Does being a lawyer automatically earn one’s trust?

May 12, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Would you wear a T-shirt that says “Trust me, I’m a lawyer?”

Or perhaps, more importantly, should I trust you because you are a lawyer?

This T-shirt popped up as a promotion in our paper’s Twitter feed this morning.  As of 10 a.m., the website says 35 have been purchased.  The description of the shirt even says, “Are you a lawyer? Then people better trust you. Wear this shirt with pride!”

I see this T-shirt being worn for two reasons: by a lawyer who’s wearing it to be funny (ha ha, I’m a lawyer and my shirt says so!) or by a non-lawyer who’s also wearing it to be funny (ha ha, I’m not a lawyer, but people trust lawyers, so you should trust me when I tell you to …)

We – the general public – should trust lawyers because these men and women have dedicated time and resources to learning the law. They are a small group of people that we can turn to when we have a serious problem: divorce, an arrest, being sued by someone, etc. We expect them to know what they are doing. We TRUST them to know what they are doing. That’s why they get paid the big bucks, right?

But sometimes, just as in every profession (Hello, Jayson Blair), there are bad apples who cause us to second guess or bad mouth attorneys. There are attorneys who take advantage of their clients, only look out for themselves, and abuse their positions of trust. They become the inspiration for bad lawyer jokes.

But I know – and I hope the general public realizes – that these few bad apples aren’t representative of the legal profession. The majority of attorneys are out there working hard and earning the trust of their clients.

So wear this T-shirt with pride, lawyers. I trust you will.



Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. Heritage, what Heritage? The New Age is dawning .... an experiment in disordered liberty and social fragmentation is upon us .... "Carmel City Council approved a human rights ordinance with a 4-3 vote Monday night after hearing about two hours of divided public testimony. The ordinance bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, among other traits. Council members Rick Sharp, Carol Schleif, Sue Finkam and Ron Carter voted in favor of it. The three council members opposing it—Luci Snyder, Kevin Rider and Eric Seidensticker—all said they were against any form of discrimination, but had issues with the wording and possible unintended consequences of the proposal." Kardashian is the new Black.

  2. Can anyone please tell me if anyone is appealing the law that certain sex offenders can't be on school property. How is somebody supposed to watch their children's sports games or graduations, this law needs revised such as sex offenders that are on school property must have another non-offender adult with them at all times while on school property. That they must go to the event and then leave directly afterwards. This is only going to hurt the children of the offenders and the father/ son mother/ daughter vice versa relationship. Please email me and let me know if there is a group that is appealing this for reasons other than voting and religion. Thank you.

  3. Should any attorney who argues against the abortion industry, or presents arguments based upon the Founders' concept of Higher Law, (like that marriage precedes the State) have to check in with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program for a mandatory mental health review? Some think so ... that could certainly cut down on cases such as this "cluttering up" the SCOTUS docket ... use JLAP to deny all uber conservative attorneys licenses and uber conservative representation will tank. If the ends justify the means, why not?

  4. Tell them sherry Mckay told you to call, they're trying to get all the people that have been wronged and held unlawfully to sign up on this class action lawsuit.

  5. Call Young and Young aAttorneys at Law theres ones handling a class action lawsuit