|
Post by june on Feb 23, 2011 17:54:49 GMT
Is this a good idea? is it actually an idea considering they will be forced to 'consider', whatever that means! I would hope that adults are big enough to make up their own minds if mediation is a go-er or not, what does the state have to do with it? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12548506
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2011 20:47:48 GMT
Is mediation readily available now to all couples?
A classic divorce has one of the two (usually the woman) on legal aid, and the other not. That is fine for those with lots of money, but an earner doesn't have to earn much to be denied legal aid, and ends up fighting the case himself with no guidance at all.
It is not always in the interests of the legally represented to agree to mediation when their non-represented spouse asks for it.
So yes, it is a good thing to require it - except that I note that if one party refuses, the thing will go to court anyway.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Feb 23, 2011 21:08:03 GMT
I think divorce should be done as quick as possible, if there is physical abuse or other extreme problems.
The couples, who just don't know how to communicate could benfit from mediation, but this should be available before divorce becomes the topic!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 6:45:51 GMT
Anna, I agree with that, but so far as I understand it, this mediation isn't about the divorce itself but the ancillary matters couples often war about - children and money.
Very often only one party has access to legal advice, and that makes the process very unblalanced. The unrepresented person is left without a clue about what he or she should be agreeing to in terms of settlement. I'm not sure whether mediation will help resolve this!
|
|