行为法律伦理

J. Robbennolt, Jean R. Sternlight
{"title":"行为法律伦理","authors":"J. Robbennolt, Jean R. Sternlight","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2248137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Complaints about lawyers’ ethics are commonplace. While it is surely the case that some attorneys deliberately choose to engage in misconduct, psychological research suggests a more complex story. Iit is not only “bad apples” who are unethical. Instead, ethical lapses can occur more easily and less intentionally than we might imagine. In this paper, we examine the ethical “blind spots,” slippery slopes, and “ethical fading” that may lead good people to behave badly. We then explore specific aspects of legal practice that can present particularly difficult challenges for lawyers given the nature of behavioral ethics - complex and ambiguous ethical rules and standards, agency relationships, the ethos of the adversarial system, the financial and temporal pressures of modern legal practice, positions or feelings of relative status or power, and cues or pressure from others. The psychology we present provides substantial insight into why attorneys sometimes behave unethically, why attorneys may have difficulty curbing or reporting the unethical conduct of their clients or fellow attorneys, and why it is often difficult for attorneys to see and learn from their own ethical missteps and the missteps of others. At the same time, the psychological research also provides insight into why attorneys are often able to resist substantial pressure to act unethically. We draw on the psychological research to make suggestions for how individual attorneys and legal employers can enhance their approach to ethics.","PeriodicalId":80553,"journal":{"name":"Arizona State law journal","volume":"10 1","pages":"1107-1182"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Behavioral Legal Ethics\",\"authors\":\"J. Robbennolt, Jean R. Sternlight\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2248137\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Complaints about lawyers’ ethics are commonplace. While it is surely the case that some attorneys deliberately choose to engage in misconduct, psychological research suggests a more complex story. Iit is not only “bad apples” who are unethical. Instead, ethical lapses can occur more easily and less intentionally than we might imagine. In this paper, we examine the ethical “blind spots,” slippery slopes, and “ethical fading” that may lead good people to behave badly. We then explore specific aspects of legal practice that can present particularly difficult challenges for lawyers given the nature of behavioral ethics - complex and ambiguous ethical rules and standards, agency relationships, the ethos of the adversarial system, the financial and temporal pressures of modern legal practice, positions or feelings of relative status or power, and cues or pressure from others. The psychology we present provides substantial insight into why attorneys sometimes behave unethically, why attorneys may have difficulty curbing or reporting the unethical conduct of their clients or fellow attorneys, and why it is often difficult for attorneys to see and learn from their own ethical missteps and the missteps of others. At the same time, the psychological research also provides insight into why attorneys are often able to resist substantial pressure to act unethically. We draw on the psychological research to make suggestions for how individual attorneys and legal employers can enhance their approach to ethics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":80553,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arizona State law journal\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"1107-1182\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arizona State law journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2248137\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arizona State law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2248137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

对律师道德的抱怨屡见不鲜。虽然一些律师故意选择不当行为是肯定存在的,但心理学研究表明,情况要复杂得多。不道德的不仅仅是“坏苹果”。相反,道德沦丧可能比我们想象的更容易发生,也更少是故意的。在本文中,我们研究了道德“盲点”、滑坡和“道德衰落”,它们可能导致好人行为不端。然后,我们探讨了法律实践的具体方面,这些方面可能会给律师带来特别困难的挑战,因为行为伦理的本质——复杂而模糊的道德规则和标准、代理关系、对抗制度的精神、现代法律实践的财务和时间压力、相对地位或权力的立场或感觉,以及来自他人的暗示或压力。我们提出的心理学为以下问题提供了实质性的见解:为什么律师有时会有不道德的行为,为什么律师可能难以遏制或报告其客户或同事的不道德行为,以及为什么律师通常很难看到并从自己的道德失误和他人的错误中吸取教训。与此同时,心理学研究也提供了洞察为什么律师往往能够抵制巨大的压力,采取不道德的行为。我们借鉴心理学研究,为律师个人和法律雇主如何提高他们的道德方法提出建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Behavioral Legal Ethics
Complaints about lawyers’ ethics are commonplace. While it is surely the case that some attorneys deliberately choose to engage in misconduct, psychological research suggests a more complex story. Iit is not only “bad apples” who are unethical. Instead, ethical lapses can occur more easily and less intentionally than we might imagine. In this paper, we examine the ethical “blind spots,” slippery slopes, and “ethical fading” that may lead good people to behave badly. We then explore specific aspects of legal practice that can present particularly difficult challenges for lawyers given the nature of behavioral ethics - complex and ambiguous ethical rules and standards, agency relationships, the ethos of the adversarial system, the financial and temporal pressures of modern legal practice, positions or feelings of relative status or power, and cues or pressure from others. The psychology we present provides substantial insight into why attorneys sometimes behave unethically, why attorneys may have difficulty curbing or reporting the unethical conduct of their clients or fellow attorneys, and why it is often difficult for attorneys to see and learn from their own ethical missteps and the missteps of others. At the same time, the psychological research also provides insight into why attorneys are often able to resist substantial pressure to act unethically. We draw on the psychological research to make suggestions for how individual attorneys and legal employers can enhance their approach to ethics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Guns, Knives, and Swords: Policing a Heavily Armed Arizona Liberal Internationalism and the Populist Backlash Google Glass While Driving Behavioral Legal Ethics Raising the Bar: Law Schools and Legal Institutions Leading to Educate Undocumented Students
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1