Divorce Mediation Service

When It Comes to a High-Net-Worth or a High-Asset Divorce Case, Are There Financial Benefits to Mediation? Should This Always Be Considered As a First Option?

Yes, mediation has many benefits. In cases with higher stakes, not only do we explore mediation, but I’m also trained as a collaborative divorce attorney. Some high-net-worth individuals seek our counsel and prefer to not spend a lot of money and waste a lot of time in court. Collaborative cases allow us to use mediation tactics to settle the case, but each side still has an attorney and has agreed to resolve everything outside of court. In mediation sessions for collaborative cases, we might meet virtually or in-person and bring in their financial advisor, their accountant, their business attorney, and any other professionals to help them with the assets. You can sign a contract agreeing to a collaborative divorce and end up mediating the matter before any paperwork is ever filed with the court.

A collaborative divorce works for couples who are communicative and on the same page. For high-net-worth cases where the couple hasn’t collaborated before the divorce is filed, the court requires two hours of mediation in every case except those involving domestic violence issues or some other reason that the parties can’t engage in mediation.

Mediation prevents someone going through a divorce from having to hire appraisers, business evaluators, pension specialists, and other professionals as they spend months and even years in litigation. For that reason, it’s usually one of the first steps we recommend. The courts like mediation because it satisfies one of our local rules for divorces to prevent spending a long time in court. When people come into their separation with the understanding that they can still communicate even if they’re getting a divorce, mediation and collaboration help to resolve cases before a judge even knows they’re filing.

When It Comes to Child Support and Child Custody Matters, Is There Ever an Age in Kentucky Where a Child Can Decide or Give Input into Who He or She Will Live With?

Under Kentucky law, one of the factors that the court must consider is the child’s wishes, whether the child is one or seventeen. Obviously, that’s not possible for a one-year-old, but there’s no differentiation in Kentucky law about the age of a child when it comes to how much the court needs to listen to their wishes. To compare, Indiana law says that a child of fourteen or older should have more deference about what they want. That does not exist in Kentucky, so a fifteen-year-old doesn’t really have a stronger voice in Kentucky than what a seven-year-old does.

One way to ensure the kid’s voice is heard is for the court to appoint what’s called a friend of the court (FOC) or a guardian ad litem (GAL). Judges try to keep kids out of court and not put them in a situation where they have to testify in front of their parents, even if it’s behind closed doors or on video. By appointing someone for that child, a judge can allow the child’s voice to filter through a court-appointed professional and amplify it so that a judge hears it more loudly.

For more information on Family Law in Kentucky, an initial consultation is your best step. Get the information and legal answers you are seeking by calling (812) 302-0539 today.