AI Mediation Notice
Divide Amicably uses an advanced AI model in place of much of the organizational and synthesis work that a human mediator might otherwise do manually. The goal is to follow a real mediation-style process while keeping the platform neutral, structured, and lower cost. It is not intended to replace legal services. It is intended to provide a neutral, non-binding guide through mediation work. AI outputs are for informational, educational, planning, discussion, and entertainment purposes only, and are not for legal reliance.
1. What the AI is trying to do
- Summarize the case record neutrally.
- Identify missing facts, unresolved conflicts, or useful follow-up questions.
- Frame fair starting-point options based on the disclosed record and explicit rules already built into the platform.
- Apply a non-binding settlement-stability screen inspired by game theory, looking for mutual-gain trades and terms that neither spouse has an obvious practical incentive to reopen based on the disclosed record.
2. What the AI is not doing
- It is not acting as a lawyer or licensed human mediator.
- It is not deciding who should “win.”
- It is not creating a binding judgment, arbitration award, or court-approved settlement.
- It is not a substitute for legal advice.
- It is not intended to replace legal services or independent legal review.
- It is not preparing court pleadings or filing-ready legal documents for either party.
- It is not verifying facts, values, hidden assets, legal deadlines, legal sufficiency, enforceability, or court acceptance.
- It is not telling anyone what rights they have, what obligations they owe, what to sign, what to file, or what to waive.
- It is not guaranteeing that an option is mathematically optimal, a true Nash equilibrium, Pareto efficient, enforceable, or immune from later dispute.
3. Neutrality and fairness objective
The system is designed to use information from both sides, keep disputed facts visible, and avoid building recommendations from a single party's narrative alone. Its role is to help move the file toward a fairer and less adversarial starting point, not to maximize one side's leverage. Any game-theory-inspired analysis is only a plain-language negotiation screen for stability and mutual-gain opportunities. It is not a promise that either party should accept a particular result.
4. Limits of AI output
AI output depends on the information supplied to the platform. If the record is incomplete, wrong, or heavily disputed, the AI output may also be limited. The platform therefore treats AI outputs as guidelines and workflow support, not as authoritative legal determinations, privileged communications, filing-ready legal work, professional advice, or promises of accuracy, fairness, settlement, enforceability, cost savings, or court approval.
5. Human review and escalation
The system is built to escalate cases that appear unsafe, coercive, incomplete, or otherwise unsuitable for ordinary self-serve mediation. That means AI use is bounded by workflow gates, not allowed to run unchecked over every case. Escalation is not emergency help, safety planning, legal protection, or a substitute for contacting appropriate professionals or authorities.