In my opinion, there are a couple of cons. One is the cost and that can be a con in a situation where the collaborative process extends longer than the average. So usually, there are about three or four collaborative sessions that we schedule and meet and usually at the fourth session or so, we know that there’s going to be a collaborative agreement. If the collaborative process goes much longer than that, it becomes more expensive, obviously. Also, because of the experts involved usually the mental health expert and the financial expert everybody is charging fees for their time so sometimes cost is a real factor.

The other part of it is that in the event and fortunately, this hasn’t happened to me, but in the event a collaborative agreement is not reached then the clients need to retain new counsel in order to proceed to litigation in order to proceed to trial so that too, can be costly.