Divorce is a term that we, as a modern society, are intimately familiar with. With an estimated one in three adults having experienced divorce themselves—and countless more having watched friends or family members go through it—divorce touches far more lives than the statistics alone suggest. Yet for all its prevalence and even acceptance, there is one inescapable aspect of divorce that statistics cannot fully quantify: Its capacity for destruction.
Divorce is destructive. Inherently and by definition. It is the dissolution of a marriage, the breaking of a contract. But it is also the opportunity to rebuild, reclaim and reinvent.
The distinction between destruction and reinvention, however, lies in the hands of the divorcing parties and their legal counsel. With the right approach, divorce can become an exercise not simply in dissolution but in reconstruction.
As founding partners of Hastings Shadmehry Family Law, Andrea (Andee) Hastings and Mali Shadmehry have built their careers on ushering their clients into a future that is not simply about starting over but also moving forward.
“When a client comes to us, they’re often in fear of what’s to come but are ready to transition into a new chapter in their life,” says Shadmehry. “We specialize in high-asset divorce, so we work with clients who are business owners or have diverse financial needs. We also work with people dealing with complex custody issues. In every case, we provide concierge care to our clients. We walk beside them through each step, so that they can have as seamless an experience as possible.”
Her partner agrees. “Our goal is to be very strategic and compassionate while protecting our clients,” says Hastings. “Not every nail needs a hammer. There are certain lawyers who have a reputation for coming in and just burning it all down—and while we’re certainly capable of that, it’s not necessarily our approach. Our methods are based on the needs of the case, the client, the opposing party, the opposing lawyer and how they’re conducting themselves. It’s much more nuanced than people realize.”
In fact, nuance is often lost altogether in divorce cases. Protracted legal battles that become almost warlike in their vindictive, manipulative and scorched-earth tactics have been normalized, but Hastings and Shadmehry believe that successful divorce leaves both parties standing.
“It doesn’t have to be combative. A lot of people have children together and want to continue to co-parent and work together, even though they’re no longer a family unit in the same way. It takes a particular set of tools to advocate for them while also working to maintain those relationships for the benefit of the family as it’s been reshaped. That’s part of our ‘chess, not checkers’ approach,” Hastings says. “The best trial lawyers are excellent settlement attorneys. To be truly effective in settling cases, you must know what’s going to happen. There will be destruction. Sometimes there’s no choice. But there is a level of destruction to the relationship when you go to trial. You must bring out evidence that will impact relationships going forward. If the parties have children, that can create additional challenges.”
The key, according to Hastings and Shadmehry, is to limit the fallout. Yes, there will be destruction, but how much will there be, and how deep will it run?
“To me, achieving divorce without true destruction means that a family law attorney bridges the gap between emotion and business,” Shadmehry explains. “We take the emotion out of it so that we can come to a practical solution. ‘Without destruction’ doesn’t mean that nothing is being dismantled. People are coming to us in a situation that is not sustainable. Our job is to get to a conclusion that can lead to a sustainable future—to put something together that allows people to proceed apart in a healthier way.”
As Shadmehry explains, keeping the peace isn’t always easy when the opposition is particularly aggressive or malicious—but it is possible. “That’s when you need a sound voice in the room,” she says. “We like the strategy of circling before we attack so that we’re not making emotional decisions. Yes, you have to meet fire with fire, but it needs to be calculated. A client must have trust in their attorney, so that strategy is not undone by emotion.”
Avoiding unnecessary destruction doesn’t necessarily mean avoiding the traditional divorce process. Rather, Hastings and Shadmehry say it means choosing the process—and the strategy within that process—that best fits the people and circumstances involved.
For couples who wish to avoid a court battle, collaborative divorce and mediation offer viable, legally binding alternatives. Collaborative divorce brings couples together with specialized attorneys and neutral experts to settle property, support and custody. Both sides agree to negotiate honestly without going to court. Mediation, by contrast, uses a neutral third party to help reach an agreement. As Hastings explains, mediation is an aspect of litigation. Both processes depend on the parties and the particulars of their case.
“I think there’s often a misconception that the only people who can go through collaborative divorce are people who don’t really have any problems and just don’t want to be married anymore,” says Hastings. “However, we deal with all the same issues, such as infidelity. The parties have simply committed up front to what they want the process to look like. Most of the time in collaborative divorce, people are there for the right reasons. Typically, they want to maintain a relationship, usually for the benefit of their children. They don’t want to destroy each other in court.”
Shadmehry stresses that most cases do not go through the formal collaborative process—though the traditional divorce process can still be collaborative. “If you want to be cordial, nondestructive, save costs, preserve peace and get to an efficient end result, what we often do is work toward settlement as soon as the case is initiated,” she explains. “You can reach collaborative results in a collaborative setting within the traditional divorce process.”
Regardless of the process itself, Shadmehry and Hastings stress that honesty and preparedness are paramount. “If you give the right lawyer all the information—with your honesty and documentation—they’re going to be better equipped to deal with a difficult opposing side,” Shadmehry says. “Preparation allows the attorney to have those initial conversations with the other attorney and set the stage. If we’re armed with information and knowledge of family law, we can nurture relationships with the other side and coax the case toward the best conclusion. Being more prepared than the other side is incredibly important. Preparedness is the number one component.”
Divorce is, by definition, an ending. But what kind of ending it becomes—and what remains when it is over—is determined in no small part by the people dissolving their marriage and the counsel guiding them through the process. Destruction is an inescapable fact; the question is whether that destruction ends with the marriage or extends to the finances, families and relationships surrounding it.
A successful divorce, as Hastings and Shadmehry point out, is not necessarily one without destruction. It is one that limits the damage, preserves what can be preserved and leaves both parties standing, so that when the dust settles, there is still something left to build. *
Liesel Schmidt is a freelance writer and book editor based in Navarre, Florida. She is the author of three novels.
