Editor’s note: This article by Cheryl Connors, chair of the NJSBA Family Law Section, appears in the February 2026 issue of the section’s newsletter - New Jersey Family Lawyer. Section members can read the full edition here. Learn more about joining the section here.
As Chair of the Family Law Section this year, I am honored to serve a section that is both forward thinking and goal oriented. Over the years, our section has actively pursued change in various areas including proposing and drafting legislation as well as identifying areas to improve and modify our court rules. In planning my year as Chair, I decided to focus on the area of Alternative Dispute Resolution. ADR not only has many benefits for families but also assists the court in moving cases to conclusion. My goal this year is to gather input from our section to identify opportunities for enhancing ADR and to develop strategies and recommendations to support those improvements.
ADR has become interwoven into the fabric of our daily family law practice. While some cases necessitate a trial, our court rules require that we discuss and consider ADR at the outset of every matter. Most family law practitioners recognize that ADR provides a means for their clients to reach a fair resolution in their matter while preserving their financial resources in avoiding trial. Further, ADR allows creative problem-solving designed to meet the unique needs of each family and provides for a private resolution.
Given how prevalent ADR has become in family law matters, it is an area that is ripe for study and improvement. To that end, I have appointed numerous professionals to serve on an Alternative Dispute Resolution Task Force with Derek Freed and Robin Bogan serving as co-chairs. The ADR Task Force intends to study how ADR is functioning in our state as well as research how ADR operates in other states under their court rules and statutes. When the ADR Task Force completes its study, the goal is to propose ideas and innovative ways to improve ADR in New Jersey family law cases.
Some examples of what the ADR Task Force hopes to examine are bottlenecks or inefficiencies in our current system, looking to best practices from other jurisdictions, developing practice recommendations for rule changes that will promote greater use of ADR and creating guidelines that balance the need for efficient case resolution and ensuring fair outcomes for families. The ADR Task Force is comprised of four subcommittees: mediation, co-chaired by Phyllis Klein and Cheryl Connors; arbitration, co-chaired by Carolyn Daly and Tracy Julian; parenting coordination, co-chaired by Amy Wechsler and Candice Drisgula and court rules, co-chaired by Jeffrey Fiorello, Alexandra Freed and Kaitlyn Lapi. Each subcommittee is in the process of forming specific areas of study and goals.
The Family Law Executive Committee recently circulated a survey to the entire section to gather data regarding ADR. This survey included questions regarding all four areas: mediation, arbitration, parenting coordination and the court rules pertaining to ADR. It also addressed our Matrimonial Early Settlement Panel system and seek input on possible changes to MESP. We prepared this survey so that we have the benefit of the wisdom of the community-at-large and will use the data gathered from this survey to guide our strategies to develop recommendations for implementation of change.