The Emotional State of a party to a divorce and their ability to adjust to the dramatic effect that divorce will have on their lives is primarily determined by their status as the initiator or non-initiator of the divorce.

Statisticlly, 75% of the initiators are women. The reason for this relates to the underlying failure of the Traditional Model of men and women in marriage, and the conclusion that all marriages based on the Traditonal Model must fail and why the Relational Relationship Model^TM and Structured Equilibrium^TM are essential for long term marital success.

Nevertheless, whether you accept the reasons for it or not, the ability of a party to adjust to the prospect of divorce is controlled by their initiator status.

The Initiator Status affects the fundamental ability of the parties to resolve issues whether they mediate or litigate, and since 98% of all litigation ends in settlement, it is critical to understand, regardless of the path chosen.

Below, we explain and define these terms. How and why the emotional state affects a party's ability to make rational decisions is affected by the amount of time that elasped in the process which is discussed in the next section Timing.

Being Resolved

Being Resolved is the Key to the Doorway of Settlement, whether in Litigation or Mediation.

The initiator, having passed through the emotional divorce, is resolved that divorce is inevitable. There is no issue or question about reconciliation. The pharase that divorce lawyers are ethically required to ask is "Is there any reasonable prospect of reconciliation?". For the initiator, the answer is always "No!".

From a settlement perspective, in mediation or litigation, the resolved state of mind is required before the parties can ever come to any form of settlement agreement. Until both are at that point, the negotiations always hedge against the possibility of reconcilliation.

Residual anger also remains. Attempted negotiations at that point may actually significanly set back not only the negotiation progress, but the long term ability of the parties to communicate at all.

However, once the possibility of reconcilliation is removed, and the level of anger has deminished, and both parties are resolved that divorce is inevitable, then the parties are ready to enter into fruitful negotitions.

The resolved mindset at the beginning of a litigated divorce, is primarily related to the initiator status of the parties. Thus, understanding the initiator status of the parties is critical to understand the timing for settlement of the case, and therefore, the choice of when to effectively spend money during the litigation.

The Initiator

The Initiator is:

The party to the divorce that first
makes the decision to end the marriage

Although one might say, but when "...he knew that if he did that again it was over...", then when he continued with that conduct, he knew that he was causing the divorce. Shouldn't that make him the initiator?

Crossing the line with deal breaking conduct makes him the cause that may legally justify or established the cause of action in a divorce complaint.

However, in emotional terms, when she, as a result of his conduct, decides "that's it" and begins the action plan toward divorce, she becomes the initiator.

Why the parties are divorcing is irrelevant.

The issues and causes that typically lead to divorce are addressed under Reconciliation and for the most part are immaterial because:

• In Legal Terms - while New Jersey is a cause state, thus requiring a reason for the divorce, i.e. a "Cause of Action", the reason for divorce is to be liberally accepted because the courts have interpreted a public policy in the law of divorce in favor of granting divorces if requested by a party. Further, there is also no punnishment, or different treatment as a result of any conduct that may have caused the divorce. Even if a party is an adulter for example, hence, no legal reason to argue about or to prove who was at fault.
• Emotionally Speaking - the initiator's reasons for the divorce, in general, have no impact upon the expected reaction of the non-initiator or in the amount of time it will take the non-initiator to adjust to the resolved state:
  • However, the initator's actions that are rationalized by their reasons, can affect the degree, extent and timing of the non-initiator's ability to adjust. For example if the initiator has an affair, rationalized because the non-initiator did or did not do something, the action of the affair prior to the divorce will adversely impact the non-initiator's ability to adjust to the divorce, and may take additional time and therapy.

The primary difference between the emotional state of the initiator and non-initiator is that:

By the time the initiator has announced his or her intentions to divorce, he or she has already passed through
all the stages of the emotional divorce.

This process of adjustment by the initiator many have taken months, but may have taken years. It is not uncommon that a woman initiator (75% of all initiators) will state that she had been thinking about getting divorced for many years, but needed to wait until a particular time when she felt more secure in moving forward with the announcement of her desire for a legal divorce.

A common example of this situation is a married couple that have not slept together for weeks, months or years. While, there are always execptions, in general, these circumstances probably indicate that the parties, for whatever reason, are seriously emotionally disconnected. In that state, there is a significant probability that they will divorce, and that the party that feels he or she is not getting their equity in the deal, will be the initiator, and that party is in the process of or has attained the emotional divorce.

Many times there may be no clear outward sign because the initiator does not want hints of his or her intention to be known until ready to actually move forward with the legal divorce. To minimize the "impact upon children" is a commonly stated reason for this behavior, but often financial issues are the true underlying concern.

There is the rare case where both parties were similarly viewing the marriage, and independantly both felt it should end: the dual-initiator situation. Even in the dual-initiator situation, it is more likely that one was the true initiator and the other was close and was pushed foward to the same point by the actions of the true initiator. A long period of separate bedrooms will typically apprear to be a dual-initiator, but was probably one party that emotionally divorced and after a signifiant period of time, the other party gave up hope for the marrige, or was so resentful, became emotionally divorced and resolved that divorce would be the inescapable conclusion.

The key to this is not that the initiator has avoided the pain and greiving over the loss of the marriage, but that this emotional adjustment was completed before the announcement was made to the non-initiator.

The initiator may have been emotionally divorced for months or years, and is therefore fully prepared emotionally and psychologically to proceed with resolving the issues of the legal divorce.

Contrast this with the the non-initiator, who when first clearly and unequivically told that divorce is inevitable may be in shock while the initiator has most likely completely adjusted already to the emotional divorce and is fully prepared to proceed as quickly as possible with the legal divorce.

The Non-Initiator

The Non-Initiator, typically the husband, is the person who is told that divorce is inevitable. Often, if the initiator is still angry, the non-initiator gets the added bonus: "...and its all your fault!"

In many cases, this announcement has been preceeded by weeks, months or years or quarreling, hostility and emotional and intimate separation. However, it is not unusual for the level of disharmony to be relatively minimal.

In any event, it is typical that the non-initiator is shocked by this announcement.

The non-initiator will typically attempt efforts at reconcilliation: apologies, promises to change, marriage counseling, bargaining, pleading, guilt trips (What about the children?), threatening and any other similar conduct intended to get the initiator to change his or her mind.

What Happened All of a Sudden?

The non-initiator, whose very conduct or lack of emotional connection, may have lead the initiator to feel compelled to divorce, is in a state of confusion by this announcement.

If the gap period between the initiator's beginning stage of emotional divorce, and the time of the announcment is a significant period of time, the shock is even more dramatic.

Even though the non-initiator's conduct was the initiator's cause for divorce, in the non-initiator's mind that pattern of behavior had become normal.

From the non-initiator's perpective, "Its been this way for years, what happened all of a sudden?"

The non-initiator must pass through the stages of the emotional divorce and become resolved that divorce is inevitable. In the process of passing through the stages of shock, anger and grief, the party is an emotional mess. However, there will be a point when the non-initiator is resolved, and at that point, fruitful negotiations can begin.

At the beginning of litigation, the non-initiator is served, usually at work, humiliated in front of his peers, and accused of wrongdoing that caused the divorce. Presenting the announcement in this manner is a recipe for giving the divorce lawyers a long term annuity for litigation fees they will collect from both parties for many years as a result of that humiliation.

Having an Affair either before the divorce is final, or before the non-initiator is resolved, or any other act by the initiator that tends to Humiliate the non-initiator, will dramatically affect the ability of the non-initiator to adjust, resulting in a protracted litigation that is mean spirited, costly and devastating upon the children.

So while it is important that the initiator feels he or she had legitimate reasons for a divorce, a key to succussful divorce litgation managment is how the non-initiator is treated at the commencement of the case, and the importance of avoiding the humiliation of either party.