Divorce Is Going DIY. Just Don't Call It Disruptive
DIY divorce websites are becoming more prevalent, spurred in large part by millennial legal consumers who want an inexpensive and digital way to divorce. But for the most part, divorce attorneys don't find such services disruptive.
November 13, 2018 at 07:00 AM
5 minute read
When Portland, Oregon-based family law attorney Nicole Schaefer came across a do-it-yourself online divorce website called It's Over Easy, she had an idea. Why not bring the service, which catered to California, Nevada, Texas and New York residents to Oregon?
“I thought it would be a good site to have in Oregon just based on my own experience as a lawyer,” she recalled. “I've see a lot more clients interested in being independent in the [divorce] process.”
In October, Schaefer launched Let's Untie the Knot, an online DIY divorce website to help those seeking an uncontested divorce draft legal and financial documents and negotiate divorce terms with their spouse. Depending on what pricing tier one chooses, the platform also provides instructions on how to file divorce documents and offers access to personal divorce consultants.
While such a service was new to Oregon, Schaefer wasn't breaking any new ground. DIY divorce services have been around for years, and many divorce attorneys don't particularly find them disruptive, noting they are not a substitute for the expertise of a seasoned legal expert. Still, DIY divorce offerings are growing and are catching on with a generation accustomed to online services. And given the rapid evolution of technology, one can't help but wonder where all this will lead.
“I think they are going to have a big impact if they develop some level of sophistication,” said Michael Stutman, founding partner at Stutman Stutman & Lichtenstein in New York. “But in terms of appearing in front of a neutral magistrate to argue and present a case and finesse around rules of evidence, I guess I hope that I won't see that development in my lifetime.”
Stutman, however, does believe there “will be an increase in DIY” in the years to come. “The population that is now coming of age; they seem to be very comfortable dealing with technological innovations.”
For Erin Levine, founder of the California-based Levine Family Law Group that launched a DIY divorce website called Hello Divorce in January 2017, such a trend is undeniable. She said one of the reasons her firm launched a DIY service, which among other things offers a resource library, legal coaching and document preparation and filing services, was because “clients, and especially millennial clients, were really pushing us to offer more options.”
To be sure, in Stutman's estimation, DIY divorce resources have been around for at least “five or six years.” He believes online legal publishers such as Nolo.com, which was acquired by Internet Brands in 2011, were among the first to offer DIY divorce legal forms online.
Since then others have offered similar services, including on-demand legal service provider LegalZoom. But having a large and well-funded player such as LegalZoom in the DIY divorce market isn't scaring others off.
“One of our main issues is just how to compete with sites like [LegalZoom],” Schaefer said. “But I think the difference is we offer a more personal feel and a more intimate experience because we are only based in Oregon right now and I think our website is geared toward the user. I think LegalZoom is more of a factory of legal paperwork so to speak, not necessarily the same feel or same dynamic.”
Other DIY services look to differentiate by expanding beyond just legal advice. “We address far more than the legal issues,” Levine said. “We consider the whole person and provide wellness support. Technology is fantastic, but if we don't provide a human touch and/or consider the user experience, we are really missing out on providing quality legal help and/or deescalating conflict.”
For his part, Stutman praised such services as helping to facilitate the understanding of divorce processes and the discussions between spouses. But he added that they are likely ill-equipped to handle more complex legal and financial matters that can arise in a divorce.
For instance, “one of the common things that creates a real problem for people is the allocation of retirement funds, and you have to be very careful with those because of valuation and tax problems that can be incurred if you screw it up,” he said.
”The other things you need to be careful of, particularly in New York, … is real property transfer, particularly if that is encumbered with some sort of lien or mortgage. So I don't know whether or not these DIY packages shine a bright enough light on those two issues alone to make people aware of, and capable of, handling those issues,” he added.
Many DIY services, however, offer to connect their customers to a live attorney. Schaefer noted that Let's Untie the Knot has recently partnered with trial attorneys who can help their users, though she adds it's rare that such legal services are needed.
That's because her website, like many DIY divorce sites, only cater to those going through uncontested divorces. “That was mainly the market we were looking for,” Schaefer said. “People who are independent and would have done this themselves but maybe are a little wary of the forms and how to fill them out.”
Of course, DIY websites know that their services aren't for everyone. Levine noted while DIY websites are catering to a real demand in the market, “there will always be a place for litigation attorneys who can fiercely advocate for clients that have contentious cases, complex estates or when there's a violent spouse.”
So for now, man and machine are learning to work side by side, complimenting each other to better serve those looking to get a divorce. But while such services are giving many a much desired level of automation and independence, it's unlikely that divorces will go completely digital anytime soon.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1NYAG Preparing to Withdraw From Defense of Four Correction Officers' Federal Lawsuits
- 22 Judges: Meet the New Chief Justice and the GC Who Just Rose to the Bench
- 3Holland & Knight Matches Milbank Bonuses for Some Associates
- 4Akin Promotes Record Number of Lawyers to Partner
- 5Ogletree Deakins Names 5 New Office Managing Shareholders
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250