DIVORCE, along with redundancy, bereavement and – less tragically – moving house, is supposed to be one of the most stressful experiences of our lives.

Which is why many of us hope to avoid it at all costs.

But Jill (not her real name) doesn't look stressed. Despite having spent most of last year divorcing her husband, the Arnold mum of two looks clear-skinned, well-rested and happy.

We are sitting on garden furniture in her new home – she moved in three months ago – discussing her plans for redecoration.

Jill, an education worker, decided she wanted a divorce 18 months ago after 15 years of marriage. The relationship, she felt, was no longer working but she was anxious to protect her children. Casting around for advice, she felt alarmed.

"I remember shaking at the computer during my first internet searches," she recalls. "It's very scary when you start to investigate the whole process of divorce."

However, she stumbled across an option called collaborative divorce that sounded more reassuring.

This process takes place in a series of meetings, rather than in a courtroom. Issues like finance and custody are settled between the two parties, plus their solicitors.

It sounded attractive to Jill.

"I like a bit of control over my life," she says. "I hated the thought of somebody telling us where our children should go."

Not to mention the expense.

"All lawyers charge hourly rates and the scariest thing is where somebody tells you how much they charge per hour," she says. "If you go down the legal route, it can take so long and you are paying constantly. I didn't want our marital assets disappearing."

However, the first lawyer she spoke to admitted he didn't know much about collaborative law. The process requires specialist training.

A word-of-mouth recommendation led Jill to consult Amanda Brown, associate director of Nottingham Family Law, who is trained in collaboration.

She met her last April – and found the experience a relief.

"I could see a way forward," she recalls. "There was a confidence about Amanda and I thought she could help me because she had helped other people. I didn't think it was bluster."

One thing Amanda did say was that, if the negotiations broke down, she would no longer be able to represent Jill in court.

This is one of the conditions set out during collaboration. It means everyone in the room is focused on finding a way through the negotiations. Nobody benefits should it go to court.

However, for Jill this was a bit of a gamble because she would have been reluctant to turn to another solicitor.

"If you've found somebody you feel you can trust, they may not end up representing you if it goes to court," she points out. The first thing Amanda did was contact Jill's ex-husband with a list of other collaborative lawyers in Nottingham.

"I had already said to him I thought this was the way forward," says Jill. "I wanted to put the children's interests first."

Instead of a lengthy, drawn-out court saga, the couple sat down with their lawyers in two hour-long meetings last June and July – one at Jill's solicitors' office, one at her husband's.

As in a courtroom divorce, each partner was required to fully disclose their finances. In the end, Jill's husband decided to buy her out of the home. Since they both work part-time and had always taken turns in caring for their two sons, aged eight and six, the sharing of custody was easily resolved.

"I'm a professional and I'm used to having meetings," says Jill. "It's reassuring to know that, in a situation like that, you can all sit around the table and you're both given the chance to air your points. There was even a bit of humour. You're sat opposite somebody you were married to for 15 years and you know how the other ticks.

"We decided on joint custody and that I would buy a house close to the family home so the kids wouldn't have to move school."

Jill and her husband have stayed on good terms for the sake of their children. She's less certain that collaborative divorce would work if the relationship were more tempestuous.

"I don't imagine you could sit down like that if there had been violence or abuse or arguments. The fact we weren't like that probably helped," she says.

The divorce papers were submitted in July and she received the decree absolute in February. The whole process cost her between £2,500-3,000.

"When I tell friends I'm divorced they say, 'That was quick!'" she smiles. "I didn't feel it was at the time. But now I feel as if a weight has been lifted off my shoulders. I think my ex-husband is happier too, now we're both negotiating new lives."

The lack of sparring means Jill and her former husband can meet up on the children's birthdays, or to take them on visits to grandparents or the seaside, yet both are released from a relationship that wasn't working.

"The whole process was right for us," Jill declares. "I think it was undoubtedly the best and most efficient way."

Collaborative divorce still isn't as common in Nottingham as it is in other cities, like Oxford and Cambridge.

Amanda Brown, Jill's solicitor, a family lawyer since 1993, trained in collaborative law in 2005. Since then, she's handled around 10 cases collaboratively.

However, collaborative divorces are expected to be available on legal aid from October which, Amanda hopes, will widen access.

For Amanda, the benefits of the process lie not in financial rewards.

"You get a great deal of satisfaction when both parties have a smile on their face at the end of the meetings, rather than you having to justify why things worked out as they did in court."

jennifer.scott@nottinghameveningpost.co.uk