Uncontested Professionalism: Phoney Turf Wars and the Myth of Holism

This paper considers the ways in which members of the public present problems to advice agencies and solicitors' firms. It looks, in particular, at the incidence and management of clients with problem clusters; that is, clients with more than one problem that crosses more than one area of practice to see how well those problems are resolved. It shows that multiple problems are common, and are only partially recognised by the advisers that deal with those clients. Furthermore, whilst lip-service is paid to the idea of holistic service in both policy literature and professional propaganda, it is an idea which is more honoured in the breach than in practice. Whilst this research exposes the idea that solicitors are not holistic, whereas nonlawyers are holistic, as something of a phoney war; it also emphasises the important intersectionality between legal and social problems which poses a number of interesting dilemmas to for access to justice policy. The idea of intersectionality is that legal and non-legal problems interact causally (creating more problems) and on the capacity of clients (literally wearing them down and reducing their capacity to cope with and solve problems). How far should legal service models adapt to that intersectionality? Should non-legal problems be dealt with alongside non-legal problems? What skills and service models are best placed to meet such needs?