Section 3.2 of the IACP Ethical Standards states that a Collaborative Professional will respect each client’s self-determination, recognizing that ultimately the clients are responsible for making the decisions that resolve their issues.

Should this self-determination extend to the composition of their Collaborative team?

This raises a fundamental question that goes to the heart of advocacy in the legal process.  Many states have adopted the Uniform Collaborative Law Act which requires two attorneys in the process.  Does the presumption that two sides are always adversarial and therefore require separate advocates align with the Collaborative paradigm shift?  Are two lawyers really needed to conduct a Collaborative matter?

These questions have recently come to the IACP Ethical Standards Committee from Collaborative practitioners in other countries.

Are we hindering access to the Collaborative Process with our strict adherence to the adversarial model of two attorneys?  Could there be other options?

“Every time I go through the ethics and standards, I feel like there is an undercurrent of the adversarial model just below the surface,” says MCT member Kristen Boldt.  “I see the big, audacious, transformative potential of Collaborative that will expand the practice beyond family law to shift how people approach conflict in a variety of areas but to get there we need to stop framing everything in relation to the lawyers and the legal system.”

Join us this Friday at 4:30 Eastern for our Happy Hour discussion on this topic.