Professionalism and our public image

by Barry Cavanaugh

Some of our numbers fall short of the standards of professionalism that we have long assumed are agreed between us.

Professionalism, defined as “professional status, methods, character or standards”, is at the center at much of the controversy swirling about the legal profession. The public “image” or perception of lawyers is often less positive than we would wish. Among our ranks, we lament a perceived decline in standards of civility, collegiality, and ethical behavior. It is no coincidence these two difficulties co-exist. If we have become the targets of public skepticism and disrespect, it stems from behavior among our ranks which we, ourselves, have begun to recognize and condemn.

What are the complaints one hears from the ‘public’, and what are the essential components of all lawyer jokes? I believe that the basic elements are these: sharpness, or a willingness to take advantage of the unwitting; greed, or money motivation; and amorality respecting specific acts or general posture. When we address the issue of our public image, it seems we often do so on the assumption that the public can be persuaded that these generalizations--based on their own or others’ experiences with lawyers--are wrong. We seek to demonstrate our profession’s contributions to the community, or cite examples of lawyerly “uprightness”. And while we do need to stress those things, I would suggest that the public already recognizes the good that some lawyers are doing. What we as a profession have to recognize, is that it’s just not good enough.

We all know that many, indeed most, of our clients and acquaintances view us positively, and consider our profession to be generally honourable and noble. However, even our friends and family recognize that we’re not all such paragons of virtue. And perhaps we have heard them say what they really think of the profession--my son/neighbor/lawyer is a capable and honest person, but he’s the exception to the rule. We need to admit and to address the truth at the root of some of these criticisms. In a way, we have already begun. Many of us are voicing concern that some of our numbers fall short of the standards of professionalism that we have long assumed are agreed between us. We have a sense, too, that those standards are the rock on which our public image was built; the basis for public confidence in lawyers as reliable, trustworthy and, well, honourable people, worthy of respect and leadership in the community.

Just as good citizenship is far more than simply avoiding a breach of the minimum standards of conduct set down in the law, so too does good professionalism involve far more than narrowly avoiding the sanctions of the Law Society. It calls, I suggest, for standards of decency, integrity and courtesy that override either one’s financial interest or the service of the client. If we do not uphold an exemplary standard of conduct toward one another--in assisting our younger members, in refusing to take advantage of our peers’ errors, in dealing with one another in an upright and open way--or toward our clients and their opponents, what do we deserve by way of reputation? If we will not act as professionals in the best sense of the word, the public is right to ask why they should accord us respect and trust.

I believe the public misjudges us, as a whole; however, we cannot turn a blind eye to reality. The perception exists not out of imagination, but because the behavior exists. Let us respond seriously to the need to control our conduct as a profession, through a meaningful, committed approach to professional discipline, peer support and education, and through rigorous self-examination and rededication to the profession. That’s how we’ll help our image.

This article was published in the June 1998 issue of BarTalk and is subject to the copyright by the British Columbia Branch of the Canadian Bar Association, 2006, all rights reserved.