December 14, 2024 • 43 mins
Discover insights into how integrating legal, financial, and emotional strategies can help achieve the benefits and of a healthy divorce.
San Diego Divorce Mediation Attorney and CDFA Scott Levin is joined by divorce coach Jill Kaufman for an in-depth exploration of the power of mediation over traditional litigation, which often mitigates emotional harm and financial strain, offering a more peaceful path forward. Learn the importance of selecting the right legal counsel aligned with holistic values, and avoid the pitfalls of adversarial approaches that can complicate and prolong the journey.
Delve into the art of effective mediation tactics and the benefits of assembling a team of financial, legal, and mental health professionals. We discuss the nuances of negotiation, emphasizing the importance of understanding the motivations behind demands to foster a more amicable resolution. Scott and Jill share real-life scenarios where creative solutions, such as involving divorce financial neutral services or opting for settlements, have led to better mental health and family outcomes.
The discussion underscores the necessity of prioritizing fair settlements that consider the welfare of any children involved, setting the stage for healthier family dynamics.
Thanks for listening and I hope you'll continue to learn more about how you can peacefully divorce.
As a divorce mediation attorney in California, Scott Levin helps couples figure out the settlement terms and draft enforceable settlement agreements so they can divorce fairly without needing to go to court. Obtain closure peacefully through an amicable divorce. process that protects families and kids.
Visit San Diego Divorce Mediation for more information and to learn more about our mission to help divorcing couples make informed decisions and fair agreements through mediation or book a free virtual consultation.
Scott Levin, attorney, mediator, CDFA®
Chief PeaceKeeper
scottlevinmediation@gmail.com
858-255-1321
San Diego Divorce Mediation & Family Law
www.SanDiegoFamilyLawyer.net
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome everybody.
I am excited to be here withyou.
We are talking about a holisticapproach to divorce, an
overview to integrating legal,financial and emotional
strategies.
Scott Levin, who is a formerlitigator.
(00:27):
He's an attorney, a mediatorand calls himself a chief
peacekeeper, which is exactlywhat we want when we're going
through divorce.
Scott, can you introduceyourself a little more?
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Yeah, hi everyone.
I'm Scott Levin.
I'm an attorney in California.
I'm a CDFA certified divorcefinancial analyst.
I have a finance background.
I was litigating for many years.
I stopped in 2014 when mysecond kid was born three boys
and I just choose to help peoplethrough mediation so that I'm a
(01:01):
big believer that gettingthrough the legal process is the
key to health.
Getting stuck in the divorceprocess only leads to more
expensive divorces, more costlyemotional harm and damage to
children.
Now, mediation is not theanswer to everybody.
(01:21):
Litigation is not the answer toeverybody, so I'm not assigning
if you're in a litigated caseor a contested case and that
sometimes can't be avoided,right.
But generally speaking, you myclients.
Over the last 20 years I'veseen they feel better about
themselves and their family andtheir finances after they get
(01:45):
the legal process done, and so Ihelp people navigate that, you
know, in a quicker way.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
Yes, absolutely, and that's all we're about.
I think you and I are alignedwith getting people through
their divorce quicker and morepeacefully for the good of
everybody, and so that's whatthis workshop is about.
And so, in terms of you knowthe physical, you know a
(02:16):
holistic process, a holisticdivorce process.
It's taking into account thephysical, emotional and mental
impact of the process.
And so you know, when you'rethinking about what a divorce
attorney typically tells theirclients, they're trying to get
their clients to get the bestdeal for them financially and
(02:39):
the parenting situation thatthey want, and if they don't
take into account the emotional,mental, health and physical
parts of this and the effect ofthis, they could be advising
their client to do somethingthat's not in the best interest
of the client.
(02:59):
And you know in the past,attorneys are not supposed to
take all of those things intoaccount.
They're supposed to advocatefor their client and get them,
you know quote the best dealRight.
Isn't that typically what youknow the past 40 years that
attorneys do?
Speaker 2 (03:20):
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean, in doing that work,what attorneys essentially do is
position their client againstthe other side, and so it's a
battle for a winner and a loser,and that's how they approach it
.
And the reality, unfortunately,is that when you are forced to
(03:43):
go to navigate a path where oneof you will win and one of you
lose, you actually both loseBecause, instead of splitting
95% of your assets and expending5% of them on the divorce
system, you'll divide 60% ofyour assets, or 65%, and the
divorce system will cut thatother third.
(04:05):
But again, there's not a rightor wrong way to navigate this
process, and people have tochoose what's best for them.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Right, right, but spending money on attorneys as
opposed to having it yourself isprobably not what's best for
them.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Family law attorneys are also Jill.
One thing I'll just say aboutfamily law attorneys and I am
one, so I get to say this and alot of my colleagues don't like
when I say this because I do dothese appearances.
But you know family lawattorneys go to the most,
they're the go to the highest.
The most tier three law schoolgraduates are in family law.
(04:43):
The most tier three law schoolgraduates are in family law.
The highest bar pass fail ratesfamily law attorneys.
So when you're in California orany state you pass the bar
after you graduate law school tobecome a lawyer.
The highest fail rates arepeople that end up in family law
.
So it's the lowest kind of rungequality of human essentially
(05:04):
right.
Like the worst educated, worstkind of positioned.
And that's kind of humanessentially right.
Like they're the worst educated, worst kind of positioned.
And that's kind of family lawright.
Because you deal with so muchemotion that you know a lot of
attorneys in family law wouldrather do business deals if they
could.
But this is what you know theirlot in life becomes so there's
very few people that like setforth out and say I can't wait
to be a family law attorney.
They kind of just end up here.
(05:25):
And so what does that mean foryou?
Well, it means that if you hirea family law attorney, they'll
be very careful.
But the real problem is yourspouse hires a family law
attorney and you have no controlover who that person is, and it
only takes one money motivatedme first attorney to dissolve a
process into a catastrophe.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Right and I want to.
You're obviously right withyour research and your facts,
but I want to say that there aresome good family law attorneys
out there who do this becauseit's a passion for them and do
really care about their clients,and I know them, you know like
you're one of them, you know, soyou know I don't want to scare
(06:09):
everybody that, like all oftheir family.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
You just can't control both sides.
It only takes one attorney tomake it really hard to navigate
divorce.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
Right, and if there are half of the family attorneys
out there who are like whatyou're describing, you have to
be really careful when you hireone right, you have to.
You have to make sure that youdon't get one of those family
law attorneys.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
I mean it.
Also when I refer cases.
A lot of my referrals will callme back and they'll say I
called you know, your friend,and I hired them.
But now, you know, now I'mworking with one of their
colleagues in their firm right.
So, like the, you know, now I'mworking with one of their
colleagues in their firm right.
So, like the, you know, familylaw attorneys are very busy
people and so they our practicesare growing, not shrinking.
(06:50):
And so even if you're gettingreferred to somebody like when I
refer someone, I'm referring aspecific attorney, not the firm
itself.
And so you just have to makesure, when you're getting
referred to someone, that youknow it's that person that's
going to be actually doing thework, because, you know, these
days their time is so much indemand.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
Right, Exactly Now.
How do we okay, how do we avoidusing the family attorney for
purposes of making the divorcemore complex, making it more
high conflict?
How do we use the family lawattorneys in a productive way,
(07:30):
where you're doing it andthinking about the emotional and
mental impact?
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Yeah.
So you set up your divorceprocess and again, there's not a
right or wrong way.
So if you have to go to courtwith the attorney, i's not.
I'm not judging you how I woulddo it.
I'm married, but if I weregetting divorced, this is how I
would do it.
I would make it very clear thatI'm hiring them as a consulting
attorney only and I will notretain them if I litigate the
case later.
So they will not be my attorneyif I litigate.
(07:59):
So they are not incentivized toblow up the process.
So I'm going to mediate, myspouse and I are going to hire a
mediator together and then I'mgoing to have a consulting
attorney and then a consultingfinancial expert on the side.
So I'm going to form my ownteam and then a coach as well.
So, like, I want to form my ownsupport staff, not necessarily
(08:23):
neutral support staff, butpeople that are like looking at
the financial disclosures,advising me on like what a good
proposal would be explaining tome.
This is why you're asking forthis, because this is the why.
Because when you negotiatedivorce settlements, the other
side wants to know why.
I just was in a mediation rightbefore this where the spouse
(08:44):
said I'm willing to co-own thehome or sell it, but I will not
let you own the home.
And I said is this an emotionalthing?
Why wouldn't you let yourspouse own the home if that's
the only way they could own?
That's just not.
I'm not going to let thathappen.
And so that was, you know, hadmore to do with mental than than
(09:04):
financial.
But there was no why behindthat.
And the other side can'tnegotiate that way.
They get that's when you createconflict Right.
So why am I asking for this?
Why is this better and reallyunderstanding?
But you're, but you're.
But you're your own quarterback, you're in control, you're,
you're putting the pieces placeand you're getting all that
(09:26):
advice and expertise at afraction of the cost, because
they're only billing you whenyou call them for a meeting or
you ask them questions.
So you have a financial expert,a lawyer and a mental expert.
All that will probably costless than $10,000.
And then you're using a mediatorwith your spouse and you're not
going into the mediation withthose people.
(09:47):
Ideally, you'll just go withyou and your spouse.
So you let all those folks knowI'm not using any of you if
we're not successful here.
So they are not motivated inany way to want to blow that
process up for you.
So what does that accomplish?
It accomplishes basicallyunderstanding what the
(10:09):
settlement is that you're aimingfor and why, and you're much
more likely to achieve it.
You're getting all theexpertise and advice, you're
making sure that you understandeverything, but you're still
using the mediation process toattack the settlement directly.
So, like an average mediationshould take you know, I mean,
(10:30):
obviously it differs for peoplecould you know one, two, three
months?
I mean it's not like a ninemonth thing Usually?
You know it's rare.
So you're still getting throughthe process using mediation and
you're being collaborative, butyou're still weaponizing all
the information, and that's howI would set up my process.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
So I think, behind all of the things that you're
saying, is that you're takinginto account what is best
physically, emotionally andmentally for you, For you yeah.
And so you're not just sayingwell, legally I am entitled to
(11:15):
50% of the assets and alimony ofthis amount or child support of
this amount.
What you're saying is, I needto know what's right for me, and
because you know, when yourattorney tells you let's say you
have two parties um, party A'sattorney says you're entitled to
(11:38):
, you know $500,000.
I'm just throwing out something.
And parties B tells them well,you're entitled to, you know
$800,000.
And that's not 50-50, right?
So each of the attorneys aretelling their parties different
things and we don't know howthey're basing that amount.
(12:02):
You know, we don't know wherethat's coming from.
But that's not taking intoconsideration any of the
emotional pieces.
And so you know, how would youtake into consideration those
emotional pieces If each of theparties are coming to you saying
they're entitled to differentthings?
(12:22):
as a mediator or well as youknow, take a holistic look at
the divorce.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Here's how I call BS on attorneys.
So I also serve as a consultingattorney and I just had that
mediation I told you about.
So we had four meetings andthis was our fifth and this was
the one where we're comingtogether to settle.
Then one of the spouses got theadvice of a consulting attorney
and I could picture exactlywhat happened, because she came
(12:51):
armed with just a wholedifferent perspective and
attitude and claims of right andwrong.
But I could picture whathappened when she met with this
attorney.
The attorney was like this iswhat the loss, this is what you
owe, this is nothing more than55, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah
, blah.
This is what's right.
(13:12):
How you prevent that fromhappening to you is putting the
financial expert and the lawyerin the same room at the same
time.
Okay, so when I'm a consultingattorney, if I have a colleague
in the room, then I'm going totemper down my BS meter, right
Because?
Or if I'm in the same room as afinancial expert and they're
saying stuff that's not true, Ihave to call that out.
(13:34):
So you're getting the real deal.
Essentially, you're getting alegitimate advice and you're not
just being fired up with.
Like you know, it was a sevenyear marriage I get.
I get spouse support for life.
Well, no, that's never going tohappen.
Sorry, not going to happen,period.
But like all that kind ofbluster goes out the window.
(13:55):
If you put them in the sameroom you'll get more genuine
perspective because they'llthey'll have to limit their,
their kind of, and then againyou let them know you're not
going to hire them if you're not.
So what happened after thismeeting I was just talking to
you about?
I spoke to each of them verybriefly, individually.
We talked about it at the endand I said you know, I don't
(14:18):
think I'm going to be able tosolve this for you guys.
If this is what you're askingfor, it's just, it's too much.
The settlement would be likethis and I have to advise your
husband to get his ownconsulting attorney to make sure
that he's informed, becausewhat you're asking for is on, is
not, is over the line, in myopinion.
And she said well, that's whatthe attorney told me.
The attorney told me that thatshe would be seeing me next week
(14:41):
because she was about to blowup my mediation.
What type of human being woulddo that to it?
We've had a settlement.
It was a good settlement.
It was fair for everybody and,guess what?
It also protected their kids,which was both of their
priorities when they came andsaw me initially, and that all
went out the window.
But like, why would you blow upthe mediation?
(15:03):
Well, because this personhadn't been disincentivized from
doing that.
Because this person hadn't beendisincentivized from doing that
, because they could get $800for a couple hours of consulting
, or they could make $60,000over the course of the next year
and a half representing thisperson in court.
Exactly, and I'm not saying allattorneys are like that.
They're not.
Like Jill said, there arereally good attorneys, but there
(15:26):
are attorneys that have billsto pay too.
Speaker 1 (15:28):
Right, right, and they're not incentivized to
lower that.
So you bring up an excellentpoint.
I want to go back to what yousaid about having two people in
the room.
So I've been in the room with afinancial expert who was
working with my client and shewanted the two of us together in
the meeting and we startedtalking about things and I kept
(15:51):
asking questions and thefinancial expert said, well, I
don't have that information yet.
Well, I haven't done that yet.
Well, I'll get that to you.
And, like, my client didn'tunderstand which questions to
ask her until I mean, we we didgo over some things, but I
thought that her financialexpert had already gone through
(16:11):
all of this.
And so, you know, we were ableto get so much accomplished in
that one meeting with the threeof us because I was able to talk
directly to the financialperson and the financial person
had to answer to someone who'sasking her.
You know, knows what to ask andknows what to follow up with.
And so it is a good ideaoccasionally I don't think all
(16:34):
the time, but once in a while tomeet with either the attorney
and the financial person, theattorney and the divorce coach,
the financial person and thedivorce coach.
So like those kinds of meetingscan be really helpful because
you're going to get differentperspectives and they are going
to present themselvesdifferently when there's another
professional in the room, youknow.
(16:55):
So hopefully we wouldn't,hopefully most people wouldn't
do that just temper it down.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
it's really easy to say like it's like when you look
at a prenup agreement and thenlike you just redline it, like
as you're reading it and pilotlike all the stuff that you
think is bad about it, but likeif I was sharing that with the
other attorney.
I probably would like you knowI wouldn't just share my like
thoughts in real time these arelike my ideas to talk about the
client with but like I wouldcertainly like not have the same
(17:23):
bravado or, you know, like thesame stream of conscious kind of
thought if I was interactingwith someone that, like you know
, knew what they were doing too.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
Right, and I have another example of everything
that you're talking about.
That just happened.
So an attorney referred me acase and I was actually doing
some counseling for this person.
And so she came to me one timeand was like I am absolutely
overwhelmed anxious, I can'tsleep, I am out of control, I
(17:59):
don't know if I can keep goinglike this.
And I said well, I think youhave to settle, because they
were going through motions andcourt and it was getting really
bad.
And I said I don't think you,emotionally, it's worth it for
you to keep going this way.
And so she went back to herattorney that afternoon and said
(18:21):
I'd like to settle my case.
And her attorney said to herwho's a great attorney, by the
way, I really like this attorney.
He said to her you can't settle.
We're on like we're on thetrial track, we are not settling
.
And he yelled at her.
He yelled at her we cannotsettle.
She I give her so much credit.
(18:43):
She said to him Jill told mefor my mental health I need to
settle and I'm settling.
And he stopped and he said helike calmed himself down and
then he apologized to her and hesaid I'm really sorry, I
shouldn't have said that If youwant to settle, we will settle,
and so, and they ended up.
(19:05):
This is a crazy story.
They ended up agreeing, theysettled and then they got back
together.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
So now they're together the couple.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
That's a, that's a side note, but but you know, it
just gives you an example of howyou have to take control of the
process, because the onlyperson who is going to
understand the emotional toll isyou and you have to express
that to your divorce coach, toyour therapist, you know, to
(19:34):
your attorney, and tell themwhat, emotionally and mentally,
is okay for you and is not okayfor you.
Speaker 2 (19:42):
I mean as a mediator, I get I get a lot of criticism
from from my friends that arelawyers.
Most of my clients take theagreements that we reach to a
consulting attorney to get itreviewed and like, for example,
you know I'm a creative problemsolver, so a lot of my clients
especially since the rates are,you know, last couple of years,
(20:04):
they're way more people areco-owning like real estate now
than they used to.
And I hear all the time likewell, I've never.
You know my lawyer said thisisn't even possible.
I can't stay on the loan for ahouse you know that I don't live
in, or something like you knowit's just like well, no,
anything is possible, it's whatyou guys want.
(20:26):
Possible, it's what you guyswant.
And you guys said that youwanted your kids, you know, for
the next three or four years tolive in this house and so you
guys agreed to co-own it.
So this agreement accomplishesthat.
But, like I often hear back frommy clients that have critiques
of the creative solutions thatwe put in place because they're
(20:46):
not like standard solutions, youknow they would rather sell
everything, divide everything,have no joint debt and call it a
day.
Is that's what's best for theclient?
I don't know, but so I'm alwaysin the firing line from you
know, being second guest andthings like that, and that's why
, again, like I always suggest,like hey, I don't, I know what I
(21:12):
can do.
I know this is legal, we can doit this way, but you know you
guys need to feel confident inthe decision.
So why don't you surroundyourself with your own mini team
and make sure that you knowthis is like a well thought out
plan for you, because one thingI, a mediator you know the
(21:35):
mediation process is not aboutis about going through your
credit card statements andmaking sure you can afford.
You know your lifestyle or yourliving agreements.
You know the things that weagree on.
Executing on those and livingafterwards is something that a
mediator really doesn't do.
We need you to make surebecause you're in control.
When you're mediating andnavigating a divorce process in
a more collaborative way, you'retaking more ownership over your
(21:58):
situation.
So you need to make sure thatyou can afford to live and
afford to make your payments and, you know, make sure that you
can execute on the things you'reagreeing on.
And that's where that teamcomes back into play.
The good part of that is, thatyou're not paying a lawyer $585
(22:19):
an hour to look through yourcredit card statements when you
could do it yourself.
But again, it's not.
Not everybody wants to be ableto do that.
Divorce is a very challengingmentally and emotional time, and
some people just can't.
You know it's very hard forthem to have that sort of level
of concentration, and so that'swhy there's different processes
for different people.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
Well, I mean, and you don't have to pay your attorney
to look through your creditcard statements, you can pay
your financial advisor.
That's going to be a lot lessand a better professional to do
that.
Speaker 2 (22:49):
But when you litigate a case, they will look through
it because they're going to billhours.
Speaker 1 (22:53):
Yeah, yeah, well, yeah, litigation is, yeah, a
whole different story.
But so the other pieces whichwe didn't touch on is the
children, right, and just whatis best for the children.
And a hundred percent, if youare emotionally, physically,
(23:16):
mentally not doing well, ifthere's something that isn't
good for you, it's not good foryour children.
And the one thing that I say alot of people do worry about is
having children move out of themarital home.
And so what I always tellpeople is that if you can't
afford to stay in the matter ofmarital home, it's not going to
be good for your children tostay in a situation where you're
, you know, anxious about money.
(23:36):
So it's better to move out andthey will adjust.
Kids are very resilient.
So, like there's, there's a lotof things you have to think
about, and that's why someonelike you know me as a divorce
coach can help you think thosethrough, think all of those
things through, and someone likeyou as a mediator who can help
people understand that they haveto consider the emotional piece
(24:00):
of this.
If one person is getting toomuch and one too little, that's
not going to be good for thechildren, for them, for anybody.
Speaker 2 (24:08):
Yeah, I totally agree , the home is always like you
know that's not going to be goodfor the children, for them, for
anybody.
Yeah, I totally agree, the homeis always, like you know, that
kind of the start and the finishof the process.
But yeah, I'm always wary whenone person's giving it all up
for the home Makes me nervous.
You know the home is notsomething you can get the money
out of that easily.
Know the home is not somethingyou can get the money out of
(24:31):
that easily.
Um, uh, but um.
Another example of kind of ofwhat a holistic approach is, is
like when you're you know, forexample, when someone is being
bought out of a home.
So one person let's say my wifeand I are getting divorced,
let's say she, she wants the,she's going to own the home.
So I give her ownership of thehome in this settlement
agreement.
But I agree, for you know, fornext five years I don't want my
(24:51):
equity out of it because I knowshe can't refi and there's not a
pot of money where we don'thave $800,000 laying around to
give me.
But I'm also simultaneouslysaying you keep the house.
So you know, historically homesgo up.
Maybe they won't this time, butover the next five years it's
(25:12):
going to be worth more than itis now, and I'm not asking for
any of that.
This is a common sort ofsituation.
So when someone takes thisagreement to the lawyer and the
lawyer goes but all this otherstuff over here, you didn't get
that, you didn't get.
You know he's taking the fourthousand dollar couch and the
six thousand dollar, you know,golden boss and I, and then you
(25:33):
come back and you say all this,this is all supposed to be mine
too.
We're supposed to split all thisand I go.
Well, what about my eighthundred thousand?
That I'm not gonna see for fiveyears right.
So it's like a holistic, likewhat's best holistically, and
that's's where just someone likeJill really comes into play to
help you kind of maintain that,like even head in this and
considering everything whenyou're when you're negotiating.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
Right, I mean everything that you give up.
You know you should be able toget something that that is good
for you.
It doesn't have to be equal invalue, but it has to be
something that that is fair, youknow, to you.
Yeah, yeah, I want to open itup to questions.
(26:16):
If you could put into the chatpeople who are here any
questions related to you knowwhat is a holistic approach or
what your specific circumstancesare, we will answer them.
And because I think havingpeople's you know, having
examples of this, is really agreat way to kind of show what a
(26:39):
holistic approach to this, todivorce, is, because Erica will
you can do this with Erica oneday, cause she really is
tremendous.
Oh, I know she's, she's got agood.
She does like a strategysession, I think, with people as
a as a consulting attorney, andit sounds like a really good
option.
I think with people as aconsulting attorney and it
sounds like a really good option.
(27:01):
But, yeah, not a lot ofattorneys do that like a
one-time strategy session tokind of look over your whole
divorce and part of it.
So put into the chat everybodywho's here any questions related
to this.
And what you have to think aboutwhen you're thinking about
doing a whole, you know, thinkabout it holistically is what is
(27:23):
most important to you, you know, is it, you know, the house?
Is it having a certain schedulewith the kids, because you can
trade off.
I did that in my divorce, likemy.
I got less financially in orderto get the schedule I wanted
with my children, which to mewas worth it.
(27:44):
You know it's not worth it tosome other people, you know, um,
but you have to decide what ismost important to you, um, and
what's most important to yourchildren and your family as a
whole.
So we're not.
Are we getting anybody putting?
I don't think we are, but oh,here we go.
Each party provides their ownteam CDFA coach and consulting
(28:10):
lawyer, but the mediator isneutral.
Speaker 2 (28:14):
Okay, I'm sorry.
Yes, you hired you both.
Both spouses hired the samemediator is neutral.
Okay, I'm sorry.
Yes, you, you, you both, bothspouses hire the same mediator
together.
Speaker 1 (28:22):
So so it depends.
I know I have a client,somebody on the on here, who is
doing a collaborative, a teamwhich I guess they're sharing,
the financial professional whichyou can't do, but not not.
If you're not doing acollaborative team, you would
have a lot of clients where Ibring in a collaborative,
(28:43):
neutral, uh.
Speaker 2 (28:44):
So I'm the mediator and I say, hey, let's get this
asset, like, let's get this, uh,valued or let's get someone's
opinion on this issue.
And they do it as a neutral.
So they're they're notrepresenting, they're not like
looking after one person, theother.
I was just saying that how Iwould set up my approaching
mediation if it were me.
I'm not against having aneutral financial person that
(29:09):
like works for both of us.
But I wanna know what would bea good settlement for me and why
, and even more so, whether it'slike a coach or the financial
neutral, having someone in theroom with the attorney as
they're kind of giving me theirsettlement, you know kind of
process and what they think Ishould, what that looks like for
(29:30):
me.
That that that's reallyimportant to remember to temper
down kind of the bluster, tohave that other person there to
call them out, because I mean,you, you don't know.
You know if they're, if they'rethey might be making like a
legally valid argument forsomething, but they they're not.
Maybe that's pushing you in adirection that's not as good for
(29:52):
you as as it as it could be.
So that's why having sooftentimes that's either a coach
or it's an.
It's the as good for you as itcould be.
So that's why having sooftentimes that's either a coach
or it's the financial person.
If your situation is more of alike financially complex but I
often have in my mediations afinancial neutral it just
depends on you know.
If you want someone, like froma financial perspective, to say,
(30:14):
hey, you should be asking forthe Roth IRA, not the
traditional IRA, because theRoth has better, you know, it's
tax free growth.
Like a financial neutral won'tgive you that because, right,
because they're neutral, theywork for both sides.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
Right, exactly, I think it's.
This gets a little complicatedbecause it really depends on the
situation.
Right, this gets a littlecomplicated because it really
depends on the situation.
If you have a very amicabledivorce and I've seen it where
each side is being fairfinancially, you can use a
financial neutral that workswith both sides.
But if you don't have thatsituation which is more often
(30:51):
the case you probably want yourown financial person to double
check and make sure that they'reon your side and they're
protecting you.
Right?
Speaker 2 (31:00):
And also just a financial person can like
evaluate your financial.
I mean we're not.
I know someone that like, ifit's not a super complicated
case, like in 90 minutes she'lltype up you know everything and
I mean it's not like a $10,000investment, you know it's.
I mean it's not like a $10,000investment, you know it's.
It can be pretty affordable.
(31:20):
And if you do have, if youdon't have like super complex
financials and you're amicableI'm a financial neutral.
I mean I'm a financial experttoo.
So a lot of my clients we justwe keep that in house and just
do it together.
But when there's a question ora valuation issue, you know I
want that other person to comein, so that's, that's when we
bring them yeah, I yeah.
Speaker 1 (31:41):
That's another question.
Is it a complicated financialsituation?
Is that there are businessinvolved?
Are they hiding money?
You know so there's a lot ofquestions there.
Yeah, if there's like um,there's some.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
There's things called like is there certain financial
instruments, like restrictedstock units, which are like
stock awards, essentially, thatyou get when you work for a
public company, like there's awhole report that has to be
produced for the valuation ofthose and they kind of they
influence child and spousalsupport as well as well, and so,
(32:18):
as the I don't want someone toask me a question about a report
that I wrote when I'm themediator, because I don't want
them to think like does Scottnot know what he's doing, so I
bring someone else in and thenthey get to ask, they get to
question that person and theyproduce that report and then I'm
able to just attach that report.
So I'm not like justifying it,the math or anything.
Speaker 1 (32:33):
Right, Right.
And I think people when theyhear about all these financial,
all these professionals, theythink that's going to be so much
more than just working with anattorney Right.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
Or less.
Yeah, remember, they don'tteach math in law school, so
your attorney is going to have afinancial expert of their own.
Speaker 1 (32:51):
Right, right, exactly .
I mean people.
People think that their theirattorney is going to know what
to tell them financially, andthey really don't.
They only know the law.
It's rare that, like for you,you're a lawyer and you have a
financial background.
That's rare.
Speaker 2 (33:10):
I think it is rare.
Yeah, finances and lawyers.
Lawyers are more, like you know, english and history.
No, not so much on the mathside.
Speaker 1 (33:19):
Right, exactly Any other questions that people have
, because that was a really goodquestion.
You know what?
What kind of a team do you form?
And I just want to bring up thewhole collaborative thing.
So if you have a collaborativeteam where there's a very
specific way that they work,that is not always the best
(33:43):
thing for everybody, becauseI've seen time and time again
that they do things in a certainway, like they bring the
attorneys into the mediation youknow and that's the way they do
it and that's not necessarilywhat you need.
They, you know, will make youmeet with you know a family
therapist, and you may need that.
(34:06):
You may not need that, needthat.
You know what I mean.
So, like they have a certainway of doing it.
The only good thing aboutcollaborative is that they agree
that they're not going to go.
They're not going to representyou if you go to court, so they
have that with collaborative,the key to a successful
collaborative divorce, or anytime.
Speaker 2 (34:24):
So I'm not the reason I stopped litigating this.
I want to deal with lessattorneys, not more.
I mean, like, I like doing thiswork and I like helping people,
but I don't want to really dealwith the as much much as the
attorneys.
I was literally being driveninsane.
So that's why I do this worknow, but for the last decade.
But it when attorneys come intomy mediations, which I'm not
(34:46):
like looking to do in mediationone, I will allow it.
If we're going to fail, like Idon't want to like hey, if these
guys are going to go to court,like, then let's bring your
attorneys in, but I don't wantthe attorneys in two separate
rooms and attorneys never willsay in the same room, you want
to know why.
They want to bull S and blusterbehind closed doors and then
(35:12):
have the mediator run to theother room and try to temper
what they said to the other side.
Who's going to bluster?
You got to make the twoattorneys hear it directly and
they'll call each other out ontheir BS and they'll say well,
you know, john, that's not true.
It's not how it works inreality.
So again, that's the tempering,the whole way I would set up my
(35:33):
divorce.
It's the same thing as how Inow.
It's hard for me to makeattorneys stay in the same room
A lot.
Oftentimes we'll just say Iabsolutely refuse, but I know
why they have to hear each other.
That's the only way thatthey're gonna get you know
that's how you set up asettlement, because you get the
real deal.
You know the real deal.
Thoughts there.
Speaker 1 (35:53):
Will you work with people without their attorneys
in separate rooms?
Speaker 2 (35:57):
Yeah, I mean I, we, we always start together.
But again, I reserve the right,you know, to suggest going into
separate rooms.
I'd say 80, 85% of the time myclients and I are in in the same
virtual or in-person roombecause I don't want them to
have questions about myimpartiality.
(36:18):
And once a mediator startsgoing between rooms they
naturally tend to kind of theother side, like.
Each side feels like they're ina way buddying up just because
it's a little bit morefreewheeling, because there's
not the other person there.
But the way that a mediation isoften defeated is when one
person does think that themediators on the other's team
(36:42):
and so like what will oftenhappen in a mediation when you
start going back and forth is orit can happen, is like one side
says, well, scott said thiswhen we were in separate rooms
and I didn't say that.
Scott said this when we were inseparate rooms and I didn't say
that.
But they took it in a way andit makes it look like you know,
something was said that wasinappropriate and you know that
(37:05):
makes you feel like is Scott onmy spouse's team or not?
And that's, that's the end ofthe mediation pretty much
beginning of the year.
Speaker 1 (37:14):
We have a good question here.
Can a mediator be useful whenone side refuses to hire an
attorney, or is this thescenario better for courts?
Speaker 2 (37:24):
And what do you think that that means, Jill?
I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
So I think if one person is not using an attorney,
you should always avoid court,you know, regardless of if
somebody's using an attorney.
So I think mediation is alwaysgoing to be the better option.
If both parties are willing todo it, at least try the
mediation.
Speaker 2 (37:48):
Half of my clients don't have attorneys, or a
little bit over half, I wouldsay.
A lot of times I don't know ifthey do or don't, I only can
tell.
Like today's mediation, I couldtell that you know the whole,
everything about my clientchanged and the language changed
.
Everything was so much moreformal, you know, formal, so I
could just tell right away.
(38:08):
But a lot of times I never knowand I don't want to know.
I mean, it's not that I don'twant to know, but it just
doesn't come up.
But you know, a lot of peoplecan navigate mediation just
hiring or a divorce, just hiringthe same mediator together and
kind of doing so that when I'mmaking proposals or making
agreements I truly feel like I'min the know and I understand
what's happening.
You know, I might spend twentyfive hundred bucks or whatever
(38:44):
on the, on the, on the team,before the mediation, just to to
feel that comfort and to youknow I think it's helpful.
Speaker 1 (38:52):
Yeah, no, absolutely.
We only have a couple ofminutes left, but can you give
us examples from when you werelitigating divorces on things
that were not taking intoconsideration the emotional and
mental impact?
Speaker 2 (39:22):
I mean you know when you're in litigation.
You know, I don't know ifanyone has ever like, if anyone
you know owns a business that'sbeen sued by an employee for
something, or just any time thatyou're in litigation, but I
mean, it is very formal,everything is formal and
everything is scary and youdon't understand what's
happening because the process isset up for you to not be in
(39:43):
touch with your attorney.
They have 35 versions of youthat they're helping or whatever
they're doing.
They have a lot of cases, theyhave very little time, they're
being drugged, they're beingdragged into court for emergency
hearings.
You know, once or twice a weekin the 8 am.
You can't really control yourschedule.
(40:04):
As an attorney that'slitigating family law disputes.
It's very hard to.
So you know you're going to becalling your attorney and you're
not going to be getting a holdof them.
And it's not that they're a badperson or that they're being
unprofessional, it's just thereality.
So you'll feel like lost,you'll feel like you're stuck
(40:25):
and I can't tell you how manytimes probably 25, 35 cases when
I was litigating where, like I,just if I could just get a hold
of the attorney and not get,you know, a 700 word email back
from my voicemail, I could havesettled.
You know, we could have figuredit out, but it's, it's.
(40:47):
Family law is not set up forthat.
So, like, the lawyer can't doanything about it, sometimes
each hearing is five months awayfrom the next and then half the
hearings get pushed off the daybefore.
So you're just kind of likefeeling stuck, feeling anxious,
and when you go pick up yourkids from school at three
(41:07):
o'clock that doesn't go away.
And guess what, when you'reseeing your kids, you know, on
July 4th, when you've alwaystaken them to the mountains, and
now you don't have July 4ththis year, like now you're sad
and stuck and there's nothingyou can do about it.
And guess what?
Jill, if you own a business,you can't sell the business, you
(41:28):
can't take on, you know, debt.
That's new.
You can't operate your businessin a different way than you
were, your business in adifferent way than you were.
You can't spend new money youcan't take.
You know everything iscontrolled financially in a way
where you're feeling stuck andlike you know, if I'm going
through divorce, my goal is tofeel empowered and living my
(41:50):
best life and dating, or youknow, all these things are going
to be pushed, you know, offinto the future.
So like, just, it's veryemotionally strained when you're
going and stuck in a divorceprocess and it's that the two
reasons I don't do that work.
One is I don't want to dealwith as many attorneys in my
(42:12):
life and two is I felt that formy clients and I didn't like,
like I never told people, likeat my kids school, what I did,
not because I was ashamed of it,it's just I didn't advertise.
Oh yeah, if you need, if youneed to go to court to sue your
spouse, let me know.
Like I just, but now like Ifeel empowered to do what I do
(42:35):
because I do feel like I helpsolve problems and the court
system for family law is justnot set up to solve problems
very easily.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
Thank you.
Thank you, scott.
That's really helpful forpeople to hear because you want
to avoid court at all costs andyou were there, you did it for
years and it's great to hear youknow from your perspective and
I really appreciate that.
Speaker 2 (43:02):
And again, I'm not judging.
I know that there's two sides,none of it's a perfect solution
and I have no judgment.
If you're in that situation, Idon't mean to judge you or to
say that you're doing the wrongthing, because I understand that
that life happens.
Speaker 1 (43:20):
Yeah, and sometimes you don't have a choice but it
should be a last resort for sure?
I believe so.
Yeah, well, thank you so somuch.
I really appreciate your timeand thank you everybody for
coming.
We will have all of yourinformation in the notes and
Scott Levin, thank you.
Speaker 2 (43:37):
Thank you so much.
Welcome everybody.
I am excited to be here withyou.
We are talking about a holisticapproach to divorce, an
overview to integrating legal,financial and emotional
strategies.
Scott Levin, who is a formerlitigator.
(00:27):
He's an attorney, a mediatorand calls himself a chief
peacekeeper, which is exactlywhat we want when we're going
through divorce.
Scott, can you introduceyourself a little more?
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Yeah, hi everyone.
I'm Scott Levin.
I'm an attorney in California.
I'm a CDFA certified divorcefinancial analyst.
I have a finance background.
I was litigating for many years.
I stopped in 2014 when mysecond kid was born three boys
and I just choose to help peoplethrough mediation so that I'm a
(01:01):
big believer that gettingthrough the legal process is the
key to health.
Getting stuck in the divorceprocess only leads to more
expensive divorces, more costlyemotional harm and damage to
children.
Now, mediation is not theanswer to everybody.
(01:21):
Litigation is not the answer toeverybody, so I'm not assigning
if you're in a litigated caseor a contested case and that
sometimes can't be avoided,right.
But generally speaking, you myclients.
Over the last 20 years I'veseen they feel better about
themselves and their family andtheir finances after they get
(01:45):
the legal process done, and so Ihelp people navigate that, you
know, in a quicker way.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
Yes, absolutely, and that's all we're about.
I think you and I are alignedwith getting people through
their divorce quicker and morepeacefully for the good of
everybody, and so that's whatthis workshop is about.
And so, in terms of you knowthe physical, you know a
(02:16):
holistic process, a holisticdivorce process.
It's taking into account thephysical, emotional and mental
impact of the process.
And so you know, when you'rethinking about what a divorce
attorney typically tells theirclients, they're trying to get
their clients to get the bestdeal for them financially and
(02:39):
the parenting situation thatthey want, and if they don't
take into account the emotional,mental, health and physical
parts of this and the effect ofthis, they could be advising
their client to do somethingthat's not in the best interest
of the client.
(02:59):
And you know in the past,attorneys are not supposed to
take all of those things intoaccount.
They're supposed to advocatefor their client and get them,
you know quote the best dealRight.
Isn't that typically what youknow the past 40 years that
attorneys do?
Speaker 2 (03:20):
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean, in doing that work,what attorneys essentially do is
position their client againstthe other side, and so it's a
battle for a winner and a loser,and that's how they approach it
.
And the reality, unfortunately,is that when you are forced to
(03:43):
go to navigate a path where oneof you will win and one of you
lose, you actually both loseBecause, instead of splitting
95% of your assets and expending5% of them on the divorce
system, you'll divide 60% ofyour assets, or 65%, and the
divorce system will cut thatother third.
(04:05):
But again, there's not a rightor wrong way to navigate this
process, and people have tochoose what's best for them.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Right, right, but spending money on attorneys as
opposed to having it yourself isprobably not what's best for
them.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Family law attorneys are also Jill.
One thing I'll just say aboutfamily law attorneys and I am
one, so I get to say this and alot of my colleagues don't like
when I say this because I do dothese appearances.
But you know family lawattorneys go to the most,
they're the go to the highest.
The most tier three law schoolgraduates are in family law.
(04:43):
The most tier three law schoolgraduates are in family law.
The highest bar pass fail ratesfamily law attorneys.
So when you're in California orany state you pass the bar
after you graduate law school tobecome a lawyer.
The highest fail rates arepeople that end up in family law
.
So it's the lowest kind of rungequality of human essentially
(05:04):
right.
Like the worst educated, worstkind of positioned.
And that's kind of humanessentially right.
Like they're the worst educated, worst kind of positioned.
And that's kind of family lawright.
Because you deal with so muchemotion that you know a lot of
attorneys in family law wouldrather do business deals if they
could.
But this is what you know theirlot in life becomes so there's
very few people that like setforth out and say I can't wait
to be a family law attorney.
They kind of just end up here.
(05:25):
And so what does that mean foryou?
Well, it means that if you hirea family law attorney, they'll
be very careful.
But the real problem is yourspouse hires a family law
attorney and you have no controlover who that person is, and it
only takes one money motivatedme first attorney to dissolve a
process into a catastrophe.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Right and I want to.
You're obviously right withyour research and your facts,
but I want to say that there aresome good family law attorneys
out there who do this becauseit's a passion for them and do
really care about their clients,and I know them, you know like
you're one of them, you know, soyou know I don't want to scare
(06:09):
everybody that, like all oftheir family.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
You just can't control both sides.
It only takes one attorney tomake it really hard to navigate
divorce.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
Right, and if there are half of the family attorneys
out there who are like whatyou're describing, you have to
be really careful when you hireone right, you have to.
You have to make sure that youdon't get one of those family
law attorneys.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
I mean it.
Also when I refer cases.
A lot of my referrals will callme back and they'll say I
called you know, your friend,and I hired them.
But now, you know, now I'mworking with one of their
colleagues in their firm right.
So, like the, you know, now I'mworking with one of their
colleagues in their firm right.
So, like the, you know, familylaw attorneys are very busy
people and so they our practicesare growing, not shrinking.
(06:50):
And so even if you're gettingreferred to somebody like when I
refer someone, I'm referring aspecific attorney, not the firm
itself.
And so you just have to makesure, when you're getting
referred to someone, that youknow it's that person that's
going to be actually doing thework, because, you know, these
days their time is so much indemand.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
Right, Exactly Now.
How do we okay, how do we avoidusing the family attorney for
purposes of making the divorcemore complex, making it more
high conflict?
How do we use the family lawattorneys in a productive way,
(07:30):
where you're doing it andthinking about the emotional and
mental impact?
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Yeah.
So you set up your divorceprocess and again, there's not a
right or wrong way.
So if you have to go to courtwith the attorney, i's not.
I'm not judging you how I woulddo it.
I'm married, but if I weregetting divorced, this is how I
would do it.
I would make it very clear thatI'm hiring them as a consulting
attorney only and I will notretain them if I litigate the
case later.
So they will not be my attorneyif I litigate.
(07:59):
So they are not incentivized toblow up the process.
So I'm going to mediate, myspouse and I are going to hire a
mediator together and then I'mgoing to have a consulting
attorney and then a consultingfinancial expert on the side.
So I'm going to form my ownteam and then a coach as well.
So, like, I want to form my ownsupport staff, not necessarily
(08:23):
neutral support staff, butpeople that are like looking at
the financial disclosures,advising me on like what a good
proposal would be explaining tome.
This is why you're asking forthis, because this is the why.
Because when you negotiatedivorce settlements, the other
side wants to know why.
I just was in a mediation rightbefore this where the spouse
(08:44):
said I'm willing to co-own thehome or sell it, but I will not
let you own the home.
And I said is this an emotionalthing?
Why wouldn't you let yourspouse own the home if that's
the only way they could own?
That's just not.
I'm not going to let thathappen.
And so that was, you know, hadmore to do with mental than than
(09:04):
financial.
But there was no why behindthat.
And the other side can'tnegotiate that way.
They get that's when you createconflict Right.
So why am I asking for this?
Why is this better and reallyunderstanding?
But you're, but you're.
But you're your own quarterback, you're in control, you're,
you're putting the pieces placeand you're getting all that
(09:26):
advice and expertise at afraction of the cost, because
they're only billing you whenyou call them for a meeting or
you ask them questions.
So you have a financial expert,a lawyer and a mental expert.
All that will probably costless than $10,000.
And then you're using a mediatorwith your spouse and you're not
going into the mediation withthose people.
(09:47):
Ideally, you'll just go withyou and your spouse.
So you let all those folks knowI'm not using any of you if
we're not successful here.
So they are not motivated inany way to want to blow that
process up for you.
So what does that accomplish?
It accomplishes basicallyunderstanding what the
(10:09):
settlement is that you're aimingfor and why, and you're much
more likely to achieve it.
You're getting all theexpertise and advice, you're
making sure that you understandeverything, but you're still
using the mediation process toattack the settlement directly.
So, like an average mediationshould take you know, I mean,
(10:30):
obviously it differs for peoplecould you know one, two, three
months?
I mean it's not like a ninemonth thing Usually?
You know it's rare.
So you're still getting throughthe process using mediation and
you're being collaborative, butyou're still weaponizing all
the information, and that's howI would set up my process.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
So I think, behind all of the things that you're
saying, is that you're takinginto account what is best
physically, emotionally andmentally for you, For you yeah.
And so you're not just sayingwell, legally I am entitled to
(11:15):
50% of the assets and alimony ofthis amount or child support of
this amount.
What you're saying is, I needto know what's right for me, and
because you know, when yourattorney tells you let's say you
have two parties um, party A'sattorney says you're entitled to
(11:38):
, you know $500,000.
I'm just throwing out something.
And parties B tells them well,you're entitled to, you know
$800,000.
And that's not 50-50, right?
So each of the attorneys aretelling their parties different
things and we don't know howthey're basing that amount.
(12:02):
You know, we don't know wherethat's coming from.
But that's not taking intoconsideration any of the
emotional pieces.
And so you know, how would youtake into consideration those
emotional pieces If each of theparties are coming to you saying
they're entitled to differentthings?
(12:22):
as a mediator or well as youknow, take a holistic look at
the divorce.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Here's how I call BS on attorneys.
So I also serve as a consultingattorney and I just had that
mediation I told you about.
So we had four meetings andthis was our fifth and this was
the one where we're comingtogether to settle.
Then one of the spouses got theadvice of a consulting attorney
and I could picture exactlywhat happened, because she came
(12:51):
armed with just a wholedifferent perspective and
attitude and claims of right andwrong.
But I could picture whathappened when she met with this
attorney.
The attorney was like this iswhat the loss, this is what you
owe, this is nothing more than55, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah
, blah.
This is what's right.
(13:12):
How you prevent that fromhappening to you is putting the
financial expert and the lawyerin the same room at the same
time.
Okay, so when I'm a consultingattorney, if I have a colleague
in the room, then I'm going totemper down my BS meter, right
Because?
Or if I'm in the same room as afinancial expert and they're
saying stuff that's not true, Ihave to call that out.
(13:34):
So you're getting the real deal.
Essentially, you're getting alegitimate advice and you're not
just being fired up with.
Like you know, it was a sevenyear marriage I get.
I get spouse support for life.
Well, no, that's never going tohappen.
Sorry, not going to happen,period.
But like all that kind ofbluster goes out the window.
(13:55):
If you put them in the sameroom you'll get more genuine
perspective because they'llthey'll have to limit their,
their kind of, and then againyou let them know you're not
going to hire them if you're not.
So what happened after thismeeting I was just talking to
you about?
I spoke to each of them verybriefly, individually.
We talked about it at the endand I said you know, I don't
(14:18):
think I'm going to be able tosolve this for you guys.
If this is what you're askingfor, it's just, it's too much.
The settlement would be likethis and I have to advise your
husband to get his ownconsulting attorney to make sure
that he's informed, becausewhat you're asking for is on, is
not, is over the line, in myopinion.
And she said well, that's whatthe attorney told me.
The attorney told me that thatshe would be seeing me next week
(14:41):
because she was about to blowup my mediation.
What type of human being woulddo that to it?
We've had a settlement.
It was a good settlement.
It was fair for everybody and,guess what?
It also protected their kids,which was both of their
priorities when they came andsaw me initially, and that all
went out the window.
But like, why would you blow upthe mediation?
(15:03):
Well, because this personhadn't been disincentivized from
doing that.
Because this person hadn't beendisincentivized from doing that
, because they could get $800for a couple hours of consulting
, or they could make $60,000over the course of the next year
and a half representing thisperson in court.
Exactly, and I'm not saying allattorneys are like that.
They're not.
Like Jill said, there arereally good attorneys, but there
(15:26):
are attorneys that have billsto pay too.
Speaker 1 (15:28):
Right, right, and they're not incentivized to
lower that.
So you bring up an excellentpoint.
I want to go back to what yousaid about having two people in
the room.
So I've been in the room with afinancial expert who was
working with my client and shewanted the two of us together in
the meeting and we startedtalking about things and I kept
(15:51):
asking questions and thefinancial expert said, well, I
don't have that information yet.
Well, I haven't done that yet.
Well, I'll get that to you.
And, like, my client didn'tunderstand which questions to
ask her until I mean, we we didgo over some things, but I
thought that her financialexpert had already gone through
(16:11):
all of this.
And so, you know, we were ableto get so much accomplished in
that one meeting with the threeof us because I was able to talk
directly to the financialperson and the financial person
had to answer to someone who'sasking her.
You know, knows what to ask andknows what to follow up with.
And so it is a good ideaoccasionally I don't think all
(16:34):
the time, but once in a while tomeet with either the attorney
and the financial person, theattorney and the divorce coach,
the financial person and thedivorce coach.
So like those kinds of meetingscan be really helpful because
you're going to get differentperspectives and they are going
to present themselvesdifferently when there's another
professional in the room, youknow.
(16:55):
So hopefully we wouldn't,hopefully most people wouldn't
do that just temper it down.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
it's really easy to say like it's like when you look
at a prenup agreement and thenlike you just redline it, like
as you're reading it and pilotlike all the stuff that you
think is bad about it, but likeif I was sharing that with the
other attorney.
I probably would like you knowI wouldn't just share my like
thoughts in real time these arelike my ideas to talk about the
client with but like I wouldcertainly like not have the same
(17:23):
bravado or, you know, like thesame stream of conscious kind of
thought if I was interactingwith someone that, like you know
, knew what they were doing too.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
Right, and I have another example of everything
that you're talking about.
That just happened.
So an attorney referred me acase and I was actually doing
some counseling for this person.
And so she came to me one timeand was like I am absolutely
overwhelmed anxious, I can'tsleep, I am out of control, I
(17:59):
don't know if I can keep goinglike this.
And I said well, I think youhave to settle, because they
were going through motions andcourt and it was getting really
bad.
And I said I don't think you,emotionally, it's worth it for
you to keep going this way.
And so she went back to herattorney that afternoon and said
(18:21):
I'd like to settle my case.
And her attorney said to herwho's a great attorney, by the
way, I really like this attorney.
He said to her you can't settle.
We're on like we're on thetrial track, we are not settling
.
And he yelled at her.
He yelled at her we cannotsettle.
She I give her so much credit.
(18:43):
She said to him Jill told mefor my mental health I need to
settle and I'm settling.
And he stopped and he said helike calmed himself down and
then he apologized to her and hesaid I'm really sorry, I
shouldn't have said that If youwant to settle, we will settle,
and so, and they ended up.
(19:05):
This is a crazy story.
They ended up agreeing, theysettled and then they got back
together.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
So now they're together the couple.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
That's a, that's a side note, but but you know, it
just gives you an example of howyou have to take control of the
process, because the onlyperson who is going to
understand the emotional toll isyou and you have to express
that to your divorce coach, toyour therapist, you know, to
(19:34):
your attorney, and tell themwhat, emotionally and mentally,
is okay for you and is not okayfor you.
Speaker 2 (19:42):
I mean as a mediator, I get I get a lot of criticism
from from my friends that arelawyers.
Most of my clients take theagreements that we reach to a
consulting attorney to get itreviewed and like, for example,
you know I'm a creative problemsolver, so a lot of my clients
especially since the rates are,you know, last couple of years,
(20:04):
they're way more people areco-owning like real estate now
than they used to.
And I hear all the time likewell, I've never.
You know my lawyer said thisisn't even possible.
I can't stay on the loan for ahouse you know that I don't live
in, or something like you knowit's just like well, no,
anything is possible, it's whatyou guys want.
(20:26):
Possible, it's what you guyswant.
And you guys said that youwanted your kids, you know, for
the next three or four years tolive in this house and so you
guys agreed to co-own it.
So this agreement accomplishesthat.
But, like I often hear back frommy clients that have critiques
of the creative solutions thatwe put in place because they're
(20:46):
not like standard solutions, youknow they would rather sell
everything, divide everything,have no joint debt and call it a
day.
Is that's what's best for theclient?
I don't know, but so I'm alwaysin the firing line from you
know, being second guest andthings like that, and that's why
, again, like I always suggest,like hey, I don't, I know what I
(21:12):
can do.
I know this is legal, we can doit this way, but you know you
guys need to feel confident inthe decision.
So why don't you surroundyourself with your own mini team
and make sure that you knowthis is like a well thought out
plan for you, because one thingI, a mediator you know the
(21:35):
mediation process is not aboutis about going through your
credit card statements andmaking sure you can afford.
You know your lifestyle or yourliving agreements.
You know the things that weagree on.
Executing on those and livingafterwards is something that a
mediator really doesn't do.
We need you to make surebecause you're in control.
When you're mediating andnavigating a divorce process in
a more collaborative way, you'retaking more ownership over your
(21:58):
situation.
So you need to make sure thatyou can afford to live and
afford to make your payments and, you know, make sure that you
can execute on the things you'reagreeing on.
And that's where that teamcomes back into play.
The good part of that is, thatyou're not paying a lawyer $585
(22:19):
an hour to look through yourcredit card statements when you
could do it yourself.
But again, it's not.
Not everybody wants to be ableto do that.
Divorce is a very challengingmentally and emotional time, and
some people just can't.
You know it's very hard forthem to have that sort of level
of concentration, and so that'swhy there's different processes
for different people.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
Well, I mean, and you don't have to pay your attorney
to look through your creditcard statements, you can pay
your financial advisor.
That's going to be a lot lessand a better professional to do
that.
Speaker 2 (22:49):
But when you litigate a case, they will look through
it because they're going to billhours.
Speaker 1 (22:53):
Yeah, yeah, well, yeah, litigation is, yeah, a
whole different story.
But so the other pieces whichwe didn't touch on is the
children, right, and just whatis best for the children.
And a hundred percent, if youare emotionally, physically,
(23:16):
mentally not doing well, ifthere's something that isn't
good for you, it's not good foryour children.
And the one thing that I say alot of people do worry about is
having children move out of themarital home.
And so what I always tellpeople is that if you can't
afford to stay in the matter ofmarital home, it's not going to
be good for your children tostay in a situation where you're
, you know, anxious about money.
(23:36):
So it's better to move out andthey will adjust.
Kids are very resilient.
So, like there's, there's a lotof things you have to think
about, and that's why someonelike you know me as a divorce
coach can help you think thosethrough, think all of those
things through, and someone likeyou as a mediator who can help
people understand that they haveto consider the emotional piece
(24:00):
of this.
If one person is getting toomuch and one too little, that's
not going to be good for thechildren, for them, for anybody.
Speaker 2 (24:08):
Yeah, I totally agree , the home is always like you
know that's not going to be goodfor the children, for them, for
anybody.
Yeah, I totally agree, the homeis always, like you know, that
kind of the start and the finishof the process.
But yeah, I'm always wary whenone person's giving it all up
for the home Makes me nervous.
You know the home is notsomething you can get the money
out of that easily.
Know the home is not somethingyou can get the money out of
(24:31):
that easily.
Um, uh, but um.
Another example of kind of ofwhat a holistic approach is, is
like when you're you know, forexample, when someone is being
bought out of a home.
So one person let's say my wifeand I are getting divorced,
let's say she, she wants the,she's going to own the home.
So I give her ownership of thehome in this settlement
agreement.
But I agree, for you know, fornext five years I don't want my
(24:51):
equity out of it because I knowshe can't refi and there's not a
pot of money where we don'thave $800,000 laying around to
give me.
But I'm also simultaneouslysaying you keep the house.
So you know, historically homesgo up.
Maybe they won't this time, butover the next five years it's
(25:12):
going to be worth more than itis now, and I'm not asking for
any of that.
This is a common sort ofsituation.
So when someone takes thisagreement to the lawyer and the
lawyer goes but all this otherstuff over here, you didn't get
that, you didn't get.
You know he's taking the fourthousand dollar couch and the
six thousand dollar, you know,golden boss and I, and then you
(25:33):
come back and you say all this,this is all supposed to be mine
too.
We're supposed to split all thisand I go.
Well, what about my eighthundred thousand?
That I'm not gonna see for fiveyears right.
So it's like a holistic, likewhat's best holistically, and
that's's where just someone likeJill really comes into play to
help you kind of maintain that,like even head in this and
considering everything whenyou're when you're negotiating.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
Right, I mean everything that you give up.
You know you should be able toget something that that is good
for you.
It doesn't have to be equal invalue, but it has to be
something that that is fair, youknow, to you.
Yeah, yeah, I want to open itup to questions.
(26:16):
If you could put into the chatpeople who are here any
questions related to you knowwhat is a holistic approach or
what your specific circumstancesare, we will answer them.
And because I think havingpeople's you know, having
examples of this, is really agreat way to kind of show what a
(26:39):
holistic approach to this, todivorce, is, because Erica will
you can do this with Erica oneday, cause she really is
tremendous.
Oh, I know she's, she's got agood.
She does like a strategysession, I think, with people as
a as a consulting attorney, andit sounds like a really good
option.
I think with people as aconsulting attorney and it
sounds like a really good option.
(27:01):
But, yeah, not a lot ofattorneys do that like a
one-time strategy session tokind of look over your whole
divorce and part of it.
So put into the chat everybodywho's here any questions related
to this.
And what you have to think aboutwhen you're thinking about
doing a whole, you know, thinkabout it holistically is what is
(27:23):
most important to you, you know, is it, you know, the house?
Is it having a certain schedulewith the kids, because you can
trade off.
I did that in my divorce, likemy.
I got less financially in orderto get the schedule I wanted
with my children, which to mewas worth it.
(27:44):
You know it's not worth it tosome other people, you know, um,
but you have to decide what ismost important to you, um, and
what's most important to yourchildren and your family as a
whole.
So we're not.
Are we getting anybody putting?
I don't think we are, but oh,here we go.
Each party provides their ownteam CDFA coach and consulting
(28:10):
lawyer, but the mediator isneutral.
Speaker 2 (28:14):
Okay, I'm sorry.
Yes, you hired you both.
Both spouses hired the samemediator is neutral.
Okay, I'm sorry.
Yes, you, you, you both, bothspouses hire the same mediator
together.
Speaker 1 (28:22):
So so it depends.
I know I have a client,somebody on the on here, who is
doing a collaborative, a teamwhich I guess they're sharing,
the financial professional whichyou can't do, but not not.
If you're not doing acollaborative team, you would
have a lot of clients where Ibring in a collaborative,
(28:43):
neutral, uh.
Speaker 2 (28:44):
So I'm the mediator and I say, hey, let's get this
asset, like, let's get this, uh,valued or let's get someone's
opinion on this issue.
And they do it as a neutral.
So they're they're notrepresenting, they're not like
looking after one person, theother.
I was just saying that how Iwould set up my approaching
mediation if it were me.
I'm not against having aneutral financial person that
(29:09):
like works for both of us.
But I wanna know what would bea good settlement for me and why
, and even more so, whether it'slike a coach or the financial
neutral, having someone in theroom with the attorney as
they're kind of giving me theirsettlement, you know kind of
process and what they think Ishould, what that looks like for
(29:30):
me.
That that that's reallyimportant to remember to temper
down kind of the bluster, tohave that other person there to
call them out, because I mean,you, you don't know.
You know if they're, if they'rethey might be making like a
legally valid argument forsomething, but they they're not.
Maybe that's pushing you in adirection that's not as good for
(29:52):
you as as it as it could be.
So that's why having sooftentimes that's either a coach
or it's an.
It's the as good for you as itcould be.
So that's why having sooftentimes that's either a coach
or it's the financial person.
If your situation is more of alike financially complex but I
often have in my mediations afinancial neutral it just
depends on you know.
If you want someone, like froma financial perspective, to say,
(30:14):
hey, you should be asking forthe Roth IRA, not the
traditional IRA, because theRoth has better, you know, it's
tax free growth.
Like a financial neutral won'tgive you that because, right,
because they're neutral, theywork for both sides.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
Right, exactly, I think it's.
This gets a little complicatedbecause it really depends on the
situation.
Right, this gets a littlecomplicated because it really
depends on the situation.
If you have a very amicabledivorce and I've seen it where
each side is being fairfinancially, you can use a
financial neutral that workswith both sides.
But if you don't have thatsituation which is more often
(30:51):
the case you probably want yourown financial person to double
check and make sure that they'reon your side and they're
protecting you.
Right?
Speaker 2 (31:00):
And also just a financial person can like
evaluate your financial.
I mean we're not.
I know someone that like, ifit's not a super complicated
case, like in 90 minutes she'lltype up you know everything and
I mean it's not like a $10,000investment, you know it's.
I mean it's not like a $10,000investment, you know it's.
It can be pretty affordable.
(31:20):
And if you do have, if youdon't have like super complex
financials and you're amicableI'm a financial neutral.
I mean I'm a financial experttoo.
So a lot of my clients we justwe keep that in house and just
do it together.
But when there's a question ora valuation issue, you know I
want that other person to comein, so that's, that's when we
bring them yeah, I yeah.
Speaker 1 (31:41):
That's another question.
Is it a complicated financialsituation?
Is that there are businessinvolved?
Are they hiding money?
You know so there's a lot ofquestions there.
Yeah, if there's like um,there's some.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
There's things called like is there certain financial
instruments, like restrictedstock units, which are like
stock awards, essentially, thatyou get when you work for a
public company, like there's awhole report that has to be
produced for the valuation ofthose and they kind of they
influence child and spousalsupport as well as well, and so,
(32:18):
as the I don't want someone toask me a question about a report
that I wrote when I'm themediator, because I don't want
them to think like does Scottnot know what he's doing, so I
bring someone else in and thenthey get to ask, they get to
question that person and theyproduce that report and then I'm
able to just attach that report.
So I'm not like justifying it,the math or anything.
Speaker 1 (32:33):
Right, Right.
And I think people when theyhear about all these financial,
all these professionals, theythink that's going to be so much
more than just working with anattorney Right.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
Or less.
Yeah, remember, they don'tteach math in law school, so
your attorney is going to have afinancial expert of their own.
Speaker 1 (32:51):
Right, right, exactly .
I mean people.
People think that their theirattorney is going to know what
to tell them financially, andthey really don't.
They only know the law.
It's rare that, like for you,you're a lawyer and you have a
financial background.
That's rare.
Speaker 2 (33:10):
I think it is rare.
Yeah, finances and lawyers.
Lawyers are more, like you know, english and history.
No, not so much on the mathside.
Speaker 1 (33:19):
Right, exactly Any other questions that people have
, because that was a really goodquestion.
You know what?
What kind of a team do you form?
And I just want to bring up thewhole collaborative thing.
So if you have a collaborativeteam where there's a very
specific way that they work,that is not always the best
(33:43):
thing for everybody, becauseI've seen time and time again
that they do things in a certainway, like they bring the
attorneys into the mediation youknow and that's the way they do
it and that's not necessarilywhat you need.
They, you know, will make youmeet with you know a family
therapist, and you may need that.
(34:06):
You may not need that, needthat.
You know what I mean.
So, like they have a certainway of doing it.
The only good thing aboutcollaborative is that they agree
that they're not going to go.
They're not going to representyou if you go to court, so they
have that with collaborative,the key to a successful
collaborative divorce, or anytime.
Speaker 2 (34:24):
So I'm not the reason I stopped litigating this.
I want to deal with lessattorneys, not more.
I mean, like, I like doing thiswork and I like helping people,
but I don't want to really dealwith the as much much as the
attorneys.
I was literally being driveninsane.
So that's why I do this worknow, but for the last decade.
But it when attorneys come intomy mediations, which I'm not
(34:46):
like looking to do in mediationone, I will allow it.
If we're going to fail, like Idon't want to like hey, if these
guys are going to go to court,like, then let's bring your
attorneys in, but I don't wantthe attorneys in two separate
rooms and attorneys never willsay in the same room, you want
to know why.
They want to bull S and blusterbehind closed doors and then
(35:12):
have the mediator run to theother room and try to temper
what they said to the other side.
Who's going to bluster?
You got to make the twoattorneys hear it directly and
they'll call each other out ontheir BS and they'll say well,
you know, john, that's not true.
It's not how it works inreality.
So again, that's the tempering,the whole way I would set up my
(35:33):
divorce.
It's the same thing as how Inow.
It's hard for me to makeattorneys stay in the same room
A lot.
Oftentimes we'll just say Iabsolutely refuse, but I know
why they have to hear each other.
That's the only way thatthey're gonna get you know
that's how you set up asettlement, because you get the
real deal.
You know the real deal.
Thoughts there.
Speaker 1 (35:53):
Will you work with people without their attorneys
in separate rooms?
Speaker 2 (35:57):
Yeah, I mean I, we, we always start together.
But again, I reserve the right,you know, to suggest going into
separate rooms.
I'd say 80, 85% of the time myclients and I are in in the same
virtual or in-person roombecause I don't want them to
have questions about myimpartiality.
(36:18):
And once a mediator startsgoing between rooms they
naturally tend to kind of theother side, like.
Each side feels like they're ina way buddying up just because
it's a little bit morefreewheeling, because there's
not the other person there.
But the way that a mediation isoften defeated is when one
person does think that themediators on the other's team
(36:42):
and so like what will oftenhappen in a mediation when you
start going back and forth is orit can happen, is like one side
says, well, scott said thiswhen we were in separate rooms
and I didn't say that.
Scott said this when we were inseparate rooms and I didn't say
that.
But they took it in a way andit makes it look like you know,
something was said that wasinappropriate and you know that
(37:05):
makes you feel like is Scott onmy spouse's team or not?
And that's, that's the end ofthe mediation pretty much
beginning of the year.
Speaker 1 (37:14):
We have a good question here.
Can a mediator be useful whenone side refuses to hire an
attorney, or is this thescenario better for courts?
Speaker 2 (37:24):
And what do you think that that means, Jill?
I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
So I think if one person is not using an attorney,
you should always avoid court,you know, regardless of if
somebody's using an attorney.
So I think mediation is alwaysgoing to be the better option.
If both parties are willing todo it, at least try the
mediation.
Speaker 2 (37:48):
Half of my clients don't have attorneys, or a
little bit over half, I wouldsay.
A lot of times I don't know ifthey do or don't, I only can
tell.
Like today's mediation, I couldtell that you know the whole,
everything about my clientchanged and the language changed
.
Everything was so much moreformal, you know, formal, so I
could just tell right away.
(38:08):
But a lot of times I never knowand I don't want to know.
I mean, it's not that I don'twant to know, but it just
doesn't come up.
But you know, a lot of peoplecan navigate mediation just
hiring or a divorce, just hiringthe same mediator together and
kind of doing so that when I'mmaking proposals or making
agreements I truly feel like I'min the know and I understand
what's happening.
You know, I might spend twentyfive hundred bucks or whatever
(38:44):
on the, on the, on the team,before the mediation, just to to
feel that comfort and to youknow I think it's helpful.
Speaker 1 (38:52):
Yeah, no, absolutely.
We only have a couple ofminutes left, but can you give
us examples from when you werelitigating divorces on things
that were not taking intoconsideration the emotional and
mental impact?
Speaker 2 (39:22):
I mean you know when you're in litigation.
You know, I don't know ifanyone has ever like, if anyone
you know owns a business that'sbeen sued by an employee for
something, or just any time thatyou're in litigation, but I
mean, it is very formal,everything is formal and
everything is scary and youdon't understand what's
happening because the process isset up for you to not be in
(39:43):
touch with your attorney.
They have 35 versions of youthat they're helping or whatever
they're doing.
They have a lot of cases, theyhave very little time, they're
being drugged, they're beingdragged into court for emergency
hearings.
You know, once or twice a weekin the 8 am.
You can't really control yourschedule.
(40:04):
As an attorney that'slitigating family law disputes.
It's very hard to.
So you know you're going to becalling your attorney and you're
not going to be getting a holdof them.
And it's not that they're a badperson or that they're being
unprofessional, it's just thereality.
So you'll feel like lost,you'll feel like you're stuck
(40:25):
and I can't tell you how manytimes probably 25, 35 cases when
I was litigating where, like I,just if I could just get a hold
of the attorney and not get,you know, a 700 word email back
from my voicemail, I could havesettled.
You know, we could have figuredit out, but it's, it's.
(40:47):
Family law is not set up forthat.
So, like, the lawyer can't doanything about it, sometimes
each hearing is five months awayfrom the next and then half the
hearings get pushed off the daybefore.
So you're just kind of likefeeling stuck, feeling anxious,
and when you go pick up yourkids from school at three
(41:07):
o'clock that doesn't go away.
And guess what, when you'reseeing your kids, you know, on
July 4th, when you've alwaystaken them to the mountains, and
now you don't have July 4ththis year, like now you're sad
and stuck and there's nothingyou can do about it.
And guess what?
Jill, if you own a business,you can't sell the business, you
(41:28):
can't take on, you know, debt.
That's new.
You can't operate your businessin a different way than you
were, your business in adifferent way than you were.
You can't spend new money youcan't take.
You know everything iscontrolled financially in a way
where you're feeling stuck andlike you know, if I'm going
through divorce, my goal is tofeel empowered and living my
(41:50):
best life and dating, or youknow, all these things are going
to be pushed, you know, offinto the future.
So like, just, it's veryemotionally strained when you're
going and stuck in a divorceprocess and it's that the two
reasons I don't do that work.
One is I don't want to dealwith as many attorneys in my
(42:12):
life and two is I felt that formy clients and I didn't like,
like I never told people, likeat my kids school, what I did,
not because I was ashamed of it,it's just I didn't advertise.
Oh yeah, if you need, if youneed to go to court to sue your
spouse, let me know.
Like I just, but now like Ifeel empowered to do what I do
(42:35):
because I do feel like I helpsolve problems and the court
system for family law is justnot set up to solve problems
very easily.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
Thank you.
Thank you, scott.
That's really helpful forpeople to hear because you want
to avoid court at all costs andyou were there, you did it for
years and it's great to hear youknow from your perspective and
I really appreciate that.
Speaker 2 (43:02):
And again, I'm not judging.
I know that there's two sides,none of it's a perfect solution
and I have no judgment.
If you're in that situation, Idon't mean to judge you or to
say that you're doing the wrongthing, because I understand that
that life happens.
Speaker 1 (43:20):
Yeah, and sometimes you don't have a choice but it
should be a last resort for sure?
I believe so.
Yeah, well, thank you so somuch.
I really appreciate your timeand thank you everybody for
coming.
We will have all of yourinformation in the notes and
Scott Levin, thank you.
Speaker 2 (43:37):
Thank you so much.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.