I’m not remotely disagreeing with you on principle, just commenting on the way the system currently “works” (not a good term for what the system currently does).

Why do we? Nearly all states have laws saying that the property has to be divided 50%. So that’s already decided. Then simply have a mediator decided who gets custody of the kids.

I’ve known attorneys who have had divorce cases last several years, decades. Does it really take that long to divide up property and decide who gets the kids?!

Out adversarial process is what turned it into an adversarial mess. When a divorce attorney gets a client willing to pay the bills, what incentive does s/he ever have to complete the matter?!

Well, leaving out that third point, yes, unfortunately, we do.

Now, we SHOULDN’T, and that we do is one of the many great flaws in our system, but that wasn’t your question.

BTW, I’m not attacking with you, I’m just using your quote as a starting point.

I think a lawsuit should be a very rare thing. It should not be as easy to find a lawyer as it is to find a bag of potato chips.

The only thing a person should really need an attorney for would be for a criminal matter.

Do we really need attorneys for divorces, to settle disputes between neighbors, or to sue your local school because your kid didn’t make the honor roll?

The sole reason we’re getting so many frivolous lawsuits is because obtaining an attorney is a frivolous matter, i.e., “lacking in seriousness.”

If it were up to me I’d cut the number of attorneys allowed to pass the various state bars by 50%.

BOY was I wrong!