Thanks for the question below:
Using the Collaborative Law process to divorce is more beneficial for several reasons. First and foremost, it is less antagonistic and thus there is less conflict. It is truly a team approach where the divorcing couple are focused on the future and what is best for everyone moving forward--especially the children--instead of being focused on just trying to hurt or "get" each other.
Second, the (sometimes ugly) details of the couple's lives remain private and do not become part of public record as with a contested divorce. This can be important when the parties are trying to protect professional reputations, etc.
Finally, when couples are able to set aside their pain and get out of the "I'm going to make you pay for this" mode, Collaborative Law provides far more control. In a standard contested divorce a judge makes many/all of the decisions. A "collaborative divorce" allows the individual parties to make the decisions. Most couples would agree that they know the needs of their family better than anyone else. Why shouldn't they be the ones making the decisions instead of a judge who has never met them?
As for cost, a Collaborative Law divorce falls somewhere between mediation and a contested one that goes to trial. Costs can certainly vary, but most find it is well worth it. For more in-depth information on the Collaborative Law process, click here for the Collaborative Law Institute of Texas: http://www.collablawtexas.com/the-collaborative-law-approach.
Hope that helps!