by Judith Richards

Created on: February 16, 2009   Last Updated: February 26, 2009

Lawyers should not be required to provide pro bono services for many reasons. Most attorneys that follow the ethical guidelines of their profession already provide pro bono services in the course of their practice. It is unfair to lump those attorneys who do pro bono on their own with those who do not. Not all attorneys work for big firms that can absorb the time and costs of providing pro bono services.

LAWYERS ALREADY PROVIDE FREE SERVICES I work for an attorney that provides free phone consultations and advice to potential new clients that never hire him. The time is never charged nor does he receive any compensation from the client. Referrals to another attorney are also made without charge. Again the referring attorney receives no compensation, but hopes that the other attorney will remember and refer clients back to him at some later date. Some clients have come in for a longer consultation, received advice and then never returned. That time is waived. If they return and hire us, then yes, they pay the fees.

We already take a few pro bono cases every year. This is entirely at the attorney's discretion.

LAWYERS CONTRIBUTE TO LEGAL SERVICES Lawyers also contribute to Legal Services through payment of bar dues at the state and county levels.

ETHICS OF THE PROFESSION An attorney is required to represent his clients to the best of his ability regardless of whether he gets paid or not. Believe me, some clients do not pay. Isn't this pro bono?

REQUIREMENT STRAINS ATTORNEY/CLIENT RELATIONSHIPS Won't this requirement change the attitude of the attorney from "want to" to "have to"? He/she will still be required to provide his/her best representation, but the attitude will be different. Will the pro bono client always get the best?

HIGH COSTS OF PRACTICE AND LITIGATION Most attorneys have huge overhead. Staffing, office space and malpractice insurance are expensive. Continuing education, dues, subscriptions, etc, all contribute to the high cost of running a practice. There are also costs involved in litigation that the attorney must now cover? Won't this lead to raising fees for paying clients to cover the costs of the pro bono clients?

IMPRACTICAL How would you regulate this without setting up another bureaucracy and mounds of reporting paperwork? Who is going to regulate this? Most attorneys are very busy as it is. Do they have to hire another attorney to do the pro-bono? How are they expected to fit this into their litigation schedules?

This is not a good idea. It's impractical and has too many unknowns. One cannot provide a one-size-fits-all requirement and expect it to work.

Learn more about this author, Judith Richards.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.