Lay Advisers in Family law Settings: The Role and Quality of Advice Provided on Social media
| Author | Tatiana Grieshofer |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/09646639221090132 |
| Published date | 01 December 2022 |
| Date | 01 December 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Lay Advisers in Family
law Settings: The Role
and Quality of Advice
Provided on Social media
Tatiana Grieshofer
Senior Lecturer in English Language, Birmingham
Institute of Media and English, Birmingham City
University, UK
Abstract
The study explores the quality of advice offered by lay advisers on social media
groupsandonlineforums.Thefocusisontheonlineadviceprovisioninrelation
to child-related cases, which are part of private or public family law proceedings
in the context of England and Wales. Since many addressees of such advice are
self-represented litigants, it is crucial to understand what kind of support is offered
by law advisers, whose professional motivation or level of expertise are underex-
plored. By drawing on content analysis and discourse analysis, the study reflects
on the substantive content and linguistic framing of the advice offered online.
The article contextualises the role of lay advisers in light of (1) the challenges
self-represented litigants experience when accessing the justice system and (2)
the growing popularity of using online resources and social platforms for obtaining
legal information and advice.
Keywords
McKenzie Friends, lay advisers, litigants in person, self-represented litigants, online advice
provision, family law, legal-lay communication
Corresponding author:
TatianaGrieshofer, Senior Lecturer in English Language, Birmingham Institute of Media and English, Birmingham
City University, UK.
Email: Tatiana.Grieshofer@bcu.ac.uk
Article
Social & Legal Studies
2022, Vol. 31(6) 941–960
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/09646639221090132
journals.sagepub.com/home/sls
Introduction
Accessing legal advice and representation can be challenging with limited financial means.
One seeming alternative to professional legal advice is to reach to social media groups and
online forums, though such online support is increasingly being offeredbylayadvisers
with unproven expertise (Smith et al., 2017, Melville 2017). The article explores the quality
of advice offered in social media groups and online forums run by lay adviser to enhance
our understanding of the scope, accuracy and linguistic framing of online advice provision.
Given the growing popularity of online discussion forums where anyone can ask legal
questions and obtainan answer from lawyers or other users (Maggs 2006),the topic of the
article has an international appeal. It is especially relevant to the context of common law
countries (such asUSA, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, England and Wales), where liti-
gants have the right to represent themselves in person. The right of self-representation has
been linked to the right to access the justice system and the court thus often cannot deny a
litigant the right to self-represent (see Assy 2011 for the discussion why the link between
the two rights should be challenged and Greacen 2014 on the myths and realities of self-
representation). As a result, many of the common law countries deal with an increasing
number of self-represented litigants (Richardson et al., 2012). Most of the literature on self-
representation focuses on civil and private family proceedings, the jurisdictions with most
unrepresented parties (Trinder et al., 2014, McKeever et al., 2018, MacFarlane 2013, Lee
and Tkacukova 2017, Moorhead and Sefton 2005, Richardson et al., 2012).
The focus of this study is on private family proceedings, specifically child-related pro-
ceedings, in the legal context of England and Wales, where the proportion of private law
disposals with at least one unrepresented party is as high as 79% (Family Court Statistics
Quarterly: July to September 2021);
1
the access to professional legal advice was curtailed
by cuts in legal aid, which came into effect in 2013 and, subsequently, caused the increase
in the numbers of self-represented parties by almost a half (ibid). Many litigants in person
(LIPs), the term used in England and Wales for unrepresented litigants, thus have to resort
to self-representation due to the lack of affordable legal advice or state-funded support
with legal disputes (Trinder et al., 2014, Moore and Newbury 2017, Lee and
Tkacukova 2017, Maclean and Eekelaar 2019, Mant 2019).
The existing research across a wide range of jurisdictions shows that self-
representation is rarely a good idea: it impacts the administration and management of
court hearings, the role of the judiciary, the duties of the lawyer representing the opposing
party (Trinder et al., 2014); but above all, the lack of representation puts LIPs in a dis-
advantaged position (Trinder et al., 2014, Lee and Tkacukova 2017, Tkacukova 2016,
MacFarlane 2013, McKeever et al., 2018). It is argued that LIPs, especially LIPs with
disputes about child-related issues, tend to be vulnerable and potentially susceptible to
biased advice and unreliable information (Trinder et al., 2014; Legal Services
Consumer Panel 2014). Yet the need for urgent legal and procedural advice from the
rising number of LIPs creates a market for lay advisers, or McKenzie Friends (MFs),
the term used following the case of McKenzie v McKenzie
2
, which established that
unrepresented litigants have a right to reasonable assistance in court (Smith et al.,
2017). MFs are thus lay advisers who provide advice either for free or for a fee. As a
general principle, the lay assistance provided for free (e.g. assistance and support from
942 Social & Legal Studies 31(6)
To continue reading
Request your trial