It’s one thing to say you’ll let the judge decide. It’s another to say what is decided. Still another to agree with it. Then, even after the gavel comes down, there can be issues over interpretation, appeals, monitoring, compliance, etc.
So, letting someone else decide doesn’t appear to lower risks, but rather may multiply them.
When you consider options to lower risks, consider the sense mediated agreements make. The unpredictability of a decision-maker is replaced with deliberate agreement. The imposition of an outcome is replaced with a personally (and meaningfully) crafted one – supplying built in buy-in, to boot. The buy-in also tends to engender a durability in honoring the terms.
Most would agree that immediate, certain, and lasting outcomes pose low-risk and high-value potential. For these reasons, mediation ought to be confidently encouraged among choices of remedies.