shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress

An editorial over the weekend in the upstate New York based North Country Gazette reminded me that self-help-law advocates can advance our cause in two important ways :  1) get our message to the mass media (as news and opinion) and 2) make sure we’re both kvetchin’ and kvellin’ — complaining about what’s wrong and needs to be done in the current system, but also pointing (often with with pride and pleasure) at what has been accomplished and is already available to the public. 

 As we had on September 16, the North Country Gazette editorial focused on Ohio Chief Justice William Moyer’s remarks about working to reduce the number of pro se litigants coming before Ohio courts.  (“Eliminating the pro se litigant,” Sept. 23, 2006)  The Gazette seems to specialize in investigating and reporting on abuses in the NY and American government, especially the judiciary.   Its editorial wonders whether Moyer has “thrown out the Constitution” and is trying to “legislate from the bench . . . or his swimming pool.”

  We certainly can understand The Gazette‘s suspicions about judges and lawyers, and can join in its suggestion that

“Instead of shutting the court doors to pro se litigants, Moyer should take steps to simplify court procedures, to remove the barriers and roadblocks for those who wish to proceed for pro se, particularly the costs, make the court system more ‘user-friendly’ instead of restrictive to those who can pay to play.”

But the editorial left me wondering whether The Gazette might not also live up to its tagline “serving New York” by turning its investigative talents toward showing what New York State has been doing lately to assist the pro se litigant. 

And that thought quickly reminded me that it’s about time that I also remind the public in my home state of what has been achieved and is being done to make self-representation an effective option in our courts — especially given ethicalEsq‘s complaints in 2004 about the failure of New York courts to use assisted self-help in achieving access to justice.  That task deserves a fuller treatment, but for now I will point out with pleasure that:

• The New York State CourtHelp website for pro se litigants has been improved and expanded, offering many forms and useful guidance in civil matters, in family, housing, small claims and surogate’s court, as well as a Glossary of common legal terms.
• The NYS Office of Court Administration has established an Office for Judicial Initiatives, which is now headed by the Hon. Juanita Bing Newton.   In citing their ambitious goals in achieving access to justice — “courts that work for every one” — the first goal listed is “effective help for self-represented litigants.”  The extensive list of activities found on the self-represented litigants page suggests that significant resources, planning and experiments (at several self-help centers) are helping to achieve to this goal.   For example, a recent conference on Access and the Self-represented created and organized a wealth of information on many relevant topics — including the vital role of judges.

Advocates for the self-represented can’t just talk among ourselves or to the converted.  We must reach out to the public, especially through the mass media.   Complaining and lobbying about what needs to be done is still important, but letting the public in each state and locality know of resources that already exist must also play a vital part in our advocacy efforts.   We can help create more demand for self-help by voters and tax-payers.  Let’s work harder to reach the public with our message, kvetchin’ and kvellin’ in high-profile places.