The Attorney: Profession and Professional Ethics in Everyday Conceptions

The Constitutional Court of Ukraine (CCU) decision has made approximately forty laws not in conformity with the constitution. The total number of acts that have been made unconstitutional immediately is still not possible to count. What has to be done to ensure that the return to the former wording of the constitution does not lead to legal chaos? We asked this question of well-known specialists in the field of law.     

The Hysterical Attorney: The Legal Advocate Within Lacanian Discourse Theory

In this essay, I apply Jacques Lacan'sfour discourses to the legal profession. A lawyer –i.e. a legal expert – engages in the Master'sdiscourse when he writes the law; he engages in theUniversity discourse when he interprets or attempts tojustify the law. In contrast, an attorney – i.e. a legal advisor – engages in the Analyst'sdiscourse when she counsel's her client; she engagesin the Hysteric's discourse when she represents herclient. From a Lacanian perspective, the two lawyer'sdiscourses are masculine, while the two attorney'sdiscourses are feminine. I divergefrom Lacan's view that the Analyst's is the mostradical discourse. The insight gained throughanalysis can only challenge and change the law iftranslated through the Hysteric's discourse. Consequently, despite dominant sexual stereotypes tothe contrary, to be an effective advocate should takeon a radically hysteric femininity.     

The no-conflict rule: the acceptance of traditional equitable values?

Boardman v Phipps is a leading authority on the no-conflictrule. The House of Lords maintained the strict rule that historicallyequity has imposed on a fiduciary. This article explores howthe dissenting judgment of Lord Upjohn in Boardman v Phippshas been preferred by the lower courts and why the courts haveadopted such a position. This has fuelled a more general debateas to whether the no-conflict rule should be harsh or more flexible.Recent cases including Bhullar v Bhullar are discussed to illustratethe present approach of the courts to the recurring issues surroundingpossible applications of the no-conflict rule.     

Jail reform litigation: The issue of rights and remedies

This paper looks at the vast array of lawsuits filed by jail inmates challenging the conditions of their confinement. While much attention has been focused on prison reform litigation, many of the nation's jails have been subject to civil rights lawsuits, and many are now operating under some form of court order. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Criminal Justice Association, October 7–9, 1987, Birmingham, AL.     

Chapter 11: Awarding Attorney Fees,Costs, and Expenses

Courts can send a strong message condemning forum shopping and parental kidnapping by awarding attorneys' fees, court costs, and travel and other expenses, to prevailing parties in interstate custody, visitation, and enforcement cases. This chapter outlines the statutory authority in the UCCJA and PKPA for making such awards. Analogous provisions are contained in the Hague Convention and ICARA. These are discussed in Chapter 10.     

Promoting Stability for Youth Returning from Residential Care: Attorney Perspectives

Aftercare services have been suggested to improve reintegration for youth departing residential care programs. The purpose of this study was to collect views from legal professionals about the challenges youth and families face during reintegration and solutions to improve stability. Views were collected from 14 legal professionals (e.g., guardian ad litem, legal counsel) through a survey and 90‐minute nominal group technique focus group. Results indicated parent expectations about re‐entry and lack of services, supports and resources were challenges. Solutions suggested by participants included family, mental health and educational supports, and transition planning. Study limitations and future implications are discussed.     

The Child's Attorney and the Alienated Child: Approaches to Resolving the Ethical Dilemma of Diminished Capacity

Increasingly lawyers for children follow a model of “client centered” (as opposed to “best interests”) representation in child custody disputes in which the child client defines the objectives of the representation. The client‐centered model, while appropriate in most cases to give voice to the child's preferences in a process that deeply impacts him or her, can create an ethical dilemma for the child's lawyer in cases where a child is truly alienated from the other parent by the actions of the alienating parent. Alienated children strongly and unreasonably express a preference for objectives of representation that might further damage the alienated parent's relationship with the child. The alienated child's objectives may be the result of a campaign of denigration and “brainwashing” by the alienating parent. This Note suggests that when a child is truly alienated from a parent, as diagnosed by a mental health expert, the child may have “diminished capacity” and therefore, the client‐directed model of representation is not adequate. This Note proposes that the Child's Attorney must determine whether the child is of diminished capacity under the Model Rules of Professional Conduct and, if so, must treat the client accordingly under Rule 1.14. Specifically, the attorney may, if all other remedial measures are inadequate, override the child's wishes and advocate a position that the child would take, but for the brainwashing of the child used to alienate him or her from a parent.