Young people's perceptions and experiences of the lawyer-client relationship.

• Author: Peterson Badali, Michele
• Position: Canada

Introduction

Over the last two decades, within the youth justice system, adolescents have generally been viewed as sufficiently mature and autonomous to make independent decisions, be held accountable for their actions, and participate in adversarial legal proceedings against them. The increased focus on youth autonomy and accountability reflected in the Young Offenders Act (YOA) constituted a significant departure from the paternalistic "welfare" model of juvenile justice when it replaced the Juvenile Delinquents Act over 20 years ago. In recognition of this, policy makers included provisions for protecting young people's due process rights under youth justice legislation (Bala 2003; Carrington and Schulenberg 2004), and the right to counsel received particular attention. As under the YOA, under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, young people must be reminded of their representational rights at several stages of the proceedings in which they are involved (e.g., s. 25(1-3), s. 146(2)(b-c)). The importance of legal representation for youth extends beyond informing young people of their right to counsel, however. Bala (2003) indicates that "the Youth Criminal Justice Act has provisions which are intended to ensure that youths can have access to legal assistance at every stage of the youth justice process" (318; emphasis added), including financial support to pay for legal services when a youth cannot afford to pay for a lawyer himself or herself, though he cautions that, in practice, many young people remain "inadequately represented or not represented at all" (319). Despite the acknowledgement of the importance of legal counsel for young people, there has been little empirical examination of the lawyer-client relationship when the client is an adolescent. In particular, little is known about the factors affecting youths' appraisals of their lawyers and lawyer-client experiences.

Clients' perceptions of lawyers, who represent and embody the law, may establish lasting foundations for their overarching legal attitudes and opinions (Curran 1977), beliefs about the justice system and the law (Nelson 1988), and feelings of attachment and commitment to the society in which laws are upheld (Curran 1977). If clients feel unfairly treated by a professional group who represent both the clients themselves and the institutionalized rules of a larger system, then they may cease to adhere to those rules (Herrin 1997). In the medical realm, it has been substantiated that satisfied patients are more likely to adhere to treatment programs and comply with rehabilitation regimens prescribed by doctors (Sanazaro 1985; Press 1994; DiPalo 1997); by analogy, individuals' dissatisfaction with lawyers may induce their disrespect or disregard for legal rules and regulations (Tyler 2000). Black (1983) suggests that negative experiences with lawyers can hamper dispute resolution and promote the use of informal methods of conflict resolution. The "use of nonlegal methods, such as violence, may injure the individuals involved, and eventually the larger society, by weakening the capacity of law as social control" (Herrin 1997: 2).

The procedural justice framework (Tyler 1987a, 2000) is a useful lens through which to examine the issue of young people's experiences with legal representation. There is a body of research suggesting that people's judgements about the legitimacy of rules and authority figures are based largely on their assessments of fairness in decision-making procedures (Tyler 1987a). Since "the willingness to defer to social rules flows from judgments that authorities are legitimate and ought to be obeyed" (Tyler 2000: 120), the use of fair decision-making procedures may facilitate the development, maintenance, and enhancement of voluntary adherence to social rules and regulations (Sparks, Bottoms, and Hay 1996; Tyler 1990). Indeed, in a study of perceived legitimacy and justice in legal proceedings, Tyler (1987a) found that citizens' evaluations of fairness in their interactions with the police and courts were highly predictive of their perceptions of legal authorities' legitimacy and their subsequent law-abiding behaviour. Lawyers have typically not been included in examinations of "legal authorities" in procedural justice research; thus evaluation of fairness in interactions with lawyers is an important area for study.

In a recent review of procedural justice theory and research, Tyler (2000) identifies four elements of procedures as "the primary factors that contribute to judgments about their fairness" (121). Participation or voice is related to process control and refers to people's real and perceived opportunities to present their opinions and suggestions about what should be done to resolve their personal problems or conflicts. The positive effects of participation have been widely established in social and legal settings (see Tyler and Lind 2001) and are largely independent of participants' opportunities for control over procedural decisions and outcomes (e.g., Hegtvedt and Markovsky 1995; Lind, Kanfer, and Earley 1990; Tyler 1987b). Tyler (2000) also identifies three non-control issues that affect individuals' assessments of fairness in procedures. Neutrality refers to people's desire for an unbiased dispute resolution forum and to their judgements about the impartiality and objectivity of the authorities with whom they are dealing. Trustworthiness involves people's concerns about the underlying motivation of authorities' decisions and describes the extent to which they view decision makers as honest, benevolent, and intent on treating people fairly. Treatment with dignity and respect refers to people's concerns about having respect shown for their rights and dignity as members of society. Tyler (2000) implies that violations of these non-control issues are just as damaging to individuals' perceptions of procedural fairness as are direct violations of control.

The role of one's lawyer is quite distinct from those of the police and courts (e.g., judges). Can the concept of procedural justice apply to such a relationship? When thinking about the lawyer-client relationship from a procedural justice standpoint, the elements of participation, trustworthiness, and treatment with dignity and respect are consistent with expectations for a lawyer's role vis-a-vis his or her client (Law Society of Upper Canada 2000; Calvin, Marcus, Oleyer, and Scali 2006). Clients' perceived participation, or voice, may be even more salient in their interactions with their lawyer than when dealing with other justice system players, such as police or judges, because the notion that lawyers are required to carry out clients' wishes is a central feature of the lawyer-client relationship and clearly contrasts with other legal roles. Similarly, trustworthiness is a central component of the lawyer-client relationship and is vital to the promotion of full disclosure and, thus, effective legal representation. Treatment with dignity and respect is also an expectation clients should have of their lawyer. However, the procedural justice element of neutrality is not. Rather, lawyers are required to repudiate neutrality or impartiality in favour of advocacy. Thus, considering the lawyer--client relationship from a procedural justice perspective requires reconceptualizing the construct of neutrality.

There is virtually no literature available that directly examines youths' evaluations of their experiences with lawyers and little research on adults' appraisals. Anecdotal information and a smattering of published literature suggest that lawyers have not been popular (Herrin 1997) and that first-hand contact with lawyers increases criticism of legal services (Sarat 1977), but there has been little systematic investigation into the reason for clients' displeasure with the services that lawyers provide. However, this small literature provides some indirect support for the relationship between the procedural justice variables outlined by Tyler (2000), on the one hand, and clients' appraisals of their lawyers, on the other. Of these, trustworthiness has received the most attention. Boccaccini and Brodsky (2002) reported that adult clients' willingness to trust their lawyers was related to satisfaction with legal services, and Pierce and Brodsky (2002) found an indirect effect of youths' trust in their lawyers--through willingness to assist counsel and participate in the lawyer-client exchange--on their subsequent satisfaction. These findings are consistent with earlier reports that youths perceive lawyers as untrustworthy and willing to rigorously defend only innocent clients (e.g., Rafkey and Sealey 1975; Grisso 1981).

Related to Tyler's (2000) notion of treatment with dignity and respect, clients' satisfaction may also be influenced by interpersonal aspects of the lawyer-client relationship and the interpersonal skills of the lawyer (e.g., Rosenthal 1976; Feldman and Wilson 1981; Abrams 1984; Hillary and Johnson 1989). In the youth literature, researchers have also pointed out that what clients bring to the relationship is important, noting that young people's critical attitudes regarding lawyers can play a role in creating or perpetuating a negative interpersonal climate that is "not conducive to collaborative interactions between lawyers and adolescent clients" (Grisso 1997: 15; see also Pierce and Brodksy 2002, above).

The preceding discussion highlights the importance of qualities that are affectively significant (e.g., trustworthiness, respect, and a positive interpersonal connection). The literature on young people's experiences in the youth justice system also points to the potential importance of cognitive factors in relation to youths' evaluations of the lawyer-client relationship. In the only study that directly bears on this issue, Tobey, Grisso, and Schwartz (2000) found that immature thinking and judgement often triggered misplaced...