Objectively, only in a minority of cases does responsibility for a divorce lie solely with one person. Often, irreconcilable differences are the cause of the breakdown. Even, if that were not the case, apportioning blame is highly unlikely to achieve a positive agreement. Abdicating responsibility The flip-side of blaming the other party is abdicating responsibility. Both sides in the Brexit negotiations have demonstrated this, most recently the EU in placing the onus solely upon the UK to identify a mutually acceptable solution to the problem of the backstop. Where two parties need to reach a mutually acceptable conclusion, this will be much easier if both take responsibility for finding that conclusion. This is as true for divorce as it is for Brexit. Brinkmanship Blame and abdication of responsibility often lead to brinkmanship, the negotiating equivalent of a siege, in an attempt to leave the other party no room for manoeuvre and thereby forcing them to capitulate to demands. Both the UK and the EU have resorted to this strategy without success. Brinkmanship is especially damaging where an ongoing relationship needs to be maintained. In the case of Brexit, that is in the form of trade, security and cultural relationships. In the case of divorce, it might be in the form of co-parenting or running a business together. Punishment Closely related to blame, abdicating responsibility and brinkmanship is punishment, whereby one party seeks to inflict harm upon the other, which we have seen throughout the Brexit negotiations and we see in divorce. While divorce can be a zero-sum game, actively seeking to harm the other party is unlikely to be the best way to reach a settlement that serves long term interests. It is only going to fuel resentment and perpetuate conflict. The same is true of the