Is Your Lawyer Deceiving You? Why Alternative Dispute Resolution May Be the Path You Haven’t Considered
Let’s face it – when tempers flare, when betrayal stings, or when misunderstandings leave scars, it’s natural to want justice served. But here’s a controversial claim that needs to be addressed: many lawyers, rather than guiding clients toward calm and calculated solutions, encourage litigation that ultimately drains pockets, wastes time, and often leads to regret. This is a passionate appeal to lawyers – and a warning to anyone considering legal action. Before you let emotions drive you to court, consider whether your lawyer is steering you toward a costly journey for their gain, rather than advising on more effective ways to resolve disputes.
It’s no secret that litigation can be lucrative for lawyers. Some, rather than assessing a case’s true merits, see only the opportunity to bill a client through endless court motions, delays, and drawn-out procedures. When a client walks in the door, upset and ready to sue, it’s the duty of a lawyer to explain the reality of what lies ahead – not to blindly encourage a course of action that’s bound to leave their client financially and emotionally depleted. If they truly acted in the client’s best interest, lawyers would more frequently recommend alternative dispute resolution (ADR), a route that can save clients significant stress, money, and time.
Consider this: many people enter a courtroom for the first time believing that being the first to file somehow gives them the upper hand, thinking they have a straightforward case. However, the reality is that courts are unpredictable, time-consuming, and often more complex than laypeople realize. Defendants with experience in litigation can draw out cases, leverage technicalities, and find ways to exhaust a plaintiff’s resources. Many clients aren’t aware of this dynamic until it’s too late, by which time they’ve invested so much that backing out feels like a defeat.
The alternative is often ADR, which includes mediation, negotiation, and arbitration. This process can allow parties to air grievances, reach fair settlements, and preserve relationships without the bruising toll of court battles. Yet, for many lawyers, ADR isn’t even mentioned as an option until a case is so hopeless that they suggest it as a “last resort.” By then, clients have already suffered unnecessary costs, court appearances, and frustration. Worse yet, they’ve often wasted valuable time that could have been spent rebuilding their lives instead of battling in court.
Yes, lawyers need clients to sustain their practices, but they also must act ethically and in their clients’ best interest. Persuading clients to enter lengthy and costly litigation when a faster, more effective resolution is available isn’t just negligent; it’s deceptive. Clients may eventually find themselves disillusioned, watching their finances dwindle, and their initial confidence shattered by a system that wasn’t designed to favour them.
So before rushing to court over a misunderstanding or an emotional outburst, take a moment to think: do you want to go down this road? Consider whether your lawyer is guiding you with genuine care or simply taking advantage of your vulnerability. Because court battles are like a storm; they blow back and forth, with no guarantees of the outcome you may expect. Choose your battles wisely, seek alternatives first, and only proceed with litigation as a last resort. If more lawyers took this approach, the legal field would truly serve justice – not just for the clients, but for society at large.
