Report on ABA Mid-Year Meeting

February 8, 2010 at 11:42 am · Filed under Collaborative Process, divorce and tagged: Collaborative Process, dovorce, family, IACP, law, UCLA

Many of us have just returned home from the ABA Mid Year Meeting in Orlando. The Uniform Collaborative Law Act, as promulgated by the Uniform Law Commission (ULC), was scheduled to have been considered for endorsement by the ABA House of Delegates today.

During the first few days of the meeting, numerous Collaborative practitioners and representatives of IACP, ABA DR Section and GCLC met with ABA sections and delegates. There was support for the act from the Dispute Resolution, Family Law, and Individual Rights and Responsibilities Sections and the Standing Committee on Delivery of Legal Services, and the committed votes of other Section delegates whose sections did not vote to oppose the Resolution. There was opposition from the Litigation and the Tort, Trial and Insurance Practice Section, the Judicial Council and the Young Lawyers Division. The discussions and debates made it clear to us that ABA delegates lacked sufficient accurate information about Collaborative Practice and the UCLA to make an informed decision regarding endorsement.

It is the sole prerogative of the ULC to put one of its Acts up for ABA endorsement or not. ULC leadership made the decision that it was prudent to withdraw the matter from vote at this meeting, which is not an unusual strategic decision. IACP fully supported the decision of the ULC leadership to remove the act from the ABA’s consideration at this time. We learned a great deal over the course of the weekend about the questions and concerns of those who do not practice Collaborative Law. The meeting provided us with a wonderful opportunity for discourse and will enable the Collaborative community to move forward with enhanced clarity about how better to educate and inform the bench, the private bar and the public about the work we do.

Overall, for this phase of the education of the bar leaders, we believe we accomplished our mission.  The term “collaborative law” was on everyone’s tongue.  Many were hearing about it for the first time (particularly section members who were not delegates and therefore not on the House of Delegates listserv).  The questions we heard as we spoke to groups were very basic:  How does it differ from mediation?  What purpose does a disqualification clause serve?  Can it be used in areas other than family law?  How can the potential of someone using it for the nefarious purpose of exhausting an opponent’s resources and then forcing the other to lose his/her attorney be addressed?  Is all the information gathered lost forever when a case is transitioned to litigation?  The questions were those that occur to someone considering the process after a very short introduction with no prior knowledge or context for the discussion.

In response to some of the feedback we received, the ULC intends to further review the act, and may consider revisiting some of its specific provisions. We will continue to work closely with the UCLA Drafting Committee and will keep you informed of new developments. IACP is deeply grateful to the ULC for the investment it has made in Collaborative Practice.

In the meantime, the IACP will assimilate what we’ve learned during both the drafting process and the ABA Mid-Year Meeting and will share this knowledge with the Collaborative community. You will soon be hearing more about a Model Participation Agreement, guidance about informed consent, and DV screening tools.  We will continue to review how to ensure that our message to professionals who do not chose to use the Collaborative Practice process option understand its value to clients.

And finally, to all who contacted delegates in advance of the Mid-Year Meeting, and traveled to Orlando, and wrote and spoke on behalf of the UCLA, our deepest thanks. Collaborative practice has spread throughout the world because of the incredible generosity of many in the Collaborative community who give their time, effort and hearts to further the goal of “transforming the way conflict is resolved worldwide.”
Sherri Goren Slovin, President
Harry Tindall, Chair, UCLA Committee
Talia Katz, Executive Director

Comments