McKenzie Friends giving “biased and misleading” online advice


Tkacukova: Worrying trend

McKenzie Friends are giving “biased and misleading” advice to vulnerable family litigants, an academic study of online posts has found.

Researchers, who used linguistics software to analyse discussions, found “many negative attitudes expressed towards lawyers, social services and the court system” and only a few positive comments.

The study, by Birmingham City University, examined 105 threads from three Facebook groups used by McKenzie Friends and 69 threads from open public forums, all discussing public and private family law.

Some McKenzie Friends advised parents to ignore the advice of lawyers, suggesting courts were institutionally unfair, while promoting the services of McKenzie Friends.

Words used to describe family courts and social services include “gender-biased” and “disgrace”, while social services were accused of not delivering, asking “stupid” questions and being incompetent.

One McKenzie Friend claimed the family courts were “routinely ignoring child abuse”, while another described it as a “broken system and not family-orientated”.

Further comments included a complaint that it was “so difficult to find a decent solicitor”, with another saying: “I sacked my barrister, who was useless.”

The study found only two positive references to judges in all of the posts analysed, and on three occasions parents were advised to write their own statements instead of taking legal advice.

At the same time, one McKenzie Friend made a “clear attempt” to build a “professional image” of a “trusted” service, saying: “I’m not legally trained but I have plenty of direct experience in family law cases. Please get some proper legal advice before deciding on your next step.”

Online advisers included 11 fee-charging McKenzie Friends actively using the internet to find work, 14 other McKenzie Friends, three former litigants in person (LiPs) and two ex-lawyers.

Researchers said some fee-charging McKenzie Friends used social media as a marketing strategy, providing emotional support and attempting to create a “safe space” for parents to share their emotional and legal problems.

They wrote: “McKenzie Friends’ non-conciliatory tone and occasional animosity expressed towards the legal profession and the court system could potentially be misleading for LiPs.

“One of the crucial roles of lawyers is to manage their clients’ expectations and responsibilities, i.e. promote active engagement with court proceedings and social services.

“The debate around professionalising McKenzie Friends should take into consideration that the framing and the tone of the advice are closely related to professional ethics and the duty to the client.

“It is equally important to inform LiPs of the risks and advantages of using the services of McKenzie Friends irrespective of whether it is in court, before the hearing or online.”

Dr Tatiana Tkacukova, senior lecturer in English language at the university and lead author of the study, said: “The increase in people representing themselves in court means that many parents are struggling to navigate the system while seeking to understand the way courts, social services and the legal system works.

“McKenzie Friends provide a much-needed service to offer advice and support to those for whom the legal system and the language of law is completely alien.

“While there are many positive experiences, the unregulated environment online means that our research found several instances of worrying, biased and misleading advice.

“The negative portrayals of the courts and social services, alongside the advice to ignore specialised legal advice, show a worrying trend towards personal viewpoints and agendas clouding impartial and objective support.”

Dr Tkacukova said that, to help protect the many vulnerable people in these cases, a more regulated environment was needed, with increased transparency to make sure people knew the information they were accessing and the legal qualifications of those advising them.

The posts were analysed using ‘corpus linguistics’ software, which looks specifically at the use of words, language and tone in posts.




    Readers Comments

  • Ria Cohen says:

    I am a McKenzie Friend. I have over 30 years experience in family law – being second in command in Solicitors practices. Having been made redundant 9 years ago I saw that people needed help and assistance and couldn’t always afford the fees of traditional high street solicitors. I therefore started my practice. I find articles like yours less than complimentary to us that ARE legally qualified , or have vast amounts of experience. You are tarring us all with the same brush. There are certainly some charlatans out there, and I always warn anyone phoning me to choose the McKenzie wisely and check them out thoroughly before making a decision to retain them. I ALWAYS send my CV to any prospective clients and I also send them documentation explaining my role. I have indemnity insurance and am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends. I am NOT the lawyer as you describe in your article and I find it sad that you can’t see there are some good ones out here!! The legal landscape is and has to change. People cannot keep affording the outrageous fees that Solicitors charge. I personally am happy to offer my services to those people. Please think twice about the ones of us who do know what we are doing and know the rules of the Court!!


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

Our latest special report, produced in association with Temple Legal Protection, looks at the role of after-the-event (ATE) insurance in commercial litigation post-LASPO. We are at a time when insurers, solicitors, clients and litigation funders work ever more closely to create funding packages that work for all of them, with conditional fee and even damages-based agreements now part of many law firms’ armoury.

Blog

7 April 2020

Remote working during coronavirus

Coronavirus is having a profound effect upon many facets of society and everyday life, not least in terms of how people work now that most office-based employees are working from home.

Read More

Loading animation