LAWYER'S DUTY TO DISCUSS ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILDREN |
| |
| Authors: | Nicole Pedone |
| |
| Institution: | Nicole Pedone is a cowinner of the 1997 Meyer Elkin Essay Contest and will graduate from Hofstra University School of Law in May 1998. She is currently a "Notes and Comments" Editor of the Hofstra Law Review;. She expresses her sincere gratitude to Professor Andrew Schepard for his time, dedication, and invaluable criticism and to her family for their love, support, and unending encouragement |
| |
| Abstract: | Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) has been championed for its power to devise agreements that meet the parents' and the children's needs and for its ability to encourage parties to work together, eventually leading to stable agreements. The Model Rules of Professional Conduct do not create any ethical duty to advise, suggest, or encourage lawyers to discuss ADR with their domestic relations client. In the medical field, patients are given a choice of treatment under the informed consent doctrine, but there is no analogous doctrine in the legal field. The Model Rules of Professional Conduct should be revised to reflect the best interests of children, as well as client choice. Clients, specifically parents in domestic relation matters, are entitled to know their options, and lawyers should be obligated to provide them with the information that will enable them to make informed decisions–decisions that will benefit their children and ultimately our nation. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
