for a preventive visitto be scheduled. Just as we go todoctors for a regular check-up toidentify small health problems beforethey get to be big ones, a parentingplan check-up can be useful inbuilding in the expectation thatthings will evolve for the firstyears after divorce, in particular.

Let’s use a commonly offered exampleof a situation where Mom has beenmuch more present on a daily basisthan Dad and she isn’t sure she trustshim to adequately and sensitively meetthe child’s needs. A parenting plan canbe designed that calls for fewerovernights for a specified time period,such as 6-8 months, and then amodification that allows for more timeduring the week. A move toward parityis built up slowly and steadily. ThenDad who is afraid that not havingenough overnights now will mean hewill never have them can begin to trustthat as his spouse gets used to thechange in family status and worksthrough losing some time andautonomy over parenting, he can buildup a relationship with his children thatensures everyone’s comfort with moretime spent away from Mom.

Some specifics to think about inshared parenting plans for youngchildren: 1) It is the consistency ofschedule, not an extra night away,from week to week that matters. Try tokeep the schedule the same from weekto week, especially during the week. Itmakes it easier for very young childrento establish a rhythm, and for slightlyolder children to recall the details ofwhere they will be living and on whatdays.

2) Making too many transitions backand forth between houses is usually anadult’s idea, not a child’s. In my

research on young children’s (ages 0 to6) responses to divorce (Ebling, Pruett,& Kline Pruett, 2008), we used play tolearn what the children thought abouttransitions. The back and forth clearlytook a toll on these youngsters. Onechild described, “Back-and-forthmakes me sick. I want to throw up—both ways.” A 5-year-old girl used aBand-Aid to help the dolls ?gure outwhere they belonged: “This [Band-aid] tells you if you’re in the righthouse.” Another child stuffed playitems into a toy vehicle or her pockets,and then explained that by the time thedolls were packed up, drove around,and arrived at Dad’s house, “it wastime to go back to Mom’s.” Usingthese children’s voices as a guide,make sure the transitions make sense,that they are built around naturalbreaks in the child’s life such as going

A crucial aspect of sharingis equalizing influence.

7


to daycare or school. Avoid when youcan transitions that take place afterdinner and when a child is tired –which is a notoriously fragile time formost young children.

3) When there are commutes andtransitions, the burden should fall toparents, not the children. Parentsshould do most of the traveling, dealwith awkward timing, and changetheir schedules as best they can toaccommodate the child. Parentingplans usually are designed forparental convenience. I have oftenhad parents “birdnest” (move in andout of the family home which thechildren stay in) for a specified timeperiod. They get to experience firsthand what it is like to move in andout. After maintaining such a plan fora brief time, I find that parentsbecome more empathic to what theirchildren are being asked to do, theyoften become more flexible in theirthinking and expectations, and theymay change the plan to consider thechild’s point of view more closely.

4) My research also shows thatparenting plans (overnights,consistency of schedule, and number

of caregivers) matter tofathers’ relationships withtheir children more thanmothers’ do. The parentingplans are also related tochildren’s behavioraloutcomes and the family’slegal outcomes (the cost andlitigiousness of the divorce).

5) In families with more than onechild, it is important to build in timefor each child to spend time alonewith his or her parent(s), withoutsiblings. So much of family lifeconsists of parents switching off, notbeing all together. One parent stayswith or drives a child in one direction,while another parent does the samewith another child in a differentdirection. This time spent aloneallows parents to key in to eachchild’s developmental needs andtemperamental preferences withoutthe dilution of the other children’spresence. After divorce, mostparenting plans involve the childrenmoving together from house to house.If the plan was designed to look morelike family life in a marriedhousehold, each parent will havefewer time frames without anychildren at home, will have more timewith children alone, and the childrenwill have more opportunity for alonetime to refuel in relative peace. Someparents have said they don’t like to dothis because they appreciate theirsolitary time to pursue their owninterests, careers, or newrelationships. That is a luxury I askparents to rethink. In married

Because children do notcount love in quantities oftime, the idea that a 50-50time split is important arisesout of parents’ sense of lossfrom the divorce, not fromchildren’s needs.

8



families, parents do not have theluxury of taking off a few daysbecause they want to do somethingnon-parental. It is that constantcommitment that is the core ofparenting. It is tiring, and oftendraining – not always rewarding – butit is part of the package. It helps toremind parents that free time as suchis not a privilege of divorce, just a by-product that could be minimized tothe benefit of the children involved.

Tips for Shared Parenting Insummary, here are a few tips fordeveloping parenting plans around theconcept of “shared parenting”:

*Don’t get caught in the 50-50 trap.Don’t confuse equal time with equalrelationships. Set up your plan tominimize transitions between homesand the amount of time and energy putinto the back and forth. Try letting thechildren stay longer in one place andthe other parent moving in and out ofthe child’s world by, for example,picking him up and taking him to amusic class and then dropping him offagain.

* Plan 1:1 Time Develop your plansto have time with each child alone, sothat each parent is spending nearly asmuch time with his or her children asprior to the divorce, though maybe notwith both or all of the children and notaltogether.

* Listen to What matters to YourChild Make a plan that fits with your

child’s temperament and activities,even if it means one parent spendsless time than he/she would like. Withyoung children, you will have to listenthrough their behaviors rather thantheir words. Build in fairness in thelong term, not the short term.

* Be Honest About Who The Child isFavoring at That DevelopmentalPeriod Take the competition out of itand view such favor as evidence ofnormal development. If the skewbegins to feel like a schism, then it isimportant to have fall-back plans inplace that shore up the less-favoredparent’s time with the child to re-establish balance between the parents.

* Moms – Shore Up Dads’ Influence.A crucial aspect of sharing isequalizing influence. With mostyoung children and in cases of olderchildren in which Moms have takenon the primary parenting role, it iseasier for Moms and children tomaintain their relationship afterdivorce than it is for fathers andchildren. It is critical to establish aplan that allows for ample weekdayand nighttime access for fathers.Otherwise, you risk losing Dad’spositive influence in the life of hischildren, and the benefits to involvedfathering for children are numerousand substantial.

* Dads – Don’t Push for Equal OverInvolved. It is fathers’ desires to stayinvolved, and their fears of being leftout of the child’s life on a regular

9


basis, that often spurs conflictsregarding parenting plans. Theseconflicts can intensify in level andlength, as fathers dig in their heels. Putyour energies into accepting that thechange toward a more balanced accessplan may take time. It may never beequal. Your child won’t keep score ifyou don’t. What he needs to know isthat he can count on you to beavailable, take interest, know what he’sup to, understand what he needs, andwant to be part of every aspect of hislife. He needs to know you will not giveup, not that you will fight over him or“time”.

Marsha Kline Pruett, Ph.D.,M.S.L., is a Professor atSmith College School forSocial Work who is nationally

noted for her research regarding fatherinvolvement, child adjustment todivorce, and parenting plans for youngchildren. Her current work includesconsultation to couples regarding thedecision to divorce, parenting plandevelopment, and co-parentingdifficulties. Marsha can be contacted [email protected].

“No matterhow thin

you slice it, there will always be two sides.” Baruch Spinoza

10



YOU CALL YOURSELF A MEDIATOR?By Oran Kaufman

One of the best lines my teenagedaughter ever used on me was, “Youcall yourself a mediator?” This wasafter an especially explosive argumentduring which I lost my cool and asmuch as I hate to admit it, I wasscreaming at her. She was right. Ishould have been ashamed of myself.All that conflict resolution training Ihave received and all that training Ihave provided others and I could notapply it myself. The truth is that mydaughter, a skilled tactical arguer sinceage 4, brings out the worst in me whenit comes to resolving conflicts. I cantry to make myself feel better byhearing my friends’ war stories abouttheir travails with their teens and I cantry to rationalize it by rereading themany articles and books I have whichseem to say it is just a normal part ofteenage development. But ultimately Ishould know better.

So it was with surprise, glee and someshock that in a recent potentiallyexplosive argument with our daughtermy wife and I, for once, felt like wehandled it correctly. We had notnecessarily planned it- it justhappened. But in many ways it wastextbook for how to conduct a conflictresolution session with your teenager.I had tried different approaches in thepast but they never really worked. Theonly time I ever remember a tacticworking was when she was around 6years old. I recall having just read

“How to Talk so Your Children WillListen and Listen so Your ChildrenWill Talk.” My daughter was in thebathtub and was throwing a fit. Shewas screaming at the top of her lungsand having an all out tantrum. Myimpulse was to yell at her and tell herenough already – grow up, stop! WhatI did however, (and it is memorablebecause I don’t recall this everhappening again) was say, “Wow, itseems like you must be having a reallyhard day!” At that point she just meltedand said, “Yes, it has been” andproceeded to tell me about her horribleday. Tantrum over, disaster averted.

Flash forward 12 years, and ourdaughter (now 18) calls us up onSaturday night from her friend’s housewhere she is spending the night and outof the blue asks, “do you still have thatCD account because I need to buy thetickets for Portugal tomorrow” towhich I reply, “What trip to Portugal?”

We thereafter agreed to talk about it thenext morning. We had heardrumblings about her plans to go toPortugal with her three best friendsafter graduation but had heard nothingabout it for months and certainly hadno specifics. The next day, as sheshowed up an hour and half later thanshe told us, we were already armed forbear before the discussion had started.We had already delayed our plans totake a hike that day and the daylight

11


hours were waning. And we werealready upset about completely beingout of the loop about plans and feelinglike the only reason we were being putin the loop was she needed money. Wedid however make the first rightdecision by moving the conversation toour bedroom rather than in the middleof the dining room. The location was

sunny, cozy and warm. The downsidemay be that it was our turf andtherefore not neutral. Nevertheless,having it there made it feel like wewere dedicating ourselves to theconversation and not doing it whilechopping vegetables, sweeping thefloor or engaging in a multitude ofother multitasking activities that wewould have been doing in the mainpart of the house.

As the discussion ensued, it quicklydevolved into an argument. We wereupset about her not communicatingwith us and making assumptions aboutmoney. On her part she lashed out atme over my audacity at contacting oneof her friend’s parents to inquire aboutwhat they knew about this plan. After15 minutes of arguing and tensionsrising, my wife and I announced thatwe were ending the conversation,going on the hike we had planned andsaid we would be back in two hours todiscuss it further.

The hike in the woods was beautiful,the fresh air exhilarating. The distancefrom the conversation allowed us toprocess what had happened. It allowedus to separate out which part of ourreaction was emotional and which partwas based on practical concerns andlogistics. What part of our reaction wasbased on this specific situation and

what part was based on historicalbaggage? The walk allowed us toget on the same page, it allowed us torealize what buttons had been pushedand helped us formulate a strategythat we felt comfortable with. As wedrove home, with the self imposed

artificial “emergency” deadline forpurchasing the tickets approaching andour daughter repeatedly calling my cellphone and then my wife’s, (we werenot about to pick up the call!) we tooknotes on what we had discussed.

The ground rules we established uponour return were that we were going totalk and she was going to listen. Therewas not going to be back and forth. Atthe end she could respond or take sometime and then respond. We finishedtelling her what we had decided. Beingtwo lawyers we also decided that wewere going to memorialize theagreement in writing, signed by allparties (we did not insist onnotarization). Further ground ruleswere that any eye rolling or signs ofdisrespect on her part and theconversation was over and we wouldnot tell her what we had decided. Afterhearing us out, she left the roomwithout a word. She came down laterand proceeded to carry on as though

Teenagers are masters atmaking situations seemmore urgent then theytruly are.

12


nothing had happened. She signed thecontract and we went about ourbusiness. We had agreed to front herthe money for her tickets subject to heragreement to pay it back before hertrip. At that point, the decision aboutbuying or not buying the tickets rightthen and there was no longer ourproblem. We were no longer engagedin the drama and urgency of when tobuy the tickets. (As of this writing, thetickets have not yet been purchased.)

Here is what I think we did right.

1. We consciously thought about thelocation of our conversation. Thelocation helped focus the conversationand keep us on task.

2. After initial information gathering,we stepped back and took time toanalyze, assess and figure out ourreactions and responses. The time wetook also allowed us to figure out astrategy for resolving the problem. Theresolution we came up with was a win-win. She got what she wanted. Whatwe got was an opportunity to have hertake financial responsibility for whatactions she ultimately took.

3. We established ground rules for thesecond part of the discussion. (Weprobably should have also done this forpart one as well.)

4. We used a technique that is veryeffective- we talk and all she did waslisten. When we were done she would

get a chance to do the same and all wedo is listen. A variation of thistechnique that is also very effectiveand has the effect of slowing down theconversation is this: person numberone talks, person number two repeatsback what they heard person numberone say and person number one tellsthem if they got it right. The wholeconversation proceeds this way. Itforces active listening and slows downthe conversation.

5. Finally, we memorialized ouragreement to make sure we all have thesame understanding and there is notthe possibility later of saying that is notwhat I agreed to.

Probably the most critical aspect ofwhat we just stumbled into because ofour planned hike was the ability to stepaway, analyze, assess, take a breathand then continue the conversation.Teenagers are masters at makingsituations seem more urgent then theytruly are. By forcing the time out weallowed ourselves to not get suckedinto the drama and artificially createdemergency.

Oran Kaufman is adomestic relations attorneyand family mediator whofounded Amherst Mediation

Services in 1995. He can be contactedat (413) 256-1575, or by email [email protected].

13


THE PSYCHODYNAMICS OF MEDIATION: Overcoming Ego to Resolve Conflict

By Jonathan E. Fields

A provocative new law journalarticle deconstructs thepsychodynamics of the mediation /negotiation process. Professionalmediators certainly understand, ifonly instinctively, the primacy ofego, self-esteem, and self-identity inany mediation; but the piecearticulates a framework anddiagnostic that even experiencedmediators may find useful.

Essentially, the author, ElizabethBader, posits that there are threestages to a typical mediation ornegotiation – Inflation, Deflationand, if the matter settles, RealisticResolution. In Bader’s shorthand,this is the “IDR Cycle.”

In Stage-1, the Inflation stage, theparticipant is overconfident in theirposition, full of hopes that arewrapped up in their sense of self-worth. This is personal: the outcomeof the mediation is “a reflection ofwho they are.”

Stage-2, the Deflation stage, beginswhen the participant learns of theopponent’s initial position. “Realityhits home,” as Bader puts it. Thepreferred outcome may not be asachievable as they believed. Often,parties in Stage-2 are personallyoffended by the position of the other.

These Stage-2 “deflationary

dynamics” can often lead to impassebecause, in Bader’s rendering, the“narcissistic crisis created when theparties’ overconfident expectationsand investments collide.”

Here, at Stage-2, Bader advises themediator to depersonalize theimpasse and to help the partiesgenerate objectively useful options –even though those options may notmirror exactly what the partiesintended.

This leads to the final stage,hopefully: settlement or, as Baderputs it, “Realistic Resolution.” Inorder to settle the matter, she writes,the parties “may have to release theirpsychological investments in theoutcome.”

Mediators, too, must confront theirown issues of ego and self-identityduring the process – for example,self-doubt about their effectivenessas a mediator, particularly duringimpasse. In Bader’s words,mediators may have to release theirown “sense of narcissistic self-investment in the outcome.”

Bader understands, of course, thatthe “IDR Cycle” will not manifestprecisely in every mediation. It is,however, a compelling archetype.And I believe that mediators attunedto the psychodynamic framework

she describes will better serve both theprocess and the clients.

Interested readers are directed to thesource: Elizabeth Bader, ThePsychology of Mediation: Issues ofSelf and Identity and the IDR Cycle, 10PEPP. DISP. RESOL. L. J. 183 (2010).It is also on the Pepperdine Law website at

httap://law.pepperdine.edu/dispute-resolution-law-journal/issues/volumeten/Bader%20Article.pdf

Jonathan E. Fields, Esq. is apartner at Fields and Dennis,LLP in Wellesley. Jon can becontacted at 781-489-6776, or

at [email protected]

14


MEDIATOR DEFINED: A Brief Reminder

Editor’s Note: Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter233, Section 23C, (excerpted below) is highlighted forclarity.

For the purposes of this section a “mediator” shallmean a person not a party to a dispute who entersinto a written agreement with the parties to assistthem in resolving their disputes AND hascompleted at least thirty hours of training inmediation AND who EITHER has four years ofprofessional experience as a mediator OR isaccountable to a dispute resolution organizationwhich has been in existence for at least threeyears OR one who has been appointed to mediate bya judicial or governmental body.

15


DIVORCE MEDIATIONBy Steve Manos

All of us know someone who isthinking about divorce, in the processof getting divorced, or alreadydivorced. If you don’t, you and thosearound you lead charmed lives.

This essay views divorce mediationwith a mediator’s eye. It is intended togive you a pretty good sense of whatdivorce mediation and mediation ingeneral are all about. While it is notaimed specifically at those who areconsidering divorce or other forms offamily mediation, they mightnonetheless find it useful.

It is informed by the wisdom of threedivorce mediators – Josh Hoch, NnenaOdim, and Bill Levine, whosethoughts and anecdotes are sprinkledliberally throughout. Since theintroduction does not do them justice,their bios are included at theconclusion of this essay.

The Miracle of Mediation Mediationoften produces a resolution of conflictthat is, against all odds, sometimestotally unpredictable and deeplysatisfying.

There was one case, a married coupleseeking divorce. One of them hadbeen unfaithful. That was part of thebreakup. They were tough. Each tooktheir turn being unreasonable,explosive. There was yelling; quite afew times one or the other stomped

out of the room. Once, the wife took abreak, went out of the room, and justscreamed. This case took over a year,but the parties reached an agreement.More important, the parties left themediation with their relationshipbetter than when they came in. That’simportant when there are kids. It’s notlike a business dissolution.… NnenaOdim

Background About 90% of divorcemediations end in an agreement. Ofcourse, most parties self-select; theycome to a mediator saying they want adivorce. Nonetheless, this is aremarkable record for three reasons.First, the issues are frequentlycomplex, and the parties are simply ata loss to deal with them or ready tothrow up their hands and leave thewhole mess to a judge.

Second, these mediations are mostlyemotion-laden. They may involveguilt, shame, anger, sadness, face, andmore. They may involve spousal orchild abuse. They may involvedepression. These are hard walls forthe parties to scale… and for themediator. And third, the parties maybe so angry at each other that theyconsider lobbing hand grenades ateach other in front of a judge to be areasonable option.

Given that, it is surprising that divorcemediation accomplishes so much in so

16


little time. Mediation sessions lastabout two hours, sometimes more,sometimes less, and though unusual,agreement may be reached in somewith as little as one meeting. Four tosix sessions is more the norm,but the amount of time will varywith the parties, the issues, andthe practitioner. Bill and Nnenaeach recalled a successfulmediation they had done lastingtwelve sessions.

Fees Fees vary among mediators andmay depend, among other factors, onthe type of problems clients bring tothe mediator – Bill, for example hasexpertise in complicated businesstransactions - and the clientele themediator has chosen to serve.

Josh, at Mediation WorksIncorporated (MWI), charges $350per hour for both parties, but a publicservice initiative allows him to use asliding fee scale to make mediationaffordable. Both Nnena and Bill areon MWI’s divorce mediation paneland maintain private practices as well.Bill, also an attorney, has a litigationrate of $700 per hour.

To Mediate Or Not To MediateUnless competence and a residue oftrust and good will allow a couple toend their marriage without assistance,they usually head to an attorney, lessoften to a mediator. There are goodreasons, however, why the first stopshould be a mediator.

First, when parties are workingtogether to produce an agreement,they have their best chance tooptimize resources. A couple of

examples. A forced sale of assets(splitting the pie) can result in lowerproceeds than allocating assetsbetween the parties to maximizerevenue generation and cost savings(enlarging the pie). Bill Levine givesan example of a couple that workedout how best to share and time thedistribution of resources so that thehusband, an entrepreneur, coulddevelop a business, potentiallyenriching both the husband and wife.

Second, a mediated parenting plancan result in better parent-childrelationships because it takes accountof the children’s needs in ways that anarm’s-length or court-imposed plan isless likely to. And producing a better,less hostile relationship betweenformer parents is also good for thekids.

Third, the probability that mediationwill cost less is very high. A 2007study by a “high end” mediation firmestimated that the median cost of a

When parties are workingtogether to produce an

agreement, they have theirbest chance to optimize

resources.


17


mediated divorce was $6,600 for bothparties, while the median cost of alitigated divorce was $78,000 and for adivorce handled by attorneys andsettled without litigation, $27,000.Don’t take the numbers as gospel – it ishighly likely that most mediations costless - but the relative sizes of the costsare surely in the ballpark.

Who Will Do Well in Mediation?Although divorce mediation usuallyresults in an agreement, not everycouple is well suited for it.

I see plenty of cases where there issuch a power imbalance or anintellectual imbalance or an emotionalimbalance between the two people that

I think mediation would be disruptivefor them, certainly in cases where therehas been domestic violence – these arenot good candidates. But if you takeout those cases, maybe ten or twentypercent of cases at most, I think theothers would benefit from tryingmediation.

The most important thing is that thetrust level is not so damaged, there’snothing left. By that I mean that bothparties know the other will beessentially truthful. Second,

intellectual parity or close to it, and,third, the issues must beunderstandable to both. The thirdcriterion may come up when there arecomplicated business issues.…BillLevine

My area of expertise is family ratherthan business relationships. I thinktrying to mediate is appropriate foreveryone, even many domesticviolence situations. For that, you needstrong and experienced mediators, andI would think they would have to beexpert in the field of domesticviolence.… Nnena Odim

Most people should try it. If parentsrecognize they’re going to parent their

children after thedivorce, they’re ripefor mediation. Othersare people who want toget divorced but don’tknow how. They don’tknow what to talkabout. They don’t

know what papers to file.… Josh Hoch

Conclusion? Most mediators leantoward mediating divorce cases – notsurprising – but they do assess whetherthe case and parties are appropriate. Aswe’ll see, they have to consider, too,whether they themselves areappropriate.

Differences Among MediatorsPhilosophy, training, individualpredilections, personality, and clienteleshape how a mediator chooses to

Capable mediators manage theirdemeanor and focus on theprocess and the parties’ interests,not their own feelings about theparties. That’s neutrality.

18


mediate. They find what worksfor them. Since mediators maydiffer in their objectives – somecare more about theempowering experience of theprocess more than theagreement itself – and sincethere is no way to do a randomdistribution, double blind study ofmediating styles, the superiority of oneover the other is a matter of conjectureand faith.

Bill spoke fondly of one of his cases,one that did not involve embittered,embattled parties.

The couple was very kind to eachother, but what I liked about that one,the guy was a serial entrepreneur in thestartup phase of a new business. In alitigation setting he would have takenthe position that the business was offthe table. He didn’t and the focus of themediation was the structure of thebusiness between the two of them. Shewas just as smart as he was and founda reasoned way to feel she was gettinga share of the partnership spoils of themarriage, while recognizing that hewas the guy in the trenches taking risksevery day. She respected that a lot, andit doesn’t always happen in ourbusiness. So I really liked workingwith them through a very ornatebusiness deal between the two of them.

I asked Bill if they had structured thedeal themselves.

Not at all. It was several sessions ofbrainstorming and my looking at each

proposal and offering variants to eachone. There are, though, sessions whereI am very quiet and very non-directiveand some where I am very active. I usedifferent kinds of mediation indifferent settings. It all depends onwhat the people want.… Bill Levine

So, in mediation jargon, Bill isprepared to be both directive,contributing his own ideas, andfacilitative, helping the parties to findtheir own way. Purely facilitativemediators aim for party autonomy andself-determination, concerned thatoffering proposals, assessing ideas, andpredicting court outcomes will detractfrom those goals. Parties, whenencouraged and guided by a capablemediator, can be surprisingly creative,much to their satisfaction.

Another way a mediator mightinfluence the mediation, is by beingsubtly directive:

There is a lot more empathy that can beshown in divorce mediations than othermediation. So I may actually talk aboutmy personal experience. When thereare children involved, I may refer tomy own two children, saying I knowwhat you must be feeling. Or I mightcomment on what I observed in a niece

Mediation often produces aresolution of conflict that is,against all odds, sometimes

totally unpredictable anddeeply satisfying.


19


or in a neighbor’s children.… NnenaOdim

Josh would firmly and happilyidentify himself as a facilitativemediator. Nnena is usually facilitative,but more eclectic in her approach thana purely facilitative mediator wouldbe. Bill is eclectic, but is comfortablewhen he feels it appropriate, withproblem-solving with his clients.Which style is better? All three aresuperb and successful mediators withsatisfied clients. And, to be honest,there is a vast overlap of themethodology and tools that they use.

Mediator Neutrality I asked Nnena,Bill, and Josh whether they wouldmediate for friends. I was interested intheir views of how mediators meettheir goal of remaining neutral,favoring neither party over the other.

Yes, (I’d mediate for friends) if bothparties are okay with it. It mightchallenge my neutrality. I’d be comingin with some preconceived notionsabout each party, probably, but I hopeI’m a good enough mediator to putthose aside.

That doesn’t mean that I will changemy mind somehow about whether Ilike somebody or not. If I think aparty’s a jerk, I will always think thatparty’s a jerk, but it doesn’t mean thatI can’t help that person reachresolution. My feeling about one partyor another doesn’t matter so much. Asyou and I agreed before, mediatorscannot be perfectly neutral. But Ibelieve I am professional enough and

good enough to put things aside.…Nnena Odim

Mediating for friends has never comeup, but I’d be very reluctant to do it.When I mediate, my thinking is aboutthe process and how the processworks. If these are friends of mine orsomebody I have an investment in,then I’m more concerned about theoutcome than I am about the process.

In litigation, sometimes I like theopposing party more than my ownclient! You can like one person morethan another in mediation too. That’swhere your professional side has tocome in. You don’t show it, and youkeep yourself balanced and neutral,because ultimately, it’s not aboutliking. It’s about the process and a fairresult. It’s not about what I feel.… BillLevine

For his part, Josh has mediateddivorces for friends, and successfullytoo, but only with their clear consentand his own sense that he could beneutral anduse the process to bothparties’ advantage.

Mediators are human. Friendship,acquaintance, and normal humanfeelings of liking and disliking coulddistort the mediation. Capablemediators, however, manage theirdemeanor and focus on the processand the parties’ interests, not their ownfeelings about the parties. That’sneutrality. If they can’t do that, thenthey should choose not to mediate, or,if started, terminate the mediation.

20


Steve Manos specializes inmediation for colleges anduniversities, but he mediatesmore broadly for MWI’s

College and University MediationProgram, the Community DisputeSettlement Center, the EEOC, and theBoston Bar Assn.’s ADR Program. Hecan be reached at [email protected] article was first published inMWI College and UniversityMediation News. Additionalinformation can be found atwww.mwi.org/university. Copyright2010, MWI. All rights reserved.

Joshua M. Hoch is directorof mediation services atMWI. Josh has beenmediating family, divorce,

parenting, child support, and never-married parents disputes since 1996,and he alsoe serves as MWI’s liaison

for the Mediation Practicum at theFletcher School of Law andDiplomacy at Tufts University.

Nnena Odim is a mediator,trainer, attorney, andconsultant who has beenmediating since 1997. While

her practice focuses on familymediation, Nnena is also the AssociateDirector of the Family/DV/LGBT LawClinic at Harvard Medical School’sWilmer/Hale Legal Services.

William M. Levine is anattorney, mediator, arbitrator,and a partner at the law firmLee & Levine LLP. Bill’s

practice focuses predominantly ondivorce and related matters, includingproperty, support, custody, paternity,and premarital agreements.

“What the large print giveth,the small print taketh away.”

Anonymous

21


Editor’s Note: John delivered the tributebelow at MCFM’s 9th Annual FamilyMediation Institute. Here is a printableversion of what happened orally in theintroduction of Gail Perlman.

“It is our choices that show what wetruly are, far more than our abilities.”That’s a quote from Gail Perlmanquoting Albus Dumbledore, animportant person in her life as you knowif you read the speech called “HarryPotter, Mediation and Us” which shegave at MCFM’s May 2000 Gatheringof Family Mediators in New England.You may remember this speech becauseLes included it in the fall edition of ourfavorite MCFM journal: as great timingfor this Institute and for this deliciouslydeserved award to her.

Your choices to be a mediator, to bemembers of the Mass Council, to cometoday, to improve your mediation skillsand knowledge, show what you trulyare. That is only one of MediatorPerlman’s lessons.

To illustrate in this introduction themany roles of Mediator Perlman I askedher clerk for a resume and received 12pages. So I highlighted only some of heraccomplishments and ask you all toraise a hand if you knew that:

1. In 1988 she was a lawyer inNorthampton and an Assistant ClinicalProfessor at the Smith College Schoolfor Social Work? (About 5 hands wentup.)

2. In 1967 she was a social worker in theBrookline Public Schools? (About 3hands.)

3. In about 1995 she was a MediatorTrainer in the Peer Mediation Programat Northampton High School? (maybetwo hands)

4. She was on the Standing Committeeon Dispute Resolution of the SJC?(Many hands.)

5. She was a member of the Board ofBar Overseers Hearing Committee 2,District 6? (No one knew.)

6. Lastly to keep it short: she won aJudicial Award with Judge RudolphKass at the ADR and the Law MCLEconference last year? (Many hands.)

That last award is as worthy as this one.Few people have worked so tirelessly toexemplify and promote mediation asMediator Perlman. Few judges haveworked so long and done so much tobring mediation into closer cooperationwith the Probate and Family Court asJudge Perlman.

The introduction ended and all handsapplauded for a long time, after which Iread the Gandhi quote on the award.

FIRST THEY IGNORE YOUTHEN THEY LAUGH AT YOU

THEN THEY FIGHT YOUTHEN YOU WIN

SIXTH ANNUAL FISKE AWARD HONORS THE HONORABLE GAIL L. PERLMAN

Presented by John A. Fiske

22


MMAASSSSAACCHHUUSSEETTTTSS CCOOUUNNCCIILL OONN FFAAMMIILLYY MMEEDDIIAATTIIOONN,, IINNCC..EESSTT.. 11998822

FFIIRRSSTT TTHHEEYY IIGGNNOORREE YYOOUU

TTHHEENN TTHHEEYY LLAAUUGGHH AATT YYOOUU

TTHHEENN TTHHEEYY FFIIGGHHTT YYOOUU

TTHHEENN YYOOUU WWIINN

GGAANNDDHHII

22001100SSIIXXTTHH AANNNNUUAALL

JJOOHHNN AADDAAMMSS FFIISSKKEE AAWWAARRDD

FOR

EEXXCCEELLLLEENNCCEE IINN MMEEDDIIAATTIIOONN

PRESENTED TO

GAIL L. PERLMAN

23


MCFM’S 9th ANNUAL FAMILY MEDIATION INSTITUTEA Photo Array By Debra L. Smith

Kathy Townsend, Marsha Kline Pruett & Lynn Cooper

Diane Neumann, Jerry Weinstein, Gail Perlman & John Fiske

24


Gail Perlman

Susan Miller & Fern Frolin

Betsy Williams & Oran Kaufman

Bill Leonard & Allison Bell

Tracy Fisher & Mark Zarrow

Donna Valanzola & Cathy Kligler

25


Michael Lavender & John Fiske

Marion Wasserman

Justin Kelsey

Susan DeMatteo, Larri Tonelli Parker & Pauline Scalley

Lynda Robbins & Kate Fanger

Tony Adamopoulos & Kevin Lawless

26


Michael Leshin & Paula Noe

David Burgess & Laurie Israel

Lynn Cooper & Carol Lynn May

Karen Levitt, Amy Bricker & Allison Bell

Les Wallerstein

Larry Dannenberg

27


Susan Matthew & Jon Fields

Rachael Goldman & Lynn Cooper

Mary Socha, Mary Samberg, Kathy Townsend, Gail Perlman & Betsy Williams

Debra L. Smith is a mediator, collaborative attorney and thephotographer who took all the Institute photos in this issue of theFMQ. Her photographs were on display at the Watertown Free PublicLibrary in December 2007 and 2008, and at the Arlington Center for

the Arts at the Tufts Street Community Gallery in February 2010 in showscalled “Art of the Seasons.” In April and July 2010, Deb’s photographs were on display at the Watertown Free Public Library in shows called “Positive Emotions.” To see more of Deb’s photos, please visitwww.debsmithphotography.com

28



DON’T LET YOUR ATTORNEY HIJACK YOUR DIVORCE!By Laurie Israel

You have embarked on a divorce,selected a lawyer, and now are ready tobegin the process. Be careful of themany pitfalls as you work with yourattorney. Here are some things toavoid as your divorce wends its waythrough the legal process:

1. The Letter The divorce usuallystarts with your lawyer sending a letterto your spouse telling him or her ofyour intention to divorce. Your story,as told to your lawyer, may becomeunrecognizable in the letter sent toyour spouse. The tone may be cranky,nasty, aggressive, accusative, or all ofthe above. It may distort facts orcontains information you did not wantto express to your spouse. Yourattorney may have sent it without yourapproval. You are mortified, regretfuland embarrassed. The letter is theopening salvo, sets the tone for theentire divorce, and is never forgotten.

2. The Filing Many divorce attorneysbelieve that it is correct operatingprocedure to file a divorce first, andask questions later. Filing a divorcesets court calendars in motion, and thetiming is no longer yours to choose.The non-filing spouse may have to beserved by a constable appearing attheir door or place of work. Litigationis war — there is no other way todescribe it. So what began as amagical, loving association ends with a

war. War is nasty by definition, andpeople get injured. Innocentbystanders are harmed. The divorcelawsuit will never be forgotten.Granted, sometimes filing is anecessary way to start the divorce, butoften it is not. A divorce process can bestarted by face-to-face meetings withyour spouse and your attorneys or witha mediator. These methods set a verydifferent tone than a constable at thedoor.

3. Are You Really Ready forDivorce? You may have hit bottom inyour marriage, and believe the onlything to do is to get divorced. Uponyour first visit to an attorney, bewarethat many attorneys will go into full-force fighting gear and start thedivorce process without consideringthat you may need more time to thinkabout it. Attorneys are sometimes likeplumbers — they see a problem andtake the steps to “fix” it withoutconsidering that a person who iscontemplating divorce may be justthinking, envisioning, and fact-finding. If your divorce attorney takesa zealous role, you won’t have time toconsider whether you really want todivorce. In fact, hitting bottom can bea wake-up call towards reclaiming andrevitalizing your marriage. You won’tfind the space to do that if you visit anoverly aggressive divorce attorneywho starts the process right away.

29


4. Money Issues Distort the ProcessYes, money issues in divorce are verysignificant. When separating a familyinto two households, there is almostalways economic scarcity. Divorcelawyers tend to do money divisionvery aggressively. Remember, alitigated divorce is a war in which thelawyers view more money as a win,and less money as a loss. But divorcetrials will always create harshfeelings, and very often will produceunfair results. If there are children, thecorrosiveness caused by fighting overmoney will spill over into thechildren’s emotional well-being fortheir entire lives. Children see andhear very clearly and will knowwhat’s going on. Spouses who workthrough money issues directly (orthrough a four-way process with theirlawyers, or through mediation) almostalways can come to terms which arereasonable and workable. The spousesfeel better because they, and not theirattorneys, are in control and their

needs are fully expressed andacknowledged. The bitterness thatcomes with winning and losing inCourt can be eliminated by workingthrough the financial problemtogether. In a sense, working onmoney issues together can be the lastact of the marriage. And it can be aloving and respectful one.

Laurie Israel is a writer,mediator and collaborativelawyer. She is one of theearly practitioners of martial

mediation, in which mediation is usedto improve and heal marriages. She isa frequent presenter on maritalmediation and prenuptial andpostnuptial agreements. She hasrecently co-founded a websitedevoted to marital mediation atwww.maritalmediation.com. © 2010Laurie Israel. All rights reserved.

“Lawyers, I suppose,

were once children.”

Charles Lamb

30


MASSACHUSETTS FAMILY LAWA Periodic ReviewBy Jonathan E. Fields

Wife’s Misconduct Results in a Disproportionate Asset Split or... Conduct Counts if it’s Really, Really Bad....

Conventional wisdom has it that bad conduct doesn’t really matter in anequitable division case except to the extent that it has a financial impact.Tell that to Donna Wolcott.

One night in 2006, while Mr. Wolcott was ill and in a “weakened state,”Mrs. Wolcott plied her usually-abstinent husband with alcohol, causing himto fall off a boat. Mr. Wolcott had to swim a mile to shore and walk forseveral hours before he got help. The fall caused him severe injuries – abroken nose, upper jaw and wrist, four broken teeth, and a “blown-outknee.” Then, when he returned home, Mrs. Wolcott forced her injuredhusband to sleep on the couch because his “breathing” bothered her. Shortlyafterwards, while he was still recovering, Mrs. Wolcott asked him to moveout of the house.

Mrs. Wolcott’s next action suggests that, even though her husband was nowout of the house, she was still bothered by his breathing: She proceeded tosolicit his murder, telling a cousin she wanted Mr. Wolcott to “disappear”and asking him if he knew anyone in the Mafia. Lucky for Mr. Wolcott, thecousin demurred. The husband was spared the bullet.

Mrs. Wolcott’s lesser offenses – an adulterous “sexual affair,” a “foolhardylandscaping plan,” and $24,000 worth of unnecessary plastic surgery.

Not surprisingly, the judge wasn’t enamored with the sociopathic Mrs.Wolcott and awarded her only 10% of the marital estate. She appealed andthe Appeals Court affirmed the decision. Wolcott v. Wolcott, 2011 Mass.AppLEXIS 16 (January 6, 2011).

Jonathan E. Fields, Esq. is a partner at Fields and Dennis, LLPin Wellesley. Jon can be contacted at 781-489-6776, or [email protected]

31


Britain Recognizes PrenuptialAgreements The U.K. Supreme Courtruled for the first time prenuptialagreements will have full legal status,saying that only grossly unfaircontracts would be overturned by thecourts. Their decision does away withhundreds of years of precedent that amarried couple are meant to betogether for life and their propertyshared, as stated in the Church ofEngland's marriage ceremony since1662 in which the groom states: “Withall my worldly goods I thee endow.”Some bishops said the decisionundermines marriage. (United PressInternational, 10/21/2010)

Home Inspections During DivorceTraditionally, divorcing spouses havetended to rely on appraisals todetermine the value of their home, butappraisals tend to focus on how ahome’s features and square footagecompare with comparable properties.Appraisers don’t necessarily take intoaccount the repairs a home may need –whether, for instance, it will need anew roof or has mold that has to beremoved — that can lower its value.Home inspectors, on the other hand,would include such information in theirreports. That information could then beprovided to an appraiser or simply beused in divorce negotiations, to helpensure that the party getting the houseis getting a fair deal. (Jennifer SaranowSchultz, New York Times, 10/30/2010)

Single Mothers and Live-In PartnersMore than a quarter of the unmarriedwomen who gave birth in a recent yearwere living with a partner, according toa Census Bureau report that for the firsttime measured the percentage ofunmarried mothers who were not livingalone. The report found that 28 percentof these women were living with anunmarried partner, whether oppositesex or same sex. While cohabitationhas increased enormously over the lastgeneration, the catchall category of“single mother” has often blurred thedifference between those living aloneand those living with a partner. (TamarLewin, New York Times, 11/5/2010)

US Census Bureau Reports NewFamily Statistics The recessioncontinued to batter families this year,with the number of stay-at-homemothers declining and a sharp rise inthe number of children living with theirgrandparents increased by 8 percentcompared with 2009. Over all, 6.5percent of children in the United Stateslived with their grandparents, a 20-yearhigh and double the rate in 1970. Thereport also highlighted increases in themarriage age for men and women, along-term trend that began in the1950s. This year, the median age formen to marry for the first time was 28,up from 26 in 2000. The age forwomen was 26, up from 25 a decadeago. In all, 54 percent of adults weremarried in 2010, down from 57 percent

WHAT’S NEWS?National & International Family News

Chronologically Compiled & Edited by Les Wallerstein

32



in 2000 (Sabrina Tavernise, New YorkTimes, 11/10/2010)

Other People’s Divorces You don’thave to be divorced to be sucked in bythe new HuffPost Divorce section onThe Huffington Post. One week after itsdebut on Nov. 8, HuffPo’s divorcesection was the eighth most populararea on the site (out of 27 sections),with about 500,000 page views its firstweek, thousands and thousands ofcomments, and grim, slightly creepyads. (Judith Newman, New York Times,11/28/2010)

Commitments Vary From State toState Same-sex couples have a broadarray of legal rights andresponsibilities. Same-Sex Marriage islegal in Connecticut, Iowa,Massachusetts, New Hampshire,Vermont and Washington, D.C. InCalifornia, same-sex marriage is notcurrently allowed, while the issuemakes its way through the courts, butsame-sex marriages were performedthere in 2008 before voters amendedthe State Constitution to definemarriage as between a man and awoman. Civil Unions are legal in NewJersey, and are expected to start inIllinois in July. Domestic Partnershipsthat grant nearly all the state-levelspousal rights as civil unions exist forsame-sex couples who register inCalifornia, Nevada, Oregon andWashington State. DomesticPartnerships that grant some rightsexist in Hawaii, Maine, Wisconsin andWashington, D.C. (Monica Davey NewYork Times, 12/2/2010)

Chasing Profit in Divorce With somein the financial world willing to bet onalmost anything, it should be nosurprise that a few would see thepotential to profit from the oftencontentious and emotional process ofending a marriage. So far, the numberof companies investing in divorce issmall, but some businesses are gearingup. A New York start-up, ChurchillDivorce Finance is planning to enterthe business. The company’s chiefexecutive previously co-founded apublicly traded Australian companythat has invested tens of millions indivorce cases there. Banks, hedge fundsand boutique firms now have a total of$1 billion invested in lawsuits at anygiven time. (Binyamin Appelbaum,New York Times, 12/5/2010)

Iran’s Divorce Rate Soars Divorce isskyrocketing in Iran. Over a decade, thenumber each year has roughly tripled toa little more than 150,000 in 2010 fromaround 50,000 in 2000, according toofficial figures. Nationwide, there isone divorce for every seven marriages;in Tehran, the ratio is 1 divorce forevery 3.76 marriages, the governmenthas reported. The numbers are stillmodest compared with the UnitedStates, which typically records about amillion divorces a year in a populationabout four times as large. (WilliamYong, New York Times, 12/7/2010)

French Civil Unions Gain FavorOver Marriage French couples areincreasingly shunning traditionalmarriages and opting instead for civilunions, to the point that there are now

33


two civil unions for every threemarriages. In 2000, just one year afterthe passage of the law, more than 75percent of civil unions were signedbetween heterosexual couples. Thattrend has only strengthened since then:of the 173,045 civil unions signed in2009, 95 percent were betweenheterosexual couples. As withtraditional marriages, civil unionsallow couples to file joint tax returns,exempt spouses from inheritancetaxes, permit partners to shareinsurance policies, ease access toresidency permits for foreigners andmake partners responsible for eachother’s debts. Creating a civil unionrequires little more than a singleappearance before a judicial official,and ending one is even easier - it canbe dissolved with just a registeredletter. (Scott Sayare & Maïa De LaBaume, New York Times, 12/16/2010)

‘Doubling Up’ in Recession-Strained Quarters Recent U.S.Census Bureau data shows that thenumber of multifamily householdsjumped 11.7 percent from 2008 to2010, reaching 15.5 million, or 13.2percent of all households. It is thehighest proportion since at least 1968,accounting for 54 million people.Even that figure, however, isundoubtedly an undercount of thephenomenon social service providerscall “doubling up,” which hasballooned in the recession and anemicrecovery. The census’ multifamilyhousehold figures, for example, do notinclude such situations as when asingle brother and a single sister move

in together, or when a childless adultgoes to live with his or her parents.The average income of multifamilyhouseholds in the records fell by morethan 5 percent from 2009 to 2010,twice as much as households over all,suggesting that many who are living insuch arrangements are under financialsiege. (Michael Luo, New York Times,12/29/2010)

Families Bear Brunt of DeploymentStrains The work of war is very mucha family affair. Nearly 6 in 10 of thetroops deployed today are married,and nearly half have children. Thosefamilies — more than a million ofthem since 2001 — have borne thebrunt of the psychological andemotional strain of deployments.Siblings and grandparents havebecome surrogate parents. Spouseshave struggled with loneliness andstress. Children have felt confused andabandoned during the longseparations. Social scientists are justbeginning to document the ripplingeffects of multiple combatdeployments on families — effectsthat those families themselves haveintimately understood for years.(James Dao & Catrin Einhorn, NewYork Times 12/31/2010)

Les Wallerstein is a familymediator and collaborativelawyer in Lexington. He canbe contacted at (781) 862-

1099, or at [email protected]

34


ANNOUNCEMENTS

All mediators and friends of mediation are invited to submit announcements of interestto the mediation community to [email protected], for free publication.

MCFM’S NEXT TWO, FREEPROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

SILVER THREADS AMONG THE GOLD: Helping Families Grapple with Personal &

Property Issues in the Context of Aging Parents

FEBRUARY 9, 2011, 2-4 PMWESTON PUBLIC LIBRARY

With parents gone or weakened by confusion, family members sometimes need helpwith resolving issues such as placement of parent in appropriate care setting,allocation of estate property, use of summer cottage, distribution of familyjewelry/heirlooms/antiques, care of disabled sibling, transfer of family business, etc.Old family grievances, unresolved disputes, jealousy, greed, or plain differences ofopinions adds to the challenge of sorting out family differences.

Come to this event and learn from Alex Moschella, Blair Trippe and SuzanneModigliani. You will gain knowledge about elder law and disabilities from anexperienced attorney, and tips and techniques from a skilled and experiencedmediator and geriatric care manager. Mixing fields of knowledge will help youenable families to devise creative and practical solutions.

DIVORCE COACHING & MEDIATIONAPRIL 6, 2011, 2-4 PM

WESTON PUBLIC LIBRARY

DETAILS TO BE ANNOUNCEDCHECK WWW.MCFM.ORG FOR UPDATES


35


ELDER DECISIONS / AGREEMENT RESOURCES, LLCA Three Day Advanced Mediation Training in

Elder (Adult Family) Mediation

$100 DISCOUNT FOR MCFM MEMBERSFEBRUARY 1 - 3, 2011

Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday9:00 AM - 5:00 PM on days 1 & 2

9:00 AM - 4:00 PM on day 3

Elder mediation helps seniors and their adult children resolve conflicts aroundissues such as living arrangements, care giving, financial planning,inheritance/estate disputes, medical decisions, family communication, driving,and guardianship. This three-day course will cover:Mental & Physical Effects of Aging: Normal Aging, Physical Changes, CognitiveChanges, Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Forms of Dementia, Depression in theElderly, Families and Caregiving- Intergenerational Relationships, Long Term Careand In-Home Services, Costs of Care, Who pays for Services and MaintainingIndependence.

Legal Planning: Planning for Financial Management, Medicaid Eligibility,Medical Decision Making, Asset Protection and Guardianship.

Advanced Multi-Party Mediation Skills & Challenges Of Elder Mediation:Neutrality vs. Mediator Advocacy, Common Hurdles, New Strategies for Intake,Exploring the Hybrid Model of Elder Mediation, Working with Large, DispersedFamily Groups, Ethical Concerns, Age Bias, Considering and MaximizingCapacity, Complex Multi-Party Role Plays and more!

Seminar on Marketing Your Mediation Practice: Interactive exercises andspecific tools for elder mediators.

Elder Decisions’ Training Team: Arline Kardasis, MAT & Crystal Thorpe, MBA,MSW

Along With Expert Guest Presenters: Jeffrey Bloom, Esq., Emily Saltz, MSW,LICSW & Jennifer Decker, Mediation Marketing Specialist.

Cost $875 / $775 for MCFM MembersIncludes breakfast pastries, coffee, lunch

on site, snacks and course materials.See website for details www.ElderDecisions.com

Social Work CEUs offered

36



To be held at The Walker CenterA Charming B&B and Conference Center in Newton

Just off Rte 95 and the Mass Pike (Rte 90)Close to Riverside MBTA Station

NEW BEGINNINGS

An interfaith support group for separated, divorced, widowed and single adults inthe Greater Boston Area. Meets year-round, every Thursday, from 7:00 to 9:00PM, at Wellesley Hills Congregational Church, 207 Washington Street. For moreinformation call 781-235-8612. Annual Dues $50.

For program details & schedule visit www.newbeginnings.org

DIVORCE IN MASSACHUSETTS:WITH OR WITHOUT A LAWYER

Jerome Weinstein& Les Wallerstein

When the issue of divorce is raised, most people don't know where to turn. How doI get information? Do I need an attorney? Should I pay a retainer? What will happento my children and my home? This course will give you information about what youcan and cannot do and what kinds of risks are involved. It will also address whenyou need an attorney (with the attendant costs) or when you can use a mediator ordo it yourself. You will also receive resources and a bibliography.

THE CAMBRIDGE CENTER FOR ADULT EDUCATIONSATURDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2011

9:30 AM - 12:30 PM42 Brattle Street

Online Registration: http://www.ccae.orgPhone Registration: 617-547-6789

Cost: $61.00, Limited to 20

37


PARENTING SOLUTIONS PRESENTS... WINTER, 2011 PROGRAMS FOR PARENTS

PARENTING YOUR CHALLENGING CHILDwith Sylvia Sirignano, Ph.D.

Wednesday Evenings 7:30 -9 pmFee: $40 per session / $120 for all 4 sessions; 2nd parent is free

January 26 | March 23A special series of programs for parents of those hard-to-raise children. Strategiesand tips will be discussed, as well as specific issues and concerns. Come to one,or come to all four.

PARENTING TOGETHERwith Sylvia Sirignano, Ph.D. and Glenn Smith, LICSW

Wednesday evenings 7:30 - 9 pmFee: $30 per person; $45 per couple

February 9th: After Divorce: When Co-Parenting Seems Impossible March 30th: Is It Worth Trying to Save This Marriage? What’s Best for the Kids?

DIVORCE THAT WORKS FOR CHILDRENCo-led by Sylvia Sirignano, Ph.D. and Glenn Smith, LICSW

Thursday and Friday Mornings 9 -11:30 am, Fee: $80January 20 & 21 / February 17 & 18

This is a two-part, five-hour court-approved parent education program requiredfor divorcing parents, but all parents just beginning to think about divorce, oralready divorced are also welcome. The workshop gives information about theeffects of divorce on children and teaches strategies to help children dealsuccessfully with divorce. Its small group, informal format allows the instructorsto tailor the program to the interests of the participants.

DIVORCE THAT WORKS FOR CHILDREN PLUS!Tuesday Evenings 7 -9 pm

Fee: $50 per session | $100 for 3 sessionsJan 25 / Feb 22 / Mar 22

For parents who have already taken the court-mandated divorcing parenteducation course, this monthly program gives divorcing parents an opportunity toaddress issues of specific concern.

PARENTING SOLUTIONS also offers divorce mediation for parents,individual parent consultations, community presentations and groups for newparents, parents of young children, and parents of teens. Our presentationsprovide practical parenting strategies informed by the latest research.

38


For further information, or to register for a workshop, or to schedule anappointment, call 508-366-7557 OR visit us online at www.parentingsolutionsprograms.com

Join our email list to receive future flyers, parenting tips, and more!

30-HOUR BASIC MEDIATION TRAININGPresented by The Mediation & Training Collaborative (TMTC)

GREENFIELD, MAMarch 11, 19, 25 & April 2, 2011

This highly interactive, practice-based training is open to anyone who wishes toincrease skill in helping others deal with conflict, whether through formalmediation or informal third-party intervention processes in other professionalsettings. TMTC is a court-approved mediation program, and this training meetsSJC Rule 8 and Guidelines training requirements for those who wish to becomecourt-qualified mediators. Social work CECs and attorney CLEs available uponrequest.

For more details or brochure contact:Susan Hackney at [email protected] or 413-475-1505

PART-TIME MEDIATOR POSITION AVAILABLE

Diane Neumann & Associates: Divorce Mediation Services, Watertown, MA, hasan opening for a part time North Shore divorce mediator. The hours include twoevenings per week. The mediator provides joint mediation sessions to clients,followed by substantial document drafting. These documents typically requirecomplex financial and tax calculations. Preference will be given to attorneys whohave mediation training, experience, and practice family law. This individualwould not be able to maintain a separate mediation practice.

Requirements: Licensed Massachusetts attorney


39


Divorce mediation experienceDivorce mediation trainingKnowledge of divorce law

Excellent writing skillsFinancial expertise

Tax knowledge of divorce related issues a plusUnderstanding of interpersonal couple and family dynamics

Child development

Please e-mail detailed cover letter and resume to: [email protected] No phone calls, please.

FRAMINGHAM COURT MEDIATION SERVICES ANNOUNCES

2011 TRAINING FOR VOLUNTEER MEDIATORS

Framingham Court Mediation Services is offering a 36-hour basic mediation coursefor people interested in becoming volunteer mediators in the District Courts ofFramingham, Natick, Concord and Marlborough. To be eligible for this training,volunteers need to commit to serving in court during the day several hours a monthfor at least one year. An interview and references are required. Course fee is $100to cover the cost of materials. Successful completion of the course is a prerequisiteto assignment in court.

January 2011 Training Dates for the Volunteer Mediator Program:

Monday 1/10 8:30-4:30Wednesday 1/12 8:30-12:30Friday 1/14 1-5

Wednesday 1/19 8:30-12:30Friday 1/21 1-5

Monday 1/24 8:30-4:30Wednesday 1/26 8:30-12:30

40


(Snow Dates: Monday, 1/31 and Wed, Feb 2, 2011)

If interested, call Jan at 508-872-9495 or [email protected].

COMMUNITY DISPUTE SETTLEMENT CENTERBuilding Bridges • People to People • Face to Face

THE FMQ WANTS YOU!

The Family Mediation Quarterly is always open tosubmissions, especially from new authors. Everymediator has stories to tell and skills to share.

To submit articles or discuss proposed articles call Les Wallerstein (781) 862-1099or email [email protected]

NOW’S THE TIME TO SHARE YOUR STORY!

41


MCFM NEWS

COUPLES GONE WILDPresented by Joseph Shay, Ph.D.

This presentation will be a joint meeting for members of MCFM andthe Massachusetts Collaborative Law Council. Dr Shay will explorethe top 10 complications in couples therapy and their implications fordivorce mediators and collaborative law negotiators. He will illustrateissues and dynamics with video clips from popular television showsincluding “The Sopranos” and “The Breakup.”

MAY 4, 2011, 2-4 PMLOCATION TO BE ANNOUNCED

CHECK WWW.MCFM.ORG FOR UPDATES

MEDIATION PEER GROUP MEETINGSPioneer-Valley Mediators Group: This Western Mass group is newlyorganized and will be meeting monthly in December on the firstWednesday of every month at the end of the day, from 4 to 6 pm or 6to 8 pm (depending on the interest) in Northampton at a location to beannounced. Please email Kathy Townsend for further information at<[email protected]>

Mediators in Search of a Group? As mediators we almost alwayswork alone with our clients. Peer supervision offers mediators anopportunity to share their experiences of that process, and to learn fromeach other in a relaxed, safe setting. Most MCFM directors aremembers of peer supervision groups. All it takes to start a new groupis the interest of a few, like-minded mediators and a willingness to gettogether on a semi-regular, informal basis. In the hope of promotingpeer supervision groups a board member will volunteer to helpfacilitate your initial meetings. Please contact Kathy Townsend<[email protected]> who will coordinate this outreach,and put mediators in touch with like-minded mediators.

42


JOIN US

MEMBERSHIP: MCFM membership is open to all practitioners and friends offamily mediation. MCFM invites guest speakers to present topics of interest at four,free, professional development meetings annually. These educational meetings oftensatisfy certification requirements. Members are encouraged to bring guests. MCFMmembers also receive the Family Mediation Quarterly and are welcome to serve on anyMCFM Committee. All members are listed online at MCFM’s web site, and all listingsare “linked” to a member’s email. Annual membership dues are $90, or $50 for full-time students. Please direct all membership inquiries to Ramona Goutiere [email protected]

REFFERALDIRECTORY: Every MCFM member is eligible to be listed inMCFM’s Referral Directory. Each listing in the Referral Directory allows a memberto share detailed information explaining her/his mediation practice and philosophy withprospective clients. The Referral Directory is printed and mailed to all Massachusettsjudges, and to each listed member. The most current directory is always available onlineat www.mcfm.org. The annual Referral Directory fee is $60. Please direct all referraldirectory inquiries to Rebecca J. Gagné at [email protected]

PRACTICE STANDARDS: MCFM was the first organization to issue PracticeStandards for mediators in Massachusetts. To be listed in the MCFM ReferralDirectory each member must agree to uphold the MCFM Standards of Practice.MCFM’s Practice Standards are available online at www.mcfm.org

CERTIFICATION & RECERTIFICATION: MCFM was the first organization tocertify family mediators in Massachusetts. Certification is reserved for mediatorswith significant mediation experience, advanced training and education. Extensivemediation experience may be substituted for an advanced academic degree. MCFM’scertification & recertification requirements are available online at www.mcfm.org

Every MCFM certified mediator is designated as such in both the online and theprinted Referral Directory. Certified mediators must have malpractice insurance, andcertification must be renewed every two years. Only certified mediators are eligible toreceive referrals from the Massachusetts Probate & Family Court through MCFM.

Certification applications cost $150 and re-certification applications cost $50. For moreinformation contact S. Tracy Fischer at [email protected] Forcertification or re-certification applications contact Ramona Goutiere [email protected].

43


DIRECTORATE

MASSACHUSETTS COUNCIL ON FAMILY MEDIATION, INC.P.O. Box 59, Ashland, NH 03217-0059

Local Telephone & Fax: 781-449-4430email: [email protected]

www.mcfm.org

OFFICERS

President Lynn K. Cooper, 262 Kenrick Street, Newton, MA 02458617-527-3152, [email protected]

Vice-President Laurie S. Udell, 399 Chestnut Street, 2nd Floor Needham, MA 02492, 781-449-3355, [email protected]

Vice-President Rebecca J. Gagné, The Renaissance, 180 Belmont Street,Brockton, MA 02301, 508-895-9300,[email protected]

Secretary Jonathan E. Fields, Fields & Dennis, LLP, 20 William Street,Suite 165, Wellesley, MA 02481, 781-489-6776, [email protected]

Treasurer & Kathleen A. Townsend, Divorce Mediation Group, Inc., 1441 Main Street, Springfield, MA 01103, 413-733-4444,[email protected]

DIRECTORS Kate Fanger, S. Tracy Fischer, Tanya Gurevich, Laurie Israel, William C. Leonard, Steven Nisenbaum,Lynda J. Robbins, Mary A. Samberg, Mary A. Socha, DianeW. Spears, Les Wallerstein, Marion Lee Wasserman &Fran L. Whyman

DIRECTORS John A. Fiske, Janet B. Weinberger, Jerome Weinstein & Barbara N. White

ADMINISTRATOR Ramona Goutiere, Goutiere Professional Business Services,P.O. Box 59, Ashland, NH 03217-0059, 781-449-4430, [email protected]

EMERITUS

Past President

MCFMFamily Mediation Quarterly

Les Wallerstein, Editor1620 Massachusetts Avenue

Lexington, MA 02420(781) 862-1099

[email protected]

The FMQ is dedicated to family mediators working with traditional and non-traditionalfamilies. All family mediators share common interests and concerns. The FMQ willprovide a forum to explore that common ground.

The FMQ intends to be a journal of practical use to family mediators. As mediation isdesigned to resolve conflicts, the FMQ will not shy away from controversy. The FMQwelcomes the broadest spectrum of diverse opinions that affect the practice of familymediation.

The contents of the FMQ are published at the discretion of the editor, in consultation withthe MCFM Board of Directors. The FMQ does not necessarily express the views of theMCFM unless specifically stated.

The FMQ is mailed and emailed to all MCFM members. The FMQ is mailed to all Probate& Family Court Judges, all local Dispute Resolution Coordinators, all Family ServiceOfficers and all law school libraries in Massachusetts. An archive of all previous editionsof the FMQ are available online in PDF at <www.mcfm.org>, accompanied by acumulative index of articles to facilitate data retrieval.

MCFM members may submit notices of mediation-related events for free publication.Complimentary publication of notices from mediation-related organizations is availableon a reciprocal basis. Commercial advertising is also available.

Please submit all contributions for the FMQ to the editor, either by email or computer disk.Submissions may be edited for clarity and length, and must scrupulously safeguard clientconfidentiality. The following deadlines for all submissions will be observed:

Summer: July 15th Fall: October 15thWinter: January 15th Spring: April 15th

All MCFM members and friends of family mediation are encouraged to contributeto the FMQ. Every mediator has stories to tell and skills to teach. Please share yours.

EDITOR’S NOTICE


44

INSPIRING SETTLEMENTS SINCE 1982

• INSPIRINGSETTLEMENTSSINCE1982•INSPIRINGSETTLEM

ENTS

SINC

E19

82•

MCFMMCFM

The Family Mediation Quarterly is printed on paper stock that is manufacturedwith non-polluting wind-generated energy, and 100% recycled (with

100% post consumer recycled fi ber), processed chlorine freeand FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certifi ed.

MASSACHUSETTS COUNCILON FAMILY MEDIATION

www.mcfm.org

MASSACHUSETTS COUNCILON FAMILY MEDIATION

www.mcfm.org

family mediation quarterly

Documents

intelligent divorce

good divorce

divorcing families

best divorce possiblefor

parents helptheir children

best book

intelligent book press

family mediators