In this season of resolutions, I pledge to continue in 2026 to promote myself as a problem solver for family law cases.
Both the public and the profession will benefit from a renewed effort by lawyers to do so. The profession will benefit by helping more people (and getting more business) and the public will benefit by having their affairs handled professionally rather than taking the risk of doing it themselves.
Cause or Correlation?
Over the course of my career, the aversion to lawyers by many self-represented divorcing parties has surprised me.
As a family court commissioner and a mediator, I’ve had divorcing spouses tell me many times that they didn’t need lawyers because they weren’t fighting. There is noble history of lawyers fighting on behalf of their clients (think civil rights). Lawyers have improved the lives of their clients and society in general.
In the context of family law, the reputation for fighting leads to an unintended consequence: many people think lawyers aren’t needed for a divorce when there is no fighting or disagreement. (Some lawyers may contribute to this perception by aggressive language in websites and advertising.)
Paul Stenzel, U.W. 1995, is of counsel with Hansen & Hildebrand, S.C. in Milwaukee, where he practices in family law.
The reputation for fighting (as well as rising costs) causes a large proportion of divorcing parties to stay away from lawyers. Nationwide, in 2016 the estimate was that 80% of those accessing the court system in a family law matter did so without an attorney.[1]
The estimate in Wisconsin is that still around 70% of parties are unrepresented in divorces. There is nothing suggesting this situation has improved, and anecdotally the number of pro se parties has continued to grow in some jurisdictions.
The results of not hiring lawyers can be costly and not just financially. There are many examples where even parties who are getting along end up costing themselves (or their families) time, money, and maybe grief because of mishandling an important legal aspect of a divorce. The kitchen table may not be a place for well-informed decisions; in addition, safety concerns may go unaddressed and unnoticed.
AI is Filling the Void
There’s another reason for lawyers to renew and re-double our efforts here: Artificial intelligence (AI). The growth of pro se parties has led to the growth of the self-help legal industry which is a mixture of courts, nonprofits, and academics who are constantly working to improve access to justice for self-represented litigants. This community is working very hard to fill the void of legal services for self-represented parties. I have been a member of the A2JN (Access to Justice Network) Listserv (formerly the Self-Represented Litigation Network (SRLN) Listserv for many years now.
Even casually browsing the A2JN Listserv posts, this community is constantly and persistently reshaping the legal system so it can be used without the assistance of a lawyer. To be clear, I have not seen evidence that they are anti-lawyer – rather, they are responding to the current conditions where people need to navigate the legal system and are not hiring lawyers to help.
The problem-solving approach could help increase the role and value of lawyers beyond the two endpoints of either DIY or aggressive advocacy and litigation. We have to acknowledge the scarcity of affordable legal services for low-income individuals, rural areas, and those who think lawyers are only for fighting. There are different ways to address these gaps, including process choices such as mediation with a neutral lawyer.
The access to justice / self-help community is working on forms, courthouse kiosks, AI-powered legal tools and more. AI is still new and growing but we’ve already seen difficulties for parties who rely on AI for legal advice. At the same time, the fact that some choose AI for legal help shows the need is real. Lawyers have the tools and options to address this need. It may require some reflection and creativity. Part of that process can be shifting public perception from weapons in a war to problem solvers.
Conclusion
We as lawyers have all the above-mentioned tools and more. We have our education, training and experience and, more importantly, we have things that AI likely cannot do: judge and assess each client’s total situation, know local practice, and exercise the duty of care and ethics.
So as we embark on 2026, please join me in renewing our efforts to be problem solvers for our clients and their families.
This article was originally published on the State Bar of Wisconsin’s Family Law Section Blog. Visit the State Bar sections or the Family Law Section web pages to learn more about the benefits of section membership.
Endnotes
[1] Marsha M. Mansfield, Litigants Without Lawyers: Measuring Success in Family Court, 67 Hastings L.J. 1389 (2016). ↩