Should Attorneys Represent Only One Gender in Family Court Cases?
There is a growing trend of attorneys and law firms "branding" themselves by representing only mothers or fathers in family law cases. The Wall Street Journal published an article last week on this subject, with particular attention to firms that are catering to men. Some of these firms market themselves as "A Partner Men Can Count On" or the "Divorced Guys' Guys."
My question is whether this approach truly benefits the client? I believe that by limiting oneself to only representing one gender, attorneys lose the ability to analyze cases from different points of view. In fact, whenever I handle a contested case, I spend a great deal of time looking at my client's case from the opposing party's perspective to analyze its strengths and weaknesses. One of the things that enables me to do this effectively is because I represent both men and women.
Randy Kessler, a noted family lawyer in Atlanta, Georgia, believes that firms who only represent one gender can make judges skeptical of their arguments: "It is much better to have a reputation for representing each client based on the facts of their case, regardless of their gender." I agree with Mr. Kessler's assessment.
Source: "Law Firms Pitch Themselves As the Divorced Guy's Guys" by Ann Carrns, published in the Wall Street Journal. Thanks to Diana L. Skaggs for her post on this subject at her Divorce Law Journal.
