A recent NY Times article discusses couples choosing long-term separation over divorce. While there can be many reasons for such an arrangement the majority of times the motivation for maintaining the marriage is financial. The combination of a depressed real estate market and the recent economic downturn are keeping many married couples together but separated. Among the financial reasons for couples to stay married are tax breaks, health care coverage, and Social Security benefits. Some couples opt to stay married solely so one spouse can continue to have access to health benefits that he or she would not be able to obtain on their own.

Another recent trend is couples separating or divorcing but continuing to live in the same house for practical reasons. In today's real estate market it can be difficult to even sell a home, and those that are able to sell often do so at a substantial loss. For couples who want to avoid this scenario, continuing to live together in the home may be their only option. It is also difficult for families to adjust their budgets to accommodate two households after a divorce. If the means for each spouse to live independently are not available they may not have a choice but to stay together until their finances improve.

Some couples simply don't want to deal with divorce proceedings and  see no upside to divorce if they are not planning to remarry. This can change though if one spouse starts a new relationship with someone who isn't comfortable with their married status. This can happen years, even decades, after the separation began.

A recent USA Today article discusses the growing trend for couples to separate amicably. The article cites a number of reasons for this shift, from couples having watched their parents and friends go through messy divorces to wanting children of the marriage to have the easiest transition possible.

For couples seeking to split on friendly terms Collaborative Divorce may be their best option. Collaborative Divorce has a number of benefits, but its focus on minimizing conflict between the parties is probably its greatest benefit for couples who want to continue a positive relationship after the divorce is finalized. The unique strcuture of a Collaborative Divorce proceeding incentives completion of the process. In a Collaborative Divorce the parties sign a participation agreement at the outset. The Participation Agreement sets the terms for the Collaborative Law process. By signing, the parties agree that if either party withdraws from the process and proceeds to litigation, they are barred from using the services of any of the professionals involved in the Collaborative process, including their attorney. The participation agreement also commits the parties to providing full and honest disclosure. The participation agreement lays the ground rules for the process and encourages the parties to see it through.

Collaborative Divorce differs from mediation, another divorce solution mentioned in the USA Today article, in many ways. In a Collaborative Divorce each party is represented by their own attorney. Attorneys must be familiar with the process, and able to represent the best interest of their client while staying in a collaborative mindset and focusing on issue resolution. Attorneys representing clients in a mediation are likely still in an adversarial mindset. Attorneys in a Collaborative Divorce should be trained in Collaborative principals and able to shift their perspective towards conflict resolution. Unlike a mediation, in a Collaborative Divorce, mutually agreed upon financial and mental health professionals assist the couple in working through issues that arise. The Collaborative process sets the tone for working through issues together and will hopefully allow couples to continue that cooperation on issues that arive after the divorce is finalized.