July 12, 2024 • 44 mins
Laura Rosefield
Laura says: "I always try to make sure that my clients can see the glimmer of promise at what the future holds. They know I will be by their side to help them put the building blocks in place to get there and at any time after the legal process is over. I will make sure that they have access to any specialist help they need. From my own experience, clients can see that there is light at the end of the darkness.”
Member of Resolution - an organisation of professionals who believe in a constructive, non-confrontational approach to family law matters.
Member of the Resolution Standards Committee and Working Together Group.
Member of the Family Ambassadors Board of Support Through Court - a charity which provides assistance to people going through the family and civil courts without representation.
Rosefield Divorce Consultancy is a member of Kids in the Middle – a charity comprised of family lawyers and mediators which aims to provide a voice for children when families split and an on-line resource for children to receive advice and support.
https://www.rosefielddivorceconsultancy.com
Tamsin Caine
Tamsin is a Chartered Financial Planner with over 20 years experience. She works with couples and individuals who are at the end of a relationship and want agree how to divide their assets FAIRLY without a fight.
You can contact Tamsin at tamsin@smartdivorce.co.uk or arrange a free initial meeting using https://bit.ly/SmDiv15min. She is also part of the team running Facebook group Separation, Divorce and Dissolution UK
Tamsin Caine MSc., FPFS
Chartered Financial Planner
Smart Divorce Ltd
https://smartdivorce.co.uk
P.S. I am the co-author of “My Divorce Handbook – It’s What You Do Next That Counts”, written by divorce specialists and lawyers writing about their area of expertise to help walk you through the divorce process. You can buy it here https://yourdivorcehandbook.co.uk/buy-the-book/
To learn more about our podcast sponsor Ampla Finance – access their product guide here: https://bit.ly/3Ieqmuc
Or complete enquiry form https://bit.ly/3W4J7pz and one of the team will be in touch.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Tamsin Caine (00:06):
Hello and welcome to the Smart Divorce Podcast.
This is series nine and in thisseries, we're going to explore
what makes up the working weekof various different
professionals who work in thedivorce world.
You'll start to understand whatthey do, both during the time
that you see them, how theyprepare for meetings, and what
(00:31):
work goes into the work of adivorce professional outside of
the time that you spend withthem.
I'm really looking forward tosome amazing clients in this
series.
We talked to a barrister,family solicitor, financial
planner, divorce coach andreally hoping that you're going
to enjoy it and get a lot fromit as well.
(00:57):
Hello and welcome to the SmartDivorce Podcast.
I am delighted to be joinedtoday by Laura Rosefield, who I
have been trying to get on thispodcast for a very long time,
but she's an insanely busy woman.
She's also my co-chair on theWorking Together Committee at
Resolution, so this should be abrilliant chat.
(01:19):
Now I'm going to let herintroduce herself properly in
terms of the work that she does.
So welcome, Laura, lovely tohave you along.
Thank you, Tamsin.
Laura Rosefield (01:27):
Thank you, Tamsin, and so sorry it's taken
so long.
Tamsin Caine (01:35):
Busy people that's the nature of the beast.
So can you tell us a little bitabout your current role and
kind of what you've been doingup until this point?
Laura Rosefield (01:48):
Yeah, sure, so I am a divorce consultant.
I set up my firm RosefieldDivorce Consultancy nearly 15
years ago now because I've beendoing it for a long time and it
arose really out of my ownsituation, which was a very
difficult divorce, um, and Iknew that I needed something.
(02:11):
That didn't exist, um, so Ibasically set it up.
So that's what I've been doingfor 15 years.
Um, I've been doing it on myown at RDC for that long, until
a few weeks ago when I wasjoined by a partner.
So that's very exciting news.
So I've got now there are twoof us doing very similar roles
(02:33):
and basically for me I mean it'sa hard role to put into a
nutshell because it covers a lotof things and I wear a lot of
hats but for me it's bringingtogether my legal background and
expertise because I used to bea criminal barrister with sort
(02:53):
of unlimited support on theemotional front, on the
practical front, and basicallydrawing together the legal, the
psychological, the practical,the financial, the welfare of
the children, and trying to sortof project manage it all in one
place.
I'm a big believer in family lawneeding to be strategized with
(03:20):
an eye on the psychology of thesituation.
So that's, I think, probablywhat I focus most on, because I
think you know this is all thelaw is.
The law is fairlystraightforward, isn't it?
Apart from in in a few rareexceptional cases.
What's difficult is you'redealing with people and
personalities and you are taskedby your client with getting
(03:44):
them from A to whichever letterthey want to end up at, and
you've got to work outstrategically what the best way
of getting them there is.
So that's me combining the lawand the psychology, providing a
bridge between the client andthe solicitor or the legal team,
(04:04):
because I talk both languages,I've been both, I've been a
lawyer and I've been the clientand they are very different
languages and sometimes theyneed a bit of bridging and
interpretation, and I sit on theclient's shoulder, basically,
and just walk in their shoes.
But from an objective point ofview, I don't know if that makes
(04:27):
sense.
Tamsin Caine (04:28):
Yeah, it does.
I'm interested to hear a bitmore about how you deal with
divorce from a psychologicalperspective, because that sounds
, I think, very straightforwardto you and very confusing to
other people.
Laura Rosefield (04:49):
So I think the best example of that is my sort
of day in, day out bread andbutter cases, which are the very
high conflict cases, oftenwhere there's a high conflict
personality on one or both sidesand often where there's been
some domestic abuse involved.
(05:09):
So the law is pretty much thesame.
You know it's a bluntinstrument.
It doesn't have the nuancenecessarily that we would want
it to.
The people who practice it andimplement it, ie the judges and
court advisors, like Kafka,don't necessarily have the time
(05:33):
to spend on the nuances of acase.
So what makes each casedifferent is that personality
both my client and the client onthe other side, or the
individual on the other side.
So I have to think about howbest to first of all take my
(05:53):
client through so he or she isas unscathed as possible from
the experience, but also andequally focused is on the
outcome for my client.
So I want him or her to get toa certain point.
And how you do that is all aboutnegotiating with people.
(06:14):
So you know what's going to bea red rag to a bull.
What's going to be calming tothe person on the other side
calming and reassuring.
Be calming to the person on theother side.
Calming and reassuring.
What's going to help the personon the other side understand
that we're not trying to rip thelife from under them or take
their kids away from them or,you know, sell the house from
(06:36):
under their feet.
We're just trying to come to asolution that works best for the
family.
Does that help a bit, I mean thehyper personality psychology is
quite in depth and I've beendoing it for so long.
You know you recognize themcoming a mile off by now.
But that's kind of it's allabout judgment and gut feel.
(06:58):
And when you've been doing itfor so long you start, you know,
you develop that quite sharplyover time.
But I do say to my clientsthere's no right or wrong with
this.
Very rarely in family law isthere a right or wrong.
Sometimes, of course, butrarely, and usually it's about
going with the judgment thatyou're feeling because you know
(07:20):
the personality of your clientand the other person really very
well, by the time you've done afew months on their case.
Tamsin Caine (07:34):
because from what you've said, it sounds like
you're quite often working withthem as well as being on on
perhaps the other side.
That must be.
That's a tricky thing to todeal with.
It's high conflictpersonalities are very difficult
to navigate, whether you'rewith them or I don't want to say
(07:55):
against, because it shouldn'tbe against, but but on on the
other side from
Laura Rosefield (08:05):
I, you know, even with high conflict
personalities on my side,although, I agree, we don't want
to use that terminology, butyou know what I mean.
It's all about trust.
So I think you know evenchallenging personalities.
When they gain your trust andyou gain theirs, and they know
(08:26):
that you are, you've got theirback.
Things rub along much moreeasily and things you're right.
Things flare up and they can bedifficult and then it's a
matter of protecting myselfourselves.
But you know, when they gainyour trust, they will hear
object, objective messages fromyou.
(08:48):
Um, and that's that's my goalis to make them realize so um
deeply, that I actually have gottheir back, um, that when I say
something that they don't wantto hear, they do take it.
Tamsin Caine (09:03):
No, that's really important.
So somebody listening to thisthink okay, I've got an
ex-spouse or a soon-to-beex-spouse who has high conflict
personality.
This whole process feels like aminefield.
(09:25):
I really want a Laura on myside to help me through this.
What can they expect when theycome to see you?
Laura Rosefield (09:34):
Well, I think the first thing that they can
expect is to have no how shouldI put this?
No shame highlighted for notbeing able to do things nicely.
So this is something I feelquite strongly about.
There is a wealth of optionsout there for clients who want
(09:58):
to do things amicably, and sothere should be.
That's absolutely right, and sowe should be gently nudging
people as far as we can in thedirection of doing divorce
better.
But there are some people forwhom that is impossible, and I
feel quite strongly that thereis a dearth of options out there
(10:20):
for people who can't manage itfor whatever reason.
I mean often in my cases it isbecause there's some high
conflict, personality involvedand or abuse, and I'm very keen
that those people don't feelshame and embarrassment and like
they failed because they'rehaving to go through litigation,
(10:41):
whereas we're all told that weshould do this through mediation
and other alternative disputemechanisms.
So that's the first thing.
The next thing is they willhave someone constantly sitting
on their shoulder, as I said.
So I will fill whatever gapthey need, and with some people
(11:02):
it's more emotional, with somepeople it's more practical.
With a lot of them there is alot of legal involvement.
So I become most of the timequite an important part of the
legal team.
So I'm copied into all thecorrespondence.
I tend to go to conferenceswith counsel.
I often go to court and I willhelp with writing statements.
(11:26):
I will help with correspondencebetween the co-parents and
basically I will be sort of partof the setting of the strategy
that then gets executed bywhoever it is on the team that
needs to do it, whether it's youguys, financial advisors,
whether it's the client herselfor himself writing co-parenting
(11:47):
emails, or whether it's thesolicitor writing letters to
court or writing statements.
So it's sort of filling the gap.
But seeing it from a placesitting in the client's shoes,
which is a role that thesolicitor doesn't do I mean that
that's not their job, um.
But actually when you're aclient feeling terribly
(12:09):
vulnerable and terribly anxious,having someone sitting there
and being in your corner, Ithink can be very helpful.
Tamsin Caine (12:19):
I just want to come back to the um, the shame
thing of of um, of not sortingout divorce amicably.
I like I'm a massive advocatefor trying, if you can, to sort
out divorce amicably.
But you're absolutely right,it's not, it's not always
(12:40):
possible and it means it takestwo.
So even if you want to, if yourex doesn't, you haven't got
hope.
And I kind of this down.
It's going to sound a reallyweird analogy, but I am liken it
to breastfeeding right, becausewhen I had my tiny babies it
(13:03):
wasn't, it wasn't possible, thevery various reasons that it
wasn't possible, but it wasn'tpossible, and there's a huge
guilt put on you if you can't doit.
And I think it's a reallysimilar, similar thing with I'm
a couple divorce and it's like,if you can, if both of you want
to, it is absolutely the bestthing for the family.
(13:23):
But it's not always possibleand you just can't beat yourself
up about it.
I've tried, I try with myclients, but it's not always
possible.
Sometimes it has to go to court
Laura Rosefield (13:36):
And you can't just dump those people.
You can't just dump them andsay, okay, knives out, then guns
out, let's get a nuclear bombwhile we're at it and just blow
the whole thing up.
Even litigation can be managedwell and sensitively and
strategically.
And you know, one of the thingsI talk a lot about is
(13:58):
responding and not reacting.
You know all of those lessonsapply just as much to whether
you find yourself in litigation,which nobody wants.
You know, protecting thechildren just because you are in
litigation doesn't mean yourchildren are going to be ruined.
There's a, there's a lot ofthis talk of.
You know, the fear of God isput into people about what
(14:20):
you're doing to your children ifyou can't sort this out
amicably.
I mean that is such a dreadfulburden to place on people who
are already terrified about howtheir children are going to cope
.
They'll be okay if we manage itbetter.
Tamsin Caine (14:37):
Yeah, no, absolutely.
I so agree with that.
I think that there are thingsthat you can do as an individual
when you're going throughdivorce to not impact your
children.
Things like don't massivelycriticize the other person in
(14:58):
front of them, don't stop allconversations about family times
that you had between you before.
Don't like those, those sortsof things, those that stuff's
really important.
Don't put them in the middleand say tell your mum this or
tell your dad this.
Don't like those things thatyou can.
(15:18):
You can do and manage, but ifyou need to go to court to sort
it out, that's what you need todo.
Laura Rosefield (15:25):
Sometimes.
This is another answer to yourquestion on the psychology.
Sometimes the sooner you makethe decision about court, the
better.
So one of the things going backto that question that you asked
is identifying the psychologyof the situation, of the
relationship and possibly of theindividual parties, and going
(15:46):
is this going to be sorted outof court?
We'll have a bash, but actuallywe know which direction this is
heading in.
So let's not make things worse,let's not draw things out,
because drawing things outalways makes things worse, and
let's not spend the fortune onbanging our head against a brick
wall by the end of which theclients are exhausted, even more
(16:07):
across with each other and evenmore entrenched in their
positions.
Let's be realistic.
Let's make an application andwe'll deal with it, but we'll
manage the litigation well.
And the other thing I just wantto pick up on your advice for
how to protect children, which,of course, is absolutely right.
All of those things are crucial, but, um, they're easy to say,
(16:31):
aren't they?
We both know they're easy tosay.
They're harder to execute.
Sometimes one needs support andand direction into how best to
protect children when you areoverwrought with your own
emotion, one of the other thingsI always say to my clients is
(16:52):
you, do you, as far as the kidsare concerned, in that, just be
the best parent you can, so thatthe kids know that they have at
least, hopefully two, but atleast one stable, sane parent
that they can entirely trust andrely on.
Um and I.
(17:13):
I think that's absolutelycrucial.
People spend a lot of timeworrying and obsessing over what
the other person is doing andactually much more important
what you're doing
Tamsin Caine (17:28):
I think that's absolutely spot on.
So we've got a client.
They come to see you for thefirst time, or have a team teams
call.
However you do it, you've got afirst meeting.
So what?
What does that look like?
Laura Rosefield (17:44):
so it it somewhat depends on how the
clients come to me.
About 50% come to me throughsolicitors or barristers and the
rest from other sources.
So if they've come from asolicitor, I tend to know a bit
about the backgrounds and I knowwhat the solicitor wants me to
(18:05):
work on with them, and so thisfirst meeting can be a little
bit more targeted.
Sometimes clients come to mecompletely cold.
I don't know.
I might know one sentence.
They might have written to mesaying I want to get a divorce
and that's it.
So a first meeting is generallyquite long and intense, where
(18:27):
we'll talk all about thebackground, and I always make it
clear that the backgroundactually, probably for legal
purposes, is not so significant.
But for psychological purposes,for understanding where we're
going with this case, which bestof the various options to pick
for process, which lawyer youshould go.
To all of those things thebackground is crucial.
(18:49):
You have to get into the nittygritty and understand the
personalities.
So we'll talk through all ofthat.
I then talk to them about theshape that's my word the shape
of the process, because I thinkit's really important to
understand from A to Z andeverything in between in terms
(19:11):
of the direction of travel,because if you only see in front
of the next step, in front ofyour nose, I think it causes
huge anxiety.
It also means that you don'tunderstand why you're doing
things.
When your lawyer tells you toexpress something in a certain
way, or write a certain letter,or not write a certain letter,
(19:32):
which is more to the point, it'svery difficult to understand
why that advice is being givenif you don't have a sense of the
overall shape and the way thatthings are decided.
So I go through that at thebeginning and I always say to my
clients you know, you you won'tremember of it, but I'm going
to draw you a diagram.
We draw some pretty pictures sothat they get on one sheet of
(19:54):
paper, they get the whole thingin one hit.
And then we make a plan andthat's the most important part
of the meeting and that plan canrange from which lawyer you
should see, can range from whichlawyer you should see whether
we need to see counsel as well,whether you need to see a
(20:17):
financial advisor at this stageand as you know, tamsin, I'm a
big fan and doing that early,very importantly whether you
need therapy.
I work very closely withtherapists and I'm a big
believer in them being anintegral part of the team.
Therapists, um, and I'm a bigbeliever in them being an
integral part of the team.
Um and um.
Then, how we're going toapproach the the person on the
other side, you know are we?
Are we going to sit down andhave a chat?
Are we going to write a letter?
(20:37):
Um, is there some joint therapygoing on at the moment?
Where we can, we can use asession to say something
difficult, um, and then we willmake a plan, more from a legal
perspective as well, what wewant to achieve and how best to
get there.
And I'm doing about half andhalf children work and finance
work, so often in the firstmeeting we'll have to talk about
(20:59):
both.
Tamsin Caine (21:00):
Wow, that's a lot.
So when you say a long meeting,that sounds like a good few
hours say a long meeting, thatsounds like a good few hours.
Laura Rosefield (21:11):
It's usually between one and two.
Right, it depends, and my bitof explaining everything doesn't
take long.
The bit that takes a long timeis um extracting the information
about what's happened and andwhat's what the personalities
are yeah, yeah, absolutely okay.
Tamsin Caine (21:26):
And then it sounds to me as though you work with
your clients from early on inthe process, even if they've
come to you from solicitors allthe way through until they get
to the resolution of thechildren or financial part, or
(21:46):
both, if, if they're bothnecessary.
Do you work on past that, or isthat?
Does that, is that right?
Very much past that?
Laura Rosefield (21:57):
I mean, I'm trying to think what's my
longest.
I think my longest at themoment is about 10 years
Tamsin Caine (22:10):
Well, not necessarily that case.
Laura Rosefield (22:12):
But the children can obviously be very
young when the separationhappens and if that's the case
and if it's a difficultrelationship, particularly with
the high conflict and all theabuse, that co-parenting
necessity is going to be aroundfor about 10, 15 years.
I mean that's the reality of it.
(22:33):
And there are people, as yousay, that need ongoing help.
It might be daily help, itmight be touching base once a
month, it might be once a year.
Something explodes and theyneed help managing that.
But definitely the relationshipcontinues well beyond the end
of the resolution, of whateverorder they're getting, um, and
(22:54):
and often beyond the end oflawyers involvement, because
that tends to be a little bitmore transactional
Tamsin Caine (23:11):
And I've definitely got clients that I'm
working with who who's withoutwanting to spook anyone who's
who have continuing um issuesand and need to go to court and
need for support, usually fromthe children's side, but but
very occasionally from thefinancial side, if they've not
(23:34):
been able to achieve a cleanbreak and and the kind of
ongoing need for the otherperson to pay, and they're not
necessarily in all those sortsof things
Laura Rosefield (24:05):
You know, an email will land in their inbox
and they weren't expecting itand suddenly the whole world's
blown apart again.
So, yeah, definitely, but Ithink the really sort of
exhausting aspect of it is thechildren front.
It's the managing, the daily.
You know the gym kit comes backdirty, the lunchbox hasn't been
packed, you know the kids werebrought back half an hour late
(24:28):
and I didn't know where theywere.
All of that stuff is terriblydifficult to manage on a daily
basis with someone that you havehad a very difficult
relationship with.
Um, and, yeah, I, I do involvemyself with that quite a bit
Tamsin Caine (24:47):
That's amazing.
, clearly we do.
I think the problem is we'rejust so busy, aren't we?
So you've got your kind ofmeetings with the clients and
the bits that you do with them,and obviously you're speaking to
solicitors.
What other work is?
(25:10):
I'm thinking of what theclients won't see, rather than
what the people who you workwith will see.
What are the things do you getinvolved in that that they
perhaps don't see on a on adaily, weekly basis?
Laura Rosefield (25:21):
Tamsin I can.
I commit the cardinal sin of ofwhen you're giving evidence in
court and not answer yourquestion because I just want, I
want to.
I remember something from yourlast question that I wanted to
mention, when you were sayingyou get involved from the
beginning to the end.
The other sort of flashpointwhere I do have some involvement
is pre-court, just pre-court,pre-final hearing.
(25:43):
Oh, okay, because obviously Iused to be a barrister, so I've
done cross examinations day in,day out, and I will sometimes be
asked to do what's called whatwe call witness familiarization
sessions.
Right, and very much notcoaching.
We're not allowed to coach, no,but it's about just
(26:04):
familiarizing the client withthe court process, the court day
.
What does crossexaminationexamination mean?
How is it different from whenyour own barrister is asking you
questions and all of that stuff?
It's a huge anxiety givingevidence at a final hearing, and
so I really like that part ofmy role actually, because I
(26:24):
think you can sort of see theanxiety dripping off them and
then it gradually falls away.
So I think that's quiteimportant and I don't need to
have had a long termrelationship with the client to
come to sort of be parachuted infor that.
But in terms of what else I do.
To now answer your question, Imean a lot of the work I do.
(26:49):
The Rosefields GirlsConsultancy work is client
facing almost all of it.
But then of course, there's alot going on in the background
in terms of the relationshipswith the solicitors, the
relationships with thetherapists.
Even with you guys I work quiteclosely, um, and there's a lot
of talk all the time, constant,constant, constant.
(27:12):
A lot of whatsapps backwardsand forwards, middle of the
night, you know, because I tendto work as a very close team
with the solicitors andbarristers and therapists and
financial advisors that I knowand trust, um, so we're pinging
each other, constantly, throwingideas around.
That's part of why I'm such apassionate believer in our thing
in the team, which is what ourResolution Committee is all
(27:35):
about, because one person's pairof eyes and one person's brain
is never as good as having twoor three people with a different
perspective on it.
And when you work with peoplewho are open to other takes and
other ideas, the client'sexperience just goes like that
(27:56):
yeah, I mean it's, it's, it'snot, and and not only the
client's experience, but theoutcome really, yeah, yeah, much
better, because you know youmight say something.
Have you thought about the waythis offer is structured?
It might, you know it doesn'ttake care of this and we'll go?
Oh god, no, we didn't.
We didn't see that because wewere looking at it with our,
(28:17):
with our eyes, and now it'sopened up this whole thing that
we need to deal with.
But how amazing that the clienthas those different perspectives
.
So I think there's a lot thatthe client doesn't see of
chatter between the differentprofessionals on a case.
And then there's a little bitof, you know, the resolution
work that we do that's trying tobuild a generally better
(28:41):
picture for clients goingforward.
I sit on a domestic abusecharity which sorry, the board
of a domestic abuse charity,which at the board sorry, the
board of a domestic abusecharity, which I find very
helpful in terms of reminding meof what these people are going
through um and um.
I do a little bit of trainingon how to divorce narcissists
(29:04):
and other high conflictpersonalities, but it's all
really about keeping up to datein terms of being able to pass
on the knowledge to the clientsyeah, absolutely.
Tamsin Caine (29:15):
I think we all do a lot of that.
Keeping up to date piece thatsometimes you do it without even
thinking about it.
You know I'll sit on Twitter ofan evening looking at posts and
reading latest um courtdecisions.
Laura Rosefield (29:33):
That's where you learn from I can.
I completely don't have to sitand read encyclopedias anymore.
That's, that's the beauty of it.
None of us have the attentionspan for that anymore.
Um, so yeah, there's a lot ofthat, and the other thing is
there's a lot of that, and theother thing is that there's a
lot of thinking, a lot ofthinking time, and that happens
in the shower, while you'rechopping the vegetables, while
(29:54):
you're taking the dog for a walk.
My thing is, it happenswhenever I go to concerts
because I love music.
So as soon as I sit down and mybrain switches off, a genius
idea will come to me about howto unlock a particularly knotty
case or a knotty issue.
Tamsin Caine (30:10):
Um, so that there's a lot of thinking that
goes on behind the scenes thatthe clients don't necessarily
see yeah, and with your mind's,the shower, but it's often,
often in the shower, or I likehiking, so on the top of a hill
somewhere, you, you do.
The best time for thinking itis when you're not trying to
(30:33):
think.
I think it feels like a randomthing to say, but I completely
agree in terms of the the teamworking ethos that you have and
that I know we both verystrongly believe in, a lot of
(30:54):
people listening will bethinking well, that sounds
incredibly expensive to have allof those different people
involved.
Is your experience that isconsiderably more expensive?
Or would you say, or is it yourexperience that perhaps because
you've got a team working withyou doing the bits that they
should be doing, rather thanusing a solicitor as a therapist
(31:15):
, that actually it doesn't costmore than than it would
otherwise?
Laura Rosefield (31:20):
I completely agree with the latter, that that
I mean that one of the purposesof me is to save money.
That that was when, when Istarted um this, whenever it was
coming up 15 years ago, thatwas one of my two limbs that I
promised myself I would try andhelp clients with.
So I've seriously failed.
(31:41):
If things become more expensive.
So I work very hard to makethem not agree with you.
Having people wear the hat thatthey are meant to wear tends to
be a lot cheaper.
The example that's always givenis don't use your lawyer as a
therapist, but it's a goodexample.
Lawyers are expensive and theyare not therapists, so they're
(32:03):
not the best person for that job.
And the same with you.
They are not the best person todo the financial side of things
, the analysis and the strategyon that front.
Same with Form Z, for example.
So definitely picking the rightperson to do the right job has
an effect of saving you money.
Often, you know the otherprofessionals that sit with us
(32:27):
on our committee end up beingcheaper than lawyers.
So that's something to remember.
But the other thing to rememberis and this is something I'm
equally passionate about as wellas the team thing is that you
can pick and mix a bespokeapproach for your divorce.
So you don't have to have, whenwe say, the team, you don't
have to have 700 people workingon your case from minute A to
(32:52):
minute, 7 million.
They come in and they come outwhen needed, and sometimes you
only need a light touch.
Sometimes you need for example,in my case, maybe you do a
first meeting, you set thestrategy, you pick and choose
what you're going to do, youwork out how to frame it for the
(33:12):
other side and the client isoff and they never need to speak
to you again.
Or maybe they touch base forthree minutes six months later.
That's all that's necessary.
So with people like us, it's apay-as-you-go system, isn't it?
You don't need to be signing onthe dotted line and then
committing to these huge amountsof fees.
So it really is about what theparticular client needs and
(33:36):
making sure that the rightperson for that job is doing it.
But it doesn't necessarily meanthat you're on the hook for,
for you know, hours, hoursinvolvement, and I feel quite
strongly about that because I'mnot.
I'm not sure if peoplenecessarily know that.
What do you think?
Tamsin Caine (33:53):
no, I think it's.
I think it depends on theperson, doesn't it?
And I know I've been speakingum?
I was back to Claire Macklin acouple of weeks ago and um
recently launched her episodeand she was saying you know,
they it depends.
Even working with her, who's adivorce coach, you know she has
(34:15):
a way of working with herclients.
It's not a forever thing, butwith some clients it's not
necessary to do six months worthor six weeks worth or whatever.
It is as and when and what youneed.
So I think you're right.
I think it's picking the rightpeople for the right jobs, but
(34:37):
also at the right time andhaving them involved when
they're when they're needed, notnecessarily all the way through
.
Laura Rosefield (34:44):
Yeah, exactly, and I mean I, unlike most
coaches, I think I don't work insessions at all.
So really, if you need threeminutes, you pay for three
minutes.
That's it, um and um.
You know, I think that'sreassuring, because sometimes
all it needs is can you justlook at this email.
I just am I right about the myresponse?
I've done a draft.
Do you think it's okay?
(35:04):
Probably takes three or fourminutes and yet the client then
goes okay, yeah, I know I'm ontrack and that's a very
inexpensive way of working.
Yeah, absolutely Very time andcost efficient.
And the other thing is anotheramazing development in family
law is that there are lots offlexible ways of working.
(35:25):
There's unbundling with thesolicitors.
There's direct access with thebarristers, which I'm a massive
advocate of.
What else is there?
Um, oh, I do some work with, uh, another divorce consultant
where we just we're we're theonly two people on the case,
there aren't solicitors oranyone else involved um, and we
just sort it out between us andit's terribly cost effective
(35:49):
yeah, yeah, absolutely, and Ithink this will happen more and
more.
Tamsin Caine (35:54):
I think that lots of people working in family
justice are trying to developnew ways of working and trying
to help their clients in thebest possible way.
There are so many options outthere now to resolve your case
in court, out of court and it's,but I think it's getting word
(36:17):
out to the, to the generalpublic and the people who
actually need it, that you don'thave to.
You don't have to go straightto a lawyer.
You don't have to go straightto court, but you need to pick
the best of all of the optionsthat are out there for you in
your circumstances and and whatyou know.
Laura Rosefield (36:37):
Answering your first question about what I do,
you know very much the sort of Idon't know concierge service or
you know someone sitting abovewho knows all of those options
and connect them but can sort ofguide you in the right
direction, because I think youknow, it's difficult.
It's easier for us to see,isn't it as an outsider?
With some independence andobjectivity.
(36:58):
What a case needs?
When you're in it, it'simpossible.
Tamsin Caine (37:02):
I mean it's it's so difficult.
Laura Rosefield (37:04):
And then you add the anxiety and you just
you're seeing and thinkingstraight becomes very hard
absolutely.
Tamsin Caine (37:13):
This is something that probably should have asked
you ages ago.
But do you work with anybody orI know we've talked about Kate
generally working in highconflict cases?
Generally you're working withpeople where there's some abuse,
but do they have to be kind ofhigh net worth, ultra high net
worth?
Do you work with I don't likethe phrase ordinary people, but
(37:36):
you know what I mean.
Is there a kind of, is there aline where you go?
Do you know what to work withme?
If I'm going to look at yoursituation, I'm going to say that
you need X, y, I don't know.
There are certain things thatyou look for before you take
them on as a client.
Laura Rosefield (37:53):
The complete opposite, because of the sort of
pay-as-you-go system which Inever thought.
A client used that phrase of metwo weeks ago and I've used it
back when I've been doing thisfor so long.
I've never thought of it likethat, but it's true you just pay
for what you use, so it's.
It's, in fact, a really goodmodel when there isn't much
(38:14):
money around.
I thought your question made methink of someone a few years
ago who I had.
I won't say too much about whohe was, but he had nothing,
really nothing.
He was begging, borrowing andalmost stealing to pay for a
second and we fixed it In thesession together.
We wrote three messages that hewas going to send out like this
(38:39):
, staggered because we knew whatthe response was going to be
each time and that was it.
That was all he needed, and Ithink that happens quite a lot.
The model where I um sort thingsout with with this other
divorce consultant that I workclosely with very inexpensive
way of doing things.
I mean we, we did a caserecently and it was minimal fees
(39:00):
um, which I think probably Idon't know how much it would
have been with lawyers, but alot, a lot, lot more um and the
same with the direct access, butdefinitely you.
I think, first, meetings are avery valuable way of setting
people off on the right, on theright track, um.
And then, of course, you knowthere's all pro bono options as
(39:21):
well, because when you're doingthis kind of work, there's some,
some cases that you feel youhave to do because someone is
suffering or struggling so much.
So I definitely don't thinkit's only for high net worth.
In fact, it works brilliantlyfor the opposite end of the
scale.
Tamsin Caine (39:39):
Just something that came to mind while you were
talking, when you're workingwith the other divorce
consultant and sorting thingsout between are you able to
write draft the financialconsent order, or does that
still need to then go through alawyer?
Um?
Laura Rosefield (39:57):
I, I don't I always ask them to get a lawyer
to do it.
Yeah, um, and again, we workwith people that that will do
that for minimal.
Yeah, my view is it's tooimportant to take any risks and
I want it done absolutelyproperly.
Tamsin Caine (40:16):
I absolutely agree .
I wondered about, with yourlegal background, whether you
went down that route.
Laura Rosefield (40:24):
I was a criminal barrister, so I didn't
grow up in family law.
So everything I've learned fromthe job and you know I'm a big
fan of knowing where your skillslie and I don't.
I don't want to do that, so Idon't.
I think some, some people in myposition, maybe do, but that's
not something I do.
Tamsin Caine (40:44):
Yeah, no fair enough, we're coming to the end
of our time together, believe itor not.
I just wondered if there wasanything that I haven't asked
you that you feel like would beimportant to get across, or that
you want to add to what you'vesaid so far.
Laura Rosefield (40:59):
I think the only thing I would say is that,
um, I am living proof thatthings get better and get a lot
better.
You are too, I think, but Ithink that that's powerful.
So, even when you're workingwith clients on the nitty-gritty
, there's this overwhelmingsense that it's gonna.
(41:22):
It's gonna get better, and notonly better.
It's gonna be exciting, joyful,calm, peaceful, and I think,
having been through it, don'tknow if you agree, but it's
helpful to be able to reassureclients that the feelings will
pass, that they're normal.
You know, I have one phrase Icall the tsunami of exhaustion,
(41:42):
which I'm sure you're familiarwith, where it's just, you know,
after a bad letter comes, orafter a court hearing or a
conference with counsel orsomething you cannot move, um
and you're, you're so tired youthink there's something wrong
with you, and just being able tosay it's the tsunami of
exhaustion, by about Thursdayyou'll be up and about again and
(42:03):
and having that being provedright, I think that that's so
nice and I I always want toleave my clients with the
feeling that, in time, therewill be relief from this.
Tamsin Caine (42:14):
That's a beautiful way to end this conversation.
Laura, thank you so much forjoining me.
That's been an absolutelyfascinating conversation and I'm
hoping lots of people willlisten and pick up the phone or
contact you by email.
All Laura's details will be inthe show notes, so if you do
(42:34):
want to reach out to her, youwill be able to, and also,
obviously, check out her websiteas well.
Hope you join us again nexttime.
If you have enjoyed this episode, please do think about giving
us a lovely five-star review andwe'll catch up with you soon.
Us a lovely five-star reviewand we'll catch up with you soon
(42:57):
.
Hi, and I hope you enjoyed thatepisode of the Smart Divorce
Podcast.
If you would like to get intouch, please have a look in the
show notes for our details orgo onto the website,
wwwsmartdivorcecouk.
Also, if you are listening onApple Podcasts or on Spotify and
you wouldn't mind leaving us alovely five-star review, that
(43:18):
would be fantastic.
I know that lots of ourlisteners are finding this is
incredibly helpful in theirjourney through separation,
divorce and dissolving a civilpartnership.
Also, if you would like somefurther support, we do have a
Facebook group now.
It's called Separation, divorceand Dissolution UK.
(43:40):
Please do go on to Facebook,search up the group and we'd be
delighted to have you join us.
The one thing I would say is doplease answer their membership
questions.
Okay, have a great day and takecare.
Hello and welcome to the Smart Divorce Podcast.
This is series nine and in thisseries, we're going to explore
what makes up the working weekof various different
professionals who work in thedivorce world.
You'll start to understand whatthey do, both during the time
that you see them, how theyprepare for meetings, and what
(00:31):
work goes into the work of adivorce professional outside of
the time that you spend withthem.
I'm really looking forward tosome amazing clients in this
series.
We talked to a barrister,family solicitor, financial
planner, divorce coach andreally hoping that you're going
to enjoy it and get a lot fromit as well.
(00:57):
Hello and welcome to the SmartDivorce Podcast.
I am delighted to be joinedtoday by Laura Rosefield, who I
have been trying to get on thispodcast for a very long time,
but she's an insanely busy woman.
She's also my co-chair on theWorking Together Committee at
Resolution, so this should be abrilliant chat.
(01:19):
Now I'm going to let herintroduce herself properly in
terms of the work that she does.
So welcome, Laura, lovely tohave you along.
Thank you, Tamsin.
Laura Rosefield (01:27):
Thank you, Tamsin, and so sorry it's taken
so long.
Tamsin Caine (01:35):
Busy people that's the nature of the beast.
So can you tell us a little bitabout your current role and
kind of what you've been doingup until this point?
Laura Rosefield (01:48):
Yeah, sure, so I am a divorce consultant.
I set up my firm RosefieldDivorce Consultancy nearly 15
years ago now because I've beendoing it for a long time and it
arose really out of my ownsituation, which was a very
difficult divorce, um, and Iknew that I needed something.
(02:11):
That didn't exist, um, so Ibasically set it up.
So that's what I've been doingfor 15 years.
Um, I've been doing it on myown at RDC for that long, until
a few weeks ago when I wasjoined by a partner.
So that's very exciting news.
So I've got now there are twoof us doing very similar roles
(02:33):
and basically for me I mean it'sa hard role to put into a
nutshell because it covers a lotof things and I wear a lot of
hats but for me it's bringingtogether my legal background and
expertise because I used to bea criminal barrister with sort
(02:53):
of unlimited support on theemotional front, on the
practical front, and basicallydrawing together the legal, the
psychological, the practical,the financial, the welfare of
the children, and trying to sortof project manage it all in one
place.
I'm a big believer in family lawneeding to be strategized with
(03:20):
an eye on the psychology of thesituation.
So that's, I think, probablywhat I focus most on, because I
think you know this is all thelaw is.
The law is fairlystraightforward, isn't it?
Apart from in in a few rareexceptional cases.
What's difficult is you'redealing with people and
personalities and you are taskedby your client with getting
(03:44):
them from A to whichever letterthey want to end up at, and
you've got to work outstrategically what the best way
of getting them there is.
So that's me combining the lawand the psychology, providing a
bridge between the client andthe solicitor or the legal team,
(04:04):
because I talk both languages,I've been both, I've been a
lawyer and I've been the clientand they are very different
languages and sometimes theyneed a bit of bridging and
interpretation, and I sit on theclient's shoulder, basically,
and just walk in their shoes.
But from an objective point ofview, I don't know if that makes
(04:27):
sense.
Tamsin Caine (04:28):
Yeah, it does.
I'm interested to hear a bitmore about how you deal with
divorce from a psychologicalperspective, because that sounds
, I think, very straightforwardto you and very confusing to
other people.
Laura Rosefield (04:49):
So I think the best example of that is my sort
of day in, day out bread andbutter cases, which are the very
high conflict cases, oftenwhere there's a high conflict
personality on one or both sidesand often where there's been
some domestic abuse involved.
(05:09):
So the law is pretty much thesame.
You know it's a bluntinstrument.
It doesn't have the nuancenecessarily that we would want
it to.
The people who practice it andimplement it, ie the judges and
court advisors, like Kafka,don't necessarily have the time
(05:33):
to spend on the nuances of acase.
So what makes each casedifferent is that personality
both my client and the client onthe other side, or the
individual on the other side.
So I have to think about howbest to first of all take my
(05:53):
client through so he or she isas unscathed as possible from
the experience, but also andequally focused is on the
outcome for my client.
So I want him or her to get toa certain point.
And how you do that is all aboutnegotiating with people.
(06:14):
So you know what's going to bea red rag to a bull.
What's going to be calming tothe person on the other side
calming and reassuring.
Be calming to the person on theother side.
Calming and reassuring.
What's going to help the personon the other side understand
that we're not trying to rip thelife from under them or take
their kids away from them or,you know, sell the house from
(06:36):
under their feet.
We're just trying to come to asolution that works best for the
family.
Does that help a bit, I mean thehyper personality psychology is
quite in depth and I've beendoing it for so long.
You know you recognize themcoming a mile off by now.
But that's kind of it's allabout judgment and gut feel.
(06:58):
And when you've been doing itfor so long you start, you know,
you develop that quite sharplyover time.
But I do say to my clientsthere's no right or wrong with
this.
Very rarely in family law isthere a right or wrong.
Sometimes, of course, butrarely, and usually it's about
going with the judgment thatyou're feeling because you know
(07:20):
the personality of your clientand the other person really very
well, by the time you've done afew months on their case.
Tamsin Caine (07:34):
because from what you've said, it sounds like
you're quite often working withthem as well as being on on
perhaps the other side.
That must be.
That's a tricky thing to todeal with.
It's high conflictpersonalities are very difficult
to navigate, whether you'rewith them or I don't want to say
(07:55):
against, because it shouldn'tbe against, but but on on the
other side from
Laura Rosefield (08:05):
I, you know, even with high conflict
personalities on my side,although, I agree, we don't want
to use that terminology, butyou know what I mean.
It's all about trust.
So I think you know evenchallenging personalities.
When they gain your trust andyou gain theirs, and they know
(08:26):
that you are, you've got theirback.
Things rub along much moreeasily and things you're right.
Things flare up and they can bedifficult and then it's a
matter of protecting myselfourselves.
But you know, when they gainyour trust, they will hear
object, objective messages fromyou.
(08:48):
Um, and that's that's my goalis to make them realize so um
deeply, that I actually have gottheir back, um, that when I say
something that they don't wantto hear, they do take it.
Tamsin Caine (09:03):
No, that's really important.
So somebody listening to thisthink okay, I've got an
ex-spouse or a soon-to-beex-spouse who has high conflict
personality.
This whole process feels like aminefield.
(09:25):
I really want a Laura on myside to help me through this.
What can they expect when theycome to see you?
Laura Rosefield (09:34):
Well, I think the first thing that they can
expect is to have no how shouldI put this?
No shame highlighted for notbeing able to do things nicely.
So this is something I feelquite strongly about.
There is a wealth of optionsout there for clients who want
(09:58):
to do things amicably, and sothere should be.
That's absolutely right, and sowe should be gently nudging
people as far as we can in thedirection of doing divorce
better.
But there are some people forwhom that is impossible, and I
feel quite strongly that thereis a dearth of options out there
(10:20):
for people who can't manage itfor whatever reason.
I mean often in my cases it isbecause there's some high
conflict, personality involvedand or abuse, and I'm very keen
that those people don't feelshame and embarrassment and like
they failed because they'rehaving to go through litigation,
(10:41):
whereas we're all told that weshould do this through mediation
and other alternative disputemechanisms.
So that's the first thing.
The next thing is they willhave someone constantly sitting
on their shoulder, as I said.
So I will fill whatever gapthey need, and with some people
(11:02):
it's more emotional, with somepeople it's more practical.
With a lot of them there is alot of legal involvement.
So I become most of the timequite an important part of the
legal team.
So I'm copied into all thecorrespondence.
I tend to go to conferenceswith counsel.
I often go to court and I willhelp with writing statements.
(11:26):
I will help with correspondencebetween the co-parents and
basically I will be sort of partof the setting of the strategy
that then gets executed bywhoever it is on the team that
needs to do it, whether it's youguys, financial advisors,
whether it's the client herselfor himself writing co-parenting
(11:47):
emails, or whether it's thesolicitor writing letters to
court or writing statements.
So it's sort of filling the gap.
But seeing it from a placesitting in the client's shoes,
which is a role that thesolicitor doesn't do I mean that
that's not their job, um.
But actually when you're aclient feeling terribly
(12:09):
vulnerable and terribly anxious,having someone sitting there
and being in your corner, Ithink can be very helpful.
Tamsin Caine (12:19):
I just want to come back to the um, the shame
thing of of um, of not sortingout divorce amicably.
I like I'm a massive advocatefor trying, if you can, to sort
out divorce amicably.
But you're absolutely right,it's not, it's not always
(12:40):
possible and it means it takestwo.
So even if you want to, if yourex doesn't, you haven't got
hope.
And I kind of this down.
It's going to sound a reallyweird analogy, but I am liken it
to breastfeeding right, becausewhen I had my tiny babies it
(13:03):
wasn't, it wasn't possible, thevery various reasons that it
wasn't possible, but it wasn'tpossible, and there's a huge
guilt put on you if you can't doit.
And I think it's a reallysimilar, similar thing with I'm
a couple divorce and it's like,if you can, if both of you want
to, it is absolutely the bestthing for the family.
(13:23):
But it's not always possibleand you just can't beat yourself
up about it.
I've tried, I try with myclients, but it's not always
possible.
Sometimes it has to go to court
Laura Rosefield (13:36):
And you can't just dump those people.
You can't just dump them andsay, okay, knives out, then guns
out, let's get a nuclear bombwhile we're at it and just blow
the whole thing up.
Even litigation can be managedwell and sensitively and
strategically.
And you know, one of the thingsI talk a lot about is
(13:58):
responding and not reacting.
You know all of those lessonsapply just as much to whether
you find yourself in litigation,which nobody wants.
You know, protecting thechildren just because you are in
litigation doesn't mean yourchildren are going to be ruined.
There's a, there's a lot ofthis talk of.
You know, the fear of God isput into people about what
(14:20):
you're doing to your children ifyou can't sort this out
amicably.
I mean that is such a dreadfulburden to place on people who
are already terrified about howtheir children are going to cope
.
They'll be okay if we manage itbetter.
Tamsin Caine (14:37):
Yeah, no, absolutely.
I so agree with that.
I think that there are thingsthat you can do as an individual
when you're going throughdivorce to not impact your
children.
Things like don't massivelycriticize the other person in
(14:58):
front of them, don't stop allconversations about family times
that you had between you before.
Don't like those, those sortsof things, those that stuff's
really important.
Don't put them in the middleand say tell your mum this or
tell your dad this.
Don't like those things thatyou can.
(15:18):
You can do and manage, but ifyou need to go to court to sort
it out, that's what you need todo.
Laura Rosefield (15:25):
Sometimes.
This is another answer to yourquestion on the psychology.
Sometimes the sooner you makethe decision about court, the
better.
So one of the things going backto that question that you asked
is identifying the psychologyof the situation, of the
relationship and possibly of theindividual parties, and going
(15:46):
is this going to be sorted outof court?
We'll have a bash, but actuallywe know which direction this is
heading in.
So let's not make things worse,let's not draw things out,
because drawing things outalways makes things worse, and
let's not spend the fortune onbanging our head against a brick
wall by the end of which theclients are exhausted, even more
(16:07):
across with each other and evenmore entrenched in their
positions.
Let's be realistic.
Let's make an application andwe'll deal with it, but we'll
manage the litigation well.
And the other thing I just wantto pick up on your advice for
how to protect children, which,of course, is absolutely right.
All of those things are crucial, but, um, they're easy to say,
(16:31):
aren't they?
We both know they're easy tosay.
They're harder to execute.
Sometimes one needs support andand direction into how best to
protect children when you areoverwrought with your own
emotion, one of the other thingsI always say to my clients is
(16:52):
you, do you, as far as the kidsare concerned, in that, just be
the best parent you can, so thatthe kids know that they have at
least, hopefully two, but atleast one stable, sane parent
that they can entirely trust andrely on.
Um and I.
(17:13):
I think that's absolutelycrucial.
People spend a lot of timeworrying and obsessing over what
the other person is doing andactually much more important
what you're doing
Tamsin Caine (17:28):
I think that's absolutely spot on.
So we've got a client.
They come to see you for thefirst time, or have a team teams
call.
However you do it, you've got afirst meeting.
So what?
What does that look like?
Laura Rosefield (17:44):
so it it somewhat depends on how the
clients come to me.
About 50% come to me throughsolicitors or barristers and the
rest from other sources.
So if they've come from asolicitor, I tend to know a bit
about the backgrounds and I knowwhat the solicitor wants me to
(18:05):
work on with them, and so thisfirst meeting can be a little
bit more targeted.
Sometimes clients come to mecompletely cold.
I don't know.
I might know one sentence.
They might have written to mesaying I want to get a divorce
and that's it.
So a first meeting is generallyquite long and intense, where
(18:27):
we'll talk all about thebackground, and I always make it
clear that the backgroundactually, probably for legal
purposes, is not so significant.
But for psychological purposes,for understanding where we're
going with this case, which bestof the various options to pick
for process, which lawyer youshould go.
To all of those things thebackground is crucial.
(18:49):
You have to get into the nittygritty and understand the
personalities.
So we'll talk through all ofthat.
I then talk to them about theshape that's my word the shape
of the process, because I thinkit's really important to
understand from A to Z andeverything in between in terms
(19:11):
of the direction of travel,because if you only see in front
of the next step, in front ofyour nose, I think it causes
huge anxiety.
It also means that you don'tunderstand why you're doing
things.
When your lawyer tells you toexpress something in a certain
way, or write a certain letter,or not write a certain letter,
(19:32):
which is more to the point, it'svery difficult to understand
why that advice is being givenif you don't have a sense of the
overall shape and the way thatthings are decided.
So I go through that at thebeginning and I always say to my
clients you know, you you won'tremember of it, but I'm going
to draw you a diagram.
We draw some pretty pictures sothat they get on one sheet of
(19:54):
paper, they get the whole thingin one hit.
And then we make a plan andthat's the most important part
of the meeting and that plan canrange from which lawyer you
should see, can range from whichlawyer you should see whether
we need to see counsel as well,whether you need to see a
(20:17):
financial advisor at this stageand as you know, tamsin, I'm a
big fan and doing that early,very importantly whether you
need therapy.
I work very closely withtherapists and I'm a big
believer in them being anintegral part of the team.
Therapists, um, and I'm a bigbeliever in them being an
integral part of the team.
Um and um.
Then, how we're going toapproach the the person on the
other side, you know are we?
Are we going to sit down andhave a chat?
Are we going to write a letter?
(20:37):
Um, is there some joint therapygoing on at the moment?
Where we can, we can use asession to say something
difficult, um, and then we willmake a plan, more from a legal
perspective as well, what wewant to achieve and how best to
get there.
And I'm doing about half andhalf children work and finance
work, so often in the firstmeeting we'll have to talk about
(20:59):
both.
Tamsin Caine (21:00):
Wow, that's a lot.
So when you say a long meeting,that sounds like a good few
hours say a long meeting, thatsounds like a good few hours.
Laura Rosefield (21:11):
It's usually between one and two.
Right, it depends, and my bitof explaining everything doesn't
take long.
The bit that takes a long timeis um extracting the information
about what's happened and andwhat's what the personalities
are yeah, yeah, absolutely okay.
Tamsin Caine (21:26):
And then it sounds to me as though you work with
your clients from early on inthe process, even if they've
come to you from solicitors allthe way through until they get
to the resolution of thechildren or financial part, or
(21:46):
both, if, if they're bothnecessary.
Do you work on past that, or isthat?
Does that, is that right?
Very much past that?
Laura Rosefield (21:57):
I mean, I'm trying to think what's my
longest.
I think my longest at themoment is about 10 years
Tamsin Caine (22:10):
Well, not necessarily that case.
Laura Rosefield (22:12):
But the children can obviously be very
young when the separationhappens and if that's the case
and if it's a difficultrelationship, particularly with
the high conflict and all theabuse, that co-parenting
necessity is going to be aroundfor about 10, 15 years.
I mean that's the reality of it.
(22:33):
And there are people, as yousay, that need ongoing help.
It might be daily help, itmight be touching base once a
month, it might be once a year.
Something explodes and theyneed help managing that.
But definitely the relationshipcontinues well beyond the end
of the resolution, of whateverorder they're getting, um, and
(22:54):
and often beyond the end oflawyers involvement, because
that tends to be a little bitmore transactional
Tamsin Caine (23:11):
And I've definitely got clients that I'm
working with who who's withoutwanting to spook anyone who's
who have continuing um issuesand and need to go to court and
need for support, usually fromthe children's side, but but
very occasionally from thefinancial side, if they've not
(23:34):
been able to achieve a cleanbreak and and the kind of
ongoing need for the otherperson to pay, and they're not
necessarily in all those sortsof things
Laura Rosefield (24:05):
You know, an email will land in their inbox
and they weren't expecting itand suddenly the whole world's
blown apart again.
So, yeah, definitely, but Ithink the really sort of
exhausting aspect of it is thechildren front.
It's the managing, the daily.
You know the gym kit comes backdirty, the lunchbox hasn't been
packed, you know the kids werebrought back half an hour late
(24:28):
and I didn't know where theywere.
All of that stuff is terriblydifficult to manage on a daily
basis with someone that you havehad a very difficult
relationship with.
Um, and, yeah, I, I do involvemyself with that quite a bit
Tamsin Caine (24:47):
That's amazing.
, clearly we do.
I think the problem is we'rejust so busy, aren't we?
So you've got your kind ofmeetings with the clients and
the bits that you do with them,and obviously you're speaking to
solicitors.
What other work is?
(25:10):
I'm thinking of what theclients won't see, rather than
what the people who you workwith will see.
What are the things do you getinvolved in that that they
perhaps don't see on a on adaily, weekly basis?
Laura Rosefield (25:21):
Tamsin I can.
I commit the cardinal sin of ofwhen you're giving evidence in
court and not answer yourquestion because I just want, I
want to.
I remember something from yourlast question that I wanted to
mention, when you were sayingyou get involved from the
beginning to the end.
The other sort of flashpointwhere I do have some involvement
is pre-court, just pre-court,pre-final hearing.
(25:43):
Oh, okay, because obviously Iused to be a barrister, so I've
done cross examinations day in,day out, and I will sometimes be
asked to do what's called whatwe call witness familiarization
sessions.
Right, and very much notcoaching.
We're not allowed to coach, no,but it's about just
(26:04):
familiarizing the client withthe court process, the court day
.
What does crossexaminationexamination mean?
How is it different from whenyour own barrister is asking you
questions and all of that stuff?
It's a huge anxiety givingevidence at a final hearing, and
so I really like that part ofmy role actually, because I
(26:24):
think you can sort of see theanxiety dripping off them and
then it gradually falls away.
So I think that's quiteimportant and I don't need to
have had a long termrelationship with the client to
come to sort of be parachuted infor that.
But in terms of what else I do.
To now answer your question, Imean a lot of the work I do.
(26:49):
The Rosefields GirlsConsultancy work is client
facing almost all of it.
But then of course, there's alot going on in the background
in terms of the relationshipswith the solicitors, the
relationships with thetherapists.
Even with you guys I work quiteclosely, um, and there's a lot
of talk all the time, constant,constant, constant.
(27:12):
A lot of whatsapps backwardsand forwards, middle of the
night, you know, because I tendto work as a very close team
with the solicitors andbarristers and therapists and
financial advisors that I knowand trust, um, so we're pinging
each other, constantly, throwingideas around.
That's part of why I'm such apassionate believer in our thing
in the team, which is what ourResolution Committee is all
(27:35):
about, because one person's pairof eyes and one person's brain
is never as good as having twoor three people with a different
perspective on it.
And when you work with peoplewho are open to other takes and
other ideas, the client'sexperience just goes like that
(27:56):
yeah, I mean it's, it's, it'snot, and and not only the
client's experience, but theoutcome really, yeah, yeah, much
better, because you know youmight say something.
Have you thought about the waythis offer is structured?
It might, you know it doesn'ttake care of this and we'll go?
Oh god, no, we didn't.
We didn't see that because wewere looking at it with our,
(28:17):
with our eyes, and now it'sopened up this whole thing that
we need to deal with.
But how amazing that the clienthas those different perspectives
.
So I think there's a lot thatthe client doesn't see of
chatter between the differentprofessionals on a case.
And then there's a little bitof, you know, the resolution
work that we do that's trying tobuild a generally better
(28:41):
picture for clients goingforward.
I sit on a domestic abusecharity which sorry, the board
of a domestic abuse charity,which at the board sorry, the
board of a domestic abusecharity, which I find very
helpful in terms of reminding meof what these people are going
through um and um.
I do a little bit of trainingon how to divorce narcissists
(29:04):
and other high conflictpersonalities, but it's all
really about keeping up to datein terms of being able to pass
on the knowledge to the clientsyeah, absolutely.
Tamsin Caine (29:15):
I think we all do a lot of that.
Keeping up to date piece thatsometimes you do it without even
thinking about it.
You know I'll sit on Twitter ofan evening looking at posts and
reading latest um courtdecisions.
Laura Rosefield (29:33):
That's where you learn from I can.
I completely don't have to sitand read encyclopedias anymore.
That's, that's the beauty of it.
None of us have the attentionspan for that anymore.
Um, so yeah, there's a lot ofthat, and the other thing is
there's a lot of that, and theother thing is that there's a
lot of thinking, a lot ofthinking time, and that happens
in the shower, while you'rechopping the vegetables, while
(29:54):
you're taking the dog for a walk.
My thing is, it happenswhenever I go to concerts
because I love music.
So as soon as I sit down and mybrain switches off, a genius
idea will come to me about howto unlock a particularly knotty
case or a knotty issue.
Tamsin Caine (30:10):
Um, so that there's a lot of thinking that
goes on behind the scenes thatthe clients don't necessarily
see yeah, and with your mind's,the shower, but it's often,
often in the shower, or I likehiking, so on the top of a hill
somewhere, you, you do.
The best time for thinking itis when you're not trying to
(30:33):
think.
I think it feels like a randomthing to say, but I completely
agree in terms of the the teamworking ethos that you have and
that I know we both verystrongly believe in, a lot of
(30:54):
people listening will bethinking well, that sounds
incredibly expensive to have allof those different people
involved.
Is your experience that isconsiderably more expensive?
Or would you say, or is it yourexperience that perhaps because
you've got a team working withyou doing the bits that they
should be doing, rather thanusing a solicitor as a therapist
(31:15):
, that actually it doesn't costmore than than it would
otherwise?
Laura Rosefield (31:20):
I completely agree with the latter, that that
I mean that one of the purposesof me is to save money.
That that was when, when Istarted um this, whenever it was
coming up 15 years ago, thatwas one of my two limbs that I
promised myself I would try andhelp clients with.
So I've seriously failed.
(31:41):
If things become more expensive.
So I work very hard to makethem not agree with you.
Having people wear the hat thatthey are meant to wear tends to
be a lot cheaper.
The example that's always givenis don't use your lawyer as a
therapist, but it's a goodexample.
Lawyers are expensive and theyare not therapists, so they're
(32:03):
not the best person for that job.
And the same with you.
They are not the best person todo the financial side of things
, the analysis and the strategyon that front.
Same with Form Z, for example.
So definitely picking the rightperson to do the right job has
an effect of saving you money.
Often, you know the otherprofessionals that sit with us
(32:27):
on our committee end up beingcheaper than lawyers.
So that's something to remember.
But the other thing to rememberis and this is something I'm
equally passionate about as wellas the team thing is that you
can pick and mix a bespokeapproach for your divorce.
So you don't have to have, whenwe say, the team, you don't
have to have 700 people workingon your case from minute A to
(32:52):
minute, 7 million.
They come in and they come outwhen needed, and sometimes you
only need a light touch.
Sometimes you need for example,in my case, maybe you do a
first meeting, you set thestrategy, you pick and choose
what you're going to do, youwork out how to frame it for the
(33:12):
other side and the client isoff and they never need to speak
to you again.
Or maybe they touch base forthree minutes six months later.
That's all that's necessary.
So with people like us, it's apay-as-you-go system, isn't it?
You don't need to be signing onthe dotted line and then
committing to these huge amountsof fees.
So it really is about what theparticular client needs and
(33:36):
making sure that the rightperson for that job is doing it.
But it doesn't necessarily meanthat you're on the hook for,
for you know, hours, hoursinvolvement, and I feel quite
strongly about that because I'mnot.
I'm not sure if peoplenecessarily know that.
What do you think?
Tamsin Caine (33:53):
no, I think it's.
I think it depends on theperson, doesn't it?
And I know I've been speakingum?
I was back to Claire Macklin acouple of weeks ago and um
recently launched her episodeand she was saying you know,
they it depends.
Even working with her, who's adivorce coach, you know she has
(34:15):
a way of working with herclients.
It's not a forever thing, butwith some clients it's not
necessary to do six months worthor six weeks worth or whatever.
It is as and when and what youneed.
So I think you're right.
I think it's picking the rightpeople for the right jobs, but
(34:37):
also at the right time andhaving them involved when
they're when they're needed, notnecessarily all the way through
.
Laura Rosefield (34:44):
Yeah, exactly, and I mean I, unlike most
coaches, I think I don't work insessions at all.
So really, if you need threeminutes, you pay for three
minutes.
That's it, um and um.
You know, I think that'sreassuring, because sometimes
all it needs is can you justlook at this email.
I just am I right about the myresponse?
I've done a draft.
Do you think it's okay?
(35:04):
Probably takes three or fourminutes and yet the client then
goes okay, yeah, I know I'm ontrack and that's a very
inexpensive way of working.
Yeah, absolutely Very time andcost efficient.
And the other thing is anotheramazing development in family
law is that there are lots offlexible ways of working.
(35:25):
There's unbundling with thesolicitors.
There's direct access with thebarristers, which I'm a massive
advocate of.
What else is there?
Um, oh, I do some work with, uh, another divorce consultant
where we just we're we're theonly two people on the case,
there aren't solicitors oranyone else involved um, and we
just sort it out between us andit's terribly cost effective
(35:49):
yeah, yeah, absolutely, and Ithink this will happen more and
more.
Tamsin Caine (35:54):
I think that lots of people working in family
justice are trying to developnew ways of working and trying
to help their clients in thebest possible way.
There are so many options outthere now to resolve your case
in court, out of court and it's,but I think it's getting word
(36:17):
out to the, to the generalpublic and the people who
actually need it, that you don'thave to.
You don't have to go straightto a lawyer.
You don't have to go straightto court, but you need to pick
the best of all of the optionsthat are out there for you in
your circumstances and and whatyou know.
Laura Rosefield (36:37):
Answering your first question about what I do,
you know very much the sort of Idon't know concierge service or
you know someone sitting abovewho knows all of those options
and connect them but can sort ofguide you in the right
direction, because I think youknow, it's difficult.
It's easier for us to see,isn't it as an outsider?
With some independence andobjectivity.
(36:58):
What a case needs?
When you're in it, it'simpossible.
Tamsin Caine (37:02):
I mean it's it's so difficult.
Laura Rosefield (37:04):
And then you add the anxiety and you just
you're seeing and thinkingstraight becomes very hard
absolutely.
Tamsin Caine (37:13):
This is something that probably should have asked
you ages ago.
But do you work with anybody orI know we've talked about Kate
generally working in highconflict cases?
Generally you're working withpeople where there's some abuse,
but do they have to be kind ofhigh net worth, ultra high net
worth?
Do you work with I don't likethe phrase ordinary people, but
(37:36):
you know what I mean.
Is there a kind of, is there aline where you go?
Do you know what to work withme?
If I'm going to look at yoursituation, I'm going to say that
you need X, y, I don't know.
There are certain things thatyou look for before you take
them on as a client.
Laura Rosefield (37:53):
The complete opposite, because of the sort of
pay-as-you-go system which Inever thought.
A client used that phrase of metwo weeks ago and I've used it
back when I've been doing thisfor so long.
I've never thought of it likethat, but it's true you just pay
for what you use, so it's.
It's, in fact, a really goodmodel when there isn't much
(38:14):
money around.
I thought your question made methink of someone a few years
ago who I had.
I won't say too much about whohe was, but he had nothing,
really nothing.
He was begging, borrowing andalmost stealing to pay for a
second and we fixed it In thesession together.
We wrote three messages that hewas going to send out like this
(38:39):
, staggered because we knew whatthe response was going to be
each time and that was it.
That was all he needed, and Ithink that happens quite a lot.
The model where I um sort thingsout with with this other
divorce consultant that I workclosely with very inexpensive
way of doing things.
I mean we, we did a caserecently and it was minimal fees
(39:00):
um, which I think probably Idon't know how much it would
have been with lawyers, but alot, a lot, lot more um and the
same with the direct access, butdefinitely you.
I think, first, meetings are avery valuable way of setting
people off on the right, on theright track, um.
And then, of course, you knowthere's all pro bono options as
(39:21):
well, because when you're doingthis kind of work, there's some,
some cases that you feel youhave to do because someone is
suffering or struggling so much.
So I definitely don't thinkit's only for high net worth.
In fact, it works brilliantlyfor the opposite end of the
scale.
Tamsin Caine (39:39):
Just something that came to mind while you were
talking, when you're workingwith the other divorce
consultant and sorting thingsout between are you able to
write draft the financialconsent order, or does that
still need to then go through alawyer?
Um?
Laura Rosefield (39:57):
I, I don't I always ask them to get a lawyer
to do it.
Yeah, um, and again, we workwith people that that will do
that for minimal.
Yeah, my view is it's tooimportant to take any risks and
I want it done absolutelyproperly.
Tamsin Caine (40:16):
I absolutely agree .
I wondered about, with yourlegal background, whether you
went down that route.
Laura Rosefield (40:24):
I was a criminal barrister, so I didn't
grow up in family law.
So everything I've learned fromthe job and you know I'm a big
fan of knowing where your skillslie and I don't.
I don't want to do that, so Idon't.
I think some, some people in myposition, maybe do, but that's
not something I do.
Tamsin Caine (40:44):
Yeah, no fair enough, we're coming to the end
of our time together, believe itor not.
I just wondered if there wasanything that I haven't asked
you that you feel like would beimportant to get across, or that
you want to add to what you'vesaid so far.
Laura Rosefield (40:59):
I think the only thing I would say is that,
um, I am living proof thatthings get better and get a lot
better.
You are too, I think, but Ithink that that's powerful.
So, even when you're workingwith clients on the nitty-gritty
, there's this overwhelmingsense that it's gonna.
(41:22):
It's gonna get better, and notonly better.
It's gonna be exciting, joyful,calm, peaceful, and I think,
having been through it, don'tknow if you agree, but it's
helpful to be able to reassureclients that the feelings will
pass, that they're normal.
You know, I have one phrase Icall the tsunami of exhaustion,
(41:42):
which I'm sure you're familiarwith, where it's just, you know,
after a bad letter comes, orafter a court hearing or a
conference with counsel orsomething you cannot move, um
and you're, you're so tired youthink there's something wrong
with you, and just being able tosay it's the tsunami of
exhaustion, by about Thursdayyou'll be up and about again and
(42:03):
and having that being provedright, I think that that's so
nice and I I always want toleave my clients with the
feeling that, in time, therewill be relief from this.
Tamsin Caine (42:14):
That's a beautiful way to end this conversation.
Laura, thank you so much forjoining me.
That's been an absolutelyfascinating conversation and I'm
hoping lots of people willlisten and pick up the phone or
contact you by email.
All Laura's details will be inthe show notes, so if you do
(42:34):
want to reach out to her, youwill be able to, and also,
obviously, check out her websiteas well.
Hope you join us again nexttime.
If you have enjoyed this episode, please do think about giving
us a lovely five-star review andwe'll catch up with you soon.
Us a lovely five-star reviewand we'll catch up with you soon
(42:57):
.
Hi, and I hope you enjoyed thatepisode of the Smart Divorce
Podcast.
If you would like to get intouch, please have a look in the
show notes for our details orgo onto the website,
wwwsmartdivorcecouk.
Also, if you are listening onApple Podcasts or on Spotify and
you wouldn't mind leaving us alovely five-star review, that
(43:18):
would be fantastic.
I know that lots of ourlisteners are finding this is
incredibly helpful in theirjourney through separation,
divorce and dissolving a civilpartnership.
Also, if you would like somefurther support, we do have a
Facebook group now.
It's called Separation, divorceand Dissolution UK.
(43:40):
Please do go on to Facebook,search up the group and we'd be
delighted to have you join us.
The one thing I would say is doplease answer their membership
questions.
Okay, have a great day and takecare.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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
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!