Document Type
Article
Publication Date
Winter 2013
ISSN
0036-0465
Publisher
Rutgers Law School
Language
en-US
Abstract
The reasons criminal lawyers so often fail to provide adequate legal representation to indigent defendants are well-known: severe underfunding, excessive workloads, and other disincentives for competent representation work together to encourage quick disposition of cases, with little regard for the quality of legal services that are provided. Yet, largely overlooked in this equation is whether defense lawyers who provide subpar representation are aware of their own shortcomings. To answer this question, this Article focuses on the psychology of ethical decision making. Relying on research that reveals the subtle ways that self-interest can cause people to overlook unethical behavior, it argues that defense lawyers will tend to be “ethically blind” to their own poor performance. Concluding that lawyers who suffer from ethical blindness cannot be expected to improve the quality of legal representation on their own, it recommends ways to reduce psychological barriers to competent representation that have proven successful in other contexts.
Recommended Citation
Tigran W. Eldred,
Prescriptions for Ethical Blindness: Improving Advocacy for Indigent Defendants in Criminal Cases
,
65
Rutgers Law Review
333
(2013).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/4144
Included in
Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Law and Psychology Commons, Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons, Legal Profession Commons
