Attorney during the Crisis

image title

Attorneys at law in many cases have to deal with crisis (of their clients). Attorneys have not been educated to help their clients other than with legal advice. Just to being able to have someone, who listens, one of the most important functions of lawyers, can help nevertheless.

The basis of almost every mandate (at least with criminal defense and damage claims) is a story. The client tells the story, the lawyer listens.

With criminal defense, it may be that the client does not say anything, as advised by his/her defense counsel. Nevertheless, the lawyer has to cope with attached matters: How it the family, financial situation, has the client illnesses (particularly if he/she is in custody), does anything in addition need to be organized, with whom may the attorney talk openly?

Such conversation, in which the “case” may not be mentioned at all, makes the client feel better and “taken care of” by his attorney. Despite the adverse conditions, such a conversation is comforting. Someone takes care and helps.

It is the task of the attorney to listen, to structure what has been told, to ask further information and to investigate himself if necessary. That way stories evolve, based on provable facts.

For the client it may be relieving to being able to rapport to someone, who is even obliged to keep what has been told secret. He “unloads his burden”. The lawyer takes up the burden, structures it and advises the client if and what legally anything can be done with it.

It may be that the law as the client would like to see it may not be put into action. This may even be so in criminal law. If this is the case, the lawyer will inform the client accordingly. It may well be that the lawyer informs the client that it will be difficult and the path to achieve the wished legal result may be stony. At least the attorney will walk this path jointly with the client and will also carry the burden with him.

The client should put confidence in his/her attorney. This also means that he/she should put aside matters, which have been reported to a lawyer and in regard to which the lawyer has advised that nothing may be achieved. Why continue to carry this burden if it does not lead to anything?

On another hand, the client can jointly with his/her attorney fight for his/her rights, if the advice is that based on the provable story, claims or other rights may result (including potentially a “not guilty” verdict). Such a joint fight may grant a new perspective.

Even the situation at a lawyers office may be set within the wisdom presented by the buddhist monk in the following video:

Do you have a problem? No? So why bother?

Do you have a problem? Yes? Can you cope with it yourself? Yes? So why bother?

Do you have a problem? Yes? Can a lawyer help? Yes? So why bother?

Do you have a problem? Yes? Can a lawyer help? No? So why bother?

Stories, which we cannot influence should not be a burden to us. A lawyer can help to explain if we can influence something legally. Should this not be possible, we should put the story aside.

The attorney at law is aware of his/her responsibility and should refer the client to other experts should this be necessary and if the attorney is not experienced in the respective matter. This is of course even more applicable to matters, which are not comprised in legal advice such as form example psychology.

en_GBEnglish (UK)