Politics, News & Issues >
Lawyers & Legal Advice
RSS FeedShould lawyers be required to provide pro bono services?
Results so far:
Votes are still being tallied.
Join the Debate now.
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesWhen considering the question of whether or not lawyers should be required to provide pro bono services, it is important to first understand the reasoning behind such a requirement. It is true that we in the United States rarely require anyone to provide something for free without the promise of SOMETHING in return, even if that something is not of monetary value. Charity for charity's sake is all well and good, but time is money in American society. Donations of material goods can earn tax credits, but what do lawyers get in return for pro bono services? In many states, pro bono work is required by the state bar association. In fact, the American Bar Association recommends that a lawyer contribute at least 50 hours of pro bono work a year. Furthermore, some states have even initiated policies that let a certain number of pro bono hours apply towards continuing legal education requirements. In other words, legal pro bono work may be free of charge, but it is not without reward.
That being said, there are much grander implications for pro bono work in the perspective of the American judicial system. Legal services are undoubtedly expensive, and there are unfortunately limits to the services the government is willing to provide for free. Criminal cases have a right to representation provided by the government, but civil cases do not. For those who cannot afford to retain legal counsel in a civil case, there is often very little recourse. Can you imagine needing to go to court to fight a custody case, but being unable to afford representation? Or facing foreclosure on your house, but having nowhere to turn to for legal advice? Certainly pro bono services cannot cover all of the needs of individuals, but even helping some is better than none. Without pro bono services, many people would have absolutely nowhere to turn.
In America, we pride ourselves on a society built on the principles of freedom and justice for all. Yes, pro bono services might add undue pressure to already overloaded lawyers, but without them justice for all would be impossible to reach.
Learn more about this author, Winifred Stockington.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.
No
One of the most famous sayings of any time is "There is no free lunch." This is true for literal lunches; buffets you may attend at business functions, while free to you, do cost the organizers money. It is also true for figurative lunches, in particular for this article, legal services.
Let us begin by stating something some people may not realize: public defenders and pro bono lawyers ARE NOT the same thing. Allow me to repeat for those who did not grasp that the first time; a public defender IS NOT a pro bono lawyer for down and outs. Public defenders are paid for by whatever county, city, or state they are attached to and their services are provided for free to their clients, but not for free to the courts.
That having been said, pro bono work is a SERVICE that lawyers may choose to provide to their community or not. Requiring those who take the time and put the effort into achieving a law degree to provide free services is the same as requiring a neurosurgeon to perform complex and expensive brain surgery for free. It is not sensible to say that lawyers should have to provide their services for free any more than it is fair to say that McDonald's should now provide food to homeless people free of charge.
Lawyers open businesses for the same reason the rest of us do: to make money. Places like homeless shelters provide their services free of charge because the are NON PROFIT organizations. They do not seek money, but rather to do good. And while many people compare lawyers to vampires, this much is true about every single for profit business that exists in this world: the idea if to generate profit, and keep your account books in the black.
Providing legal advice for free is one thing, but working for 200 hours on the defense and trial of someone who will not, at the end of the trial, pay you a dime is ludicrous. If someone walked into a TV repair shop you owned, and expected you to work for 24, about three working days, without pay, how would you react? I can tell you how you would react: you would laugh in that person's face and ask them to leave your shop and either come back with money or not come back at all.
In all seriousness, saying that lawyers should be REQUIRED to provide pro bono services is unfair in the extreme. Anyone who advocates that principle should advocate free food, free medicine, free housing, free power, free water, etc etc, for everyone with equal vigor. But, strangely, those who argue most strongly for required pro bono services are often people who could afford to PAY a decent lawyer but do not WANT to do so. Paying for other things does not seem to be so much of a burden, but legal advice is just too much. I hope we can all see just how laughable the argument that a BUSINESS should provide free services really is, when it is presented in this light.
Learn more about this author, James Potterfield.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.
