you, you can increase the opportunity for a productive dialog before you get into a liti- gation situation. It is always nice to be able to try and resolve something in a way ev- eryone can feel good about under the cir- cumstances.
BP: I hear a lot—and you probably do, too—that many lawyers don’t want to prac- tice in family court, and there has been an exit of lawyers from family court going back twenty-two years. What is your take on that? Do you think those complaints are accurate? If so, why are lawyers not want- ing to take those cases? AB: I think lawyers exit family law be- cause you either really like being a family law practitioner or you do not like it at all. I don’t believe there is much of a middle ground. You either enjoy working with peo- ple in a very emotionally charged situation or it becomes draining to you. And I think a lot of people leave it because they just don’t like it. I believe most leave or avoid family practice not because they feel it isn’t a reasonable practice area, or because there aren’t opportunities there for cre- ative legal work, but rather because they don’t enjoy it. I happen to like it very much and really feel that I am helping individuals through a really challenging time.
BP: You practice all over the state? AB: I do. I will practice anywhere if some- one wants me to, but it is important that cli- ents weigh the cost versus the benefit and make an educated decision. Most of my cases are in Chittenden, Addison, Franklin, Grand Isle, Washington, and Lamoille—the surrounding counties.
BP: Let’s go back and talk a little bit about your involvement in the bar associa- tion, both on the board and in the family law section, where I know you were active for awhile. If we can do this chronological- ly, let’s try to put this in some kind of order. You began in the YLD, if I recall. AB: I began in the YLD, and that was because Kim Velk called me one day and said, “Hi, I am with the YLD”—I didn’t even know what that was at the time—“and I want you to organize a family law CLE for the Mid-Winter Thaw.” I was very flattered that someone wanted me to help do some- thing for our area of the law. So I rolled up my sleeves and put together a CLE for the Mid-Winter Thaw. I found some good pan- elists and it was very well received. I was asked to consider becoming a YLD board member, so I threw my hat in the ring and the rest is history. I was elected to the YLD board. I served a year as a board member, the next year as secretary, then treasurer, chair-elect, chair, and the past-chair.
BP: That’s the typical progression 6
through the division and the last three of those positions—chair-elect, chair and past-chair—gave you a seat on the VBA board. AB: Right, on the “Big Board,” as we called it back then. The Board of Manag- ers.
BP: That is when we first met, I guess, when you were on that board. Then, at the end of those three years, you ran for a seat. AB: Yes, I did. The first year, I was not elected. It was a contested election and it was in favor of another candidate. But I re- ally loved being on the board, I really loved the opportunity to give back to the legal profession. I enjoyed so much the conver- sations that go on, on the board. The dis- cussions, sometimes very lively discussions, about what we can do to better the prac- tice of law in Vermont, what we can do in the legislature, what opportunities we have for changing rules or the law, how the prac- tice is developing, how attorneys can give back to their communities, and what re- sources we can provide for attorneys. I re- ally wanted to continue what I had started, and I felt that after three years, being on the board through the YLD, I felt like I was just starting to hit my stride, I knew I could continue to be a valuable contributor, and to give back even more to our profession. I decided not to let the one attempt dis- suade me, and I ran again the next year and was elected.
BP: And clearly you have been on the
board continuously since then, and you will serve this year as president and one more year as immediate past-president. When was it that you were chair of the family law section? Was it before you came on the board? AB: I don’t remember the answer. I was thinking of who appointed me. I believe it was 2007 and 2008.
BP: Penny Benelli followed you as chair. AB: Yes, she did and she does a wonder- ful job. I chaired the Family Law Section for a few years, and then I think I wound up tak- ing on other responsibilities for the VBA, so it was a good time to transition. I am also the treasurer of the Chittenden County Bar Association, and eventually became co- chair of the DRM family law group, moving more into leadership and becoming more involved with litigation and mediation.
BP: So you are pretty busy. AB: Yes, and I also had a son too.
BP: Who is now how old? AB: Four. His name is Jake and together with my wonderful husband, Ben, and our thirteen year-old chocolate lab, Emma, we have a lot of fun.
THE VERMONT BAR JOURNAL • FALL 2012
BP: Actually that is a busy schedule, now
that I think about it when you say it all to- gether. You have a lot going on. AB: I do, but I love everything I do, so I am not willing to give up any of it.
BP: So, let’s talk a little bit more about your years on the board. You have given us a pretty good list of why you like being there, and what topics are being discussed, and I know you have been active in the past couple years in some legislative initiatives. I know you worked pretty hard on drafting a bill dealing with military parents about to be deployed. AB: I worked with Penny Benelli and LTC
Ellen Abbott on that bill, and they were such great partners. We worked together to draft the legislation for the Military Pa- rental Rights Act. It was something the mil- itary, through LTC Abbott, had come and asked the VBA Family Law Section to sup- port. They wanted to bring a bill through the legislature. Our VBA Family Law Sec- tion felt that we could do better if we put our heads together, and redrafted it in a way that would be more helpful to the chil- dren involved in these cases. We agreed to go back to the drawing board and work to- gether to do that. Actually I am very proud of the work that we did. It is a really good piece of legislation, one of the most com- prehensive acts of its kind. I believe it is very beneficial to the children in these situ- ations and it has been used as a template for other states when they have wanted to try and solve similar issues. Our concern was the best interest of the children.
BP: When that original draft was brought to the two of you or to the section, that was sort of a generic approach and didn’t real- ly take into account Vermont practice and Vermont terminology. It was you and your section that pulled it together and made it work with the way our family court does business. AB: Yes. We were able to bring to it the terminology that we use in our family court, but it was much more than just changing “parental rights” for “custody” or “parent- child contact” for “visitation.” We really started from scratch and developed it in a way that wasn’t just changing the format, but actually made it into a product that will work within the context of the best inter- est factors that we have for parental rights determinations, and for looking at what the children’s needs are for transitions be- tween parents and opportunities of that nature. We drafted a piece of work that takes into consideration what the children’s needs are overall, and not just what a mili- tary parent’s needs are and what a non-mil- itary parent’s needs are. I am very proud of our work.
www.vtbar.org
President’s Column
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44