CDT Advanced Training · June 2026
"I don't get enough cases."
The number one thing I hear collaborative lawyers say. This talk is about why — and why it isn't the market's fault.
You don't have a referral problem.
You have a conversion problem.
The headline
4 in 5
first-time divorce clients had never heard of collaborative.
Where the few who knew heard about it
Every informed client was told. Not one found it alone.
The handful who walked in already aware had each been pointed to collaborative by:
- A collaborative professional — a financial neutral, a trust attorney, another lawyer.
- Their spouse, who raised it first.
- A referral — "someone suggested a collaborative attorney."
0
found it through their own research
The awareness that exists is recycled inside the collaborative network itself — which is exactly why advertising to the public can't manufacture it.
The whole game is in the room
If you don't raise it, it never happens. When you do, they want it.
46 of 46
divorce consults where collaborative could apply — Cristi raised it in every one.
Clients almost never raise it themselves, so the conversation is entirely on the lawyer. The only 5 she skipped were non-starters — an emergency, a same-day TRO, an already-settled case.
4 of 5
first-time hearers wanted it once she explained it.
Almost none declined on the merits. The interest is already there — it just has to be unlocked in the consult.
The signature line
Protect the future family
"His job is not to attack the other party, but to advocate for you in a positive, future-focused way — so you can co-parent… you can dance together at your daughter's wedding."
— Consult #1
"We don't have to have separate birthday parties for our grandkids because grandma and grandpa can't get along."
→ Client: "Right. That's what I would want."
— Consult #10
Short, repeatable
"No parenting relationship was ever made better at the courthouse."
— Consults #7, #10, #12
"Collaborative — you get to go home and sleep after these meetings and think about it. As opposed to mediation, where we're in a room for eight, twelve hours… it's just a pressure cooker."
— Consult #1
The first lands every time. The second resonates with anyone afraid of being railroaded.
The dominant blocker, by a wide margin
"My spouse will never agree to it."
Spouse will never
cooperate
Distrust / "he
hides money"
Cost — "overkill
for a simple case"
Fear it fails /
principled objection
Everything else is a distant second. The reframes that defuse "they'll never do it" are the core skill.
The counter to the #1 objection
"Make it their idea" + the joint petition
Client builds a whole plan around it: "Maybe I go to him and tell him… here's this option."
— Consult #5
"You can file a joint petition in a collaborative case. So it doesn't have to be you suing her, or her suing you."
— Consult #13
This is the practical answer to "my spouse will never agree" — and it visibly works.
Reframes that flip a negative into a reason it works
The narcissist likes control
"They often like collaborative — they feel in control, no judge telling them what to do."
→ "You might be right. It's certainly a control thing." #8
Sworn disclosure as a feature
To a client who feared a hiding spouse: "You're under oath. You'll sign a sworn inventory the financial neutral helps with."
Answered "I don't have his logins." — #14
Privacy for professionals
"He's a physician — he won't want this aired in court."
→ Client: "And that would be the angle." #6
The ethics teaching point
Sometimes collaborative is the wrong answer — and saying so builds trust
"I don't expect there's much of a negotiation. It is a math problem."
— Consult #15
A client came in pre-disposed to collaborative — but her estate was simple enough that she didn't need a full process like collaborative to divide it. Cristi honestly steered her to the kitchen table instead. Collaborative isn't always the client's best move. Saying so out loud is what separates a trusted advisor from a salesperson — and it protects the integrity of the process. It's the opposite of the all-too-common collaborative bait-and-switch — litigators who advertise collaborative to get clients in the door, then steer everyone toward court.
The reusable script — consistent across 60+ consults
The pitch architecture
Frame it as mainstream, not niche — a first-tier way to divorce, not the exotic alternative. How you introduce it decides whether the client takes it seriously.
- 1"A form of alternative dispute resolution."
- 2"You each have a lawyer; you sign a contract not to go to court."
- 3Two neutrals — a mental-health process facilitator who runs the meetings + a financial neutral (sometimes a child specialist).
- 4Interest-based negotiation — "the why behind what you want" (the orange-vs-rind metaphor).
- 5"A series of two-hour meetings — about 4–6 over 4–6 months."
- 6"Transparent. We don't take advantage of mistakes."
- 7"Less than 1–3% opt out" ("maybe 5 out of hundreds in my own practice").
- 8The cost anchor: collaborative consistently runs a quarter to a third of a litigated divorce.
- 9"You can file a joint petition — you can even start without filing."
What this means for getting cases
Don't teach the public. Convert the person already in your chair.
No one researches collaborative divorce before they need it — but the divorcing client is already in your office. Every collaborative case is made in that room, or not at all.
State 1 · zero
Doesn't raise it
Waits to be asked. Clients never ask — so it yields no collaborative cases, ever.
State 2 · leaks
Raises it, sells it badly
Folds at "my spouse will never agree." Makes informed clients who still walk.
State 3 · converts
Raises it, sells it well
Every time it fits, with the reframes. Four of five first-hearers want it.
The one part you can't control
You did everything right. Then you send them home — and cross your fingers.
You raised it. You explained it well. They want it. Now they walk out to the one conversation you'll never be in — with a spouse who heard "collaborative" from the other side and is sure it's a trap. Every reframe you just learned stops at your office door.
So you're not just crossing your fingers
collabfacts.com
A neutral, nothing-to-sell explanation of collaborative — built for the spouse you're not allowed to talk to. It opens with their real fear:
"My spouse — or their lawyer — wants a collaborative divorce. Is this a setup?"
- Nothing to sell, no form, no tracking, a quick-exit button — and it tells them when collaborative is the wrong call. Credible precisely because it has nothing to gain.
- Built for the whole state. It even covers "can we do this over Zoom, from different cities?" — which matters most where collaborative practitioners are scarce.
Inoculate the other spouse with the truth before the distrust hardens. A Share button right on the page makes it one tap to send — to the other spouse, or their lawyer. Take what's useful and pass it on.