Monday, March 27, 2017

Exploring Process: The Viewpoint of the Self-Represented Litigant

By Angela Tripp, Director, Michigan Legal Help Program, and
Martha Gove, Staff Attorney/Program & Outreach Coordinator, Michigan Legal Help Program


Sometimes the best way to understand how others experience your product is to be your own customer.  Michigan Legal Help staff recently conducted user testing to get real-time, in-person feedback about the website – its layout, wording, and the new features we’re adding.  Similarly, an attorney colleague recently used Michigan Legal Help to represent herself in her divorce, moving through the courts for the first time as a self-represented litigant instead of as an attorney.  What she had to say about the experience was as illuminating as any user testing we could have done, and speaks a great deal to the experiences of self-represented litigants.
To court staff, self-represented litigants may seem disorganized, misinformed, and confused.  What these litigants would tell us is that they are also intimidated and overwhelmed, and feel like they are at the mercy of every court staff person with whom they interact.  They may also feel humiliated, because they had to remove their shoes and belt at the security line when they thought they had emptied their pockets of metal.
My colleague’s story involved a very simple divorce, one with a consent judgment that plaintiff and defendant agreed to and signed.  Even so, she could not schedule the final court date or file the motion/notice of hearing without talking to three different people.  She soon discovered she had been given a wrong date, which required another trip to the courthouse, complete with security screening, because only the clerk could correct the notice of hearing for her.  Luckily, because she has a Bar card, my colleague could take her phone into the courthouse with her to make sure she didn’t have a work conflict on the new proposed hearing date.  After the final hearing, the process to get a signed copy of the judgment of divorce was cryptic and involved going to the judge’s clerk’s office rather than the main clerk’s office.  My colleague had to navigate these hurdles while doing one of the most personal and difficult things she has had to do: end her marriage.
Her story struck me for several reasons.  First, it is easy for us to forget that the people on the other side of the website, or the bench or desk, are individuals who are just trying to live through a very difficult personal crisis that involves the legal system.  In our work, it is easy to let them blend into an unending, confused, and confusing blur.  We are all well served to stop and consider their humanity from time to time.
Second, I am reminded that providing procedural instructions is one of our biggest challenges on Michigan Legal Help.  Specific instructions are what people need to feel comfortable, to calm nerves, to make them feel confident and in control of the process.  And yet it is hard to provide accurate information, even with all our research, because so many courts and judges have their own preferred processes.  As a result, the best-researched checklist on MLH is often useless.  Is there a better way for MLH to handle this?  We’d love to hear from you!
Third, and related to the first two, is the concept of simplifying the court process, which is often discussed in the context of self-represented litigants.  Some barriers to self-representation are security related and may be harder to implement.  However, given the number of people who rely on electronic calendars, is there a way to allow people to bring their phones into court?  Other barriers may be easier to remove.  For example, the divorce paperwork says “Circuit Court” at the top, but this may need to be filed with a “Domestic Clerk.”  Can courthouse signage help people get to the right desk?  Must there be separate offices for scheduling and filing?  Are there ways to move simple cases (consent divorces, for example) through the courts in fewer steps?
Simplification of some court processes was a goal that came out of the 21st Century Practice Task Force, and efforts are already underway.  The Self-Represented Litigation Network has a Simplification Work Group, and the National Center for State Courts has resources on Rule and Process Simplification.  These concepts may already be under discussion in your courts, and I encourage you to join the conversation and keep it moving forward.  This is a movement that can improve the experience for both litigants and courts, and I invite you to involve us at Michigan Legal Help as well. 

We are very comfortable in the worlds we inhabit and the routines of our workplaces.  But complacency may keep us from identifying weaknesses.  Getting input from outsiders can be very productive.  We did this at Michigan Legal Help recently, when a group of University of Michigan School of Information students studied the processes we use in the office and provided recommendations for improvements.  This type of fresh look, particularly from the eyes of our customers, is always an interesting experience and worth every moment spent. 
Contact Michigan Legal Help at http://michiganlegalhelp.org/contact-us.