When we change how we view disputes over parenting, child support, custody/guardianship, spousal support, and property division from legal battles to be won to joint problems to be solved, the experience of separation and divorce becomes less adversarial as out of court settlement strategies replace traditional ways of resolving the family law dispute.
I support my clients by offering a menu of options
from traditional to more collaborative approaches to resolving family law problems.
As a litigation lawyer, I was inspired to explore non-adversarial approaches after witnessing disputes escalate into animosity, frustration, delays and excessive costs. What I discovered was that non-adversarial settlement strategies help to preserve relationships; reduce the emotional and financial costs; and promote a more thorough exploration of options in reaching mutually satisfying agreements. The success of these out of court settlement strategies begins with this fundamental shift in seeing the dispute as a joint problem to be solved. This shift unlocks the door to innovative ways of resolving disputes respectfully even when couples are experiencing high conflict, disagreements, difficulty communicating, and wanting different outcomes.
Helping you make informed choices involves understanding your hopes, fears, concerns, and goals. Together we can explore all your options and develop a personalized plan to move forward. I am based in Nanaimo, BC serving clients on Central Vancouver Island. Contact me to book a consultation.
With 20 years of litigation experience combined with my dispute resolution background, I am well equipped to work within any process.
Mediation focuses on exploring solutions that meet the interests of both parties which is referred to as “interest based negotiation”.
Arbitration is an out of court process that offers a legally binding decision by a qualified Arbitrator acting as a Judge.
Laura’s expertise made a significant increase to my visitation with my breast-fed infant son. I went from being a dad whose ex only allowed me to visit my son in her home, with her present, and only at her convenience to having my son almost half the week including overnight. I enthusiastically recommend Laura Taylor in family legal matters. She is bright, supportive, and effective.
Laura listened to my concerns, validated the reason why I was coming to see her and offered options as to how she could help me. I felt very supported and heard. I have seen Laura come to my aid as an excellent advocate for my well being. She is quick and efficiant to respond at my collaborative meetings and always has my best interest in mind.
I would highly recommend Laura to anyone. Through one of the most toughest time in my life she has stood
by me and advocated for me all the way. Helping to restore my voice and giving me more confidence than I thought possible.
Laura Taylor helped me with compassion, understanding, integrity and real Professional service. She is good at
what she does, easy to reach and communicate with, she supported me with empathy like a friend through a
very difficult journey. I strongly recommend laura taylor if you are in need of a lawyer
I am also a member of the Family Separation Professionals in Victoria, BC; the International Association of
Collaborative Professionals; and a member of the CBA-ADR section
The collaborative lawyer plays a key role in helping couples to negotiate a mutually acceptable separation agreement, which is the ultimate goal of the collaborative process. To achieve successful negotiations it is important for couples to understand the difference between interest-based negotiations, as compared with positional bargaining. A lack of understanding can create significant obstacles to reaching a mutually acceptable agreement in the collaborative process. An understanding of the differences between the two negotiation approaches will also help couples understand the role of the collaborative lawyer in helping them reach their goals.
Typically the concept of “negotiation” in family law conjures up traditional notions of exchanging proposals through lawyers. Proposals are positions taken based upon what each person has decided he/she wants. This approach is known as “positional bargaining” or “positional negotiation”. Strategies are often employed to try to influence the other party to give up his/her position such as making demands, making concessions, holding back information, and using threats of court. The lawyer’s role is traditionally understood as “fighting” to get what the client has decided he/she wants as being fair and reasonable.
When the ultimate goal is to agree on a position that is mutually satisfying, the tendency is to think and talk only about the positions.
Wife: “I want my spouse to pay me spousal support”.
Husband: “I don’t want to pay spousal support”.
The statements above reflect this type of positional thinking and talking. When talking in terms of positions only, the options to find mutually satisfying solutions are limited to the two positions that each party is advancing. The limited options often lead to impasse as neither party wants to give up what he/she wants to reach an agreement.