Law Students

Having been deeply involved in thinking like a law student (and sometimes like a lawyer), I seemed to have lost touch in conflict resolution. Initially, I thought it was because I have been a law student too long, but as it turns out, this is not the case.

The instructor for conflict resolution is not an attorney by profession. S/he has a difficult time communicating to law students, in particular the 1Ls, that not every conflict must result in litigation. The concepts s/he taught were simple, but difficult to accept. I was surprised how cynical the 1Ls were by the end of first semester. Where is the idealism that things could all work out if you just talk about it?

This got me thinking about the legal education. We learn so much about the adversarial system, and how to examine issues from both sides, yet we do not train future attorneys how to mediate or even how to settle cases. Understandably, settling cases is different from mediating conflict. However, you still need to have good listening skills, communication skills, and reflective skills. You have to think outside the box. What is really the problem here? What are the real issues here? Which problems need to be addressed? What can we do to facilitate an agreement instead of going into litigation?

Somewhere out there, some litigators would beg to differ and argue that not every case is mediable. I would argue that not all cases require litigation. How is that for optimism?