I am writing a book regarding legal issues affecting wellness initiatives in the United States (more blog posts on that later). In researching for my book, I stumbled across some discussions about the difference between legal compliance consulting and legal advice. The former does not require a law degree. The latter does. One proponent of legal compliance consulting argued that the need for legal advice was becoming less necessary because the one true benefit of obtaining legal advice - the attorney-client privilege - has diminishing importance in American society. Specifically, clients are inclined to give up their attorney-client privileged communications in return for softer punishment by government enforcers. With no real need for the attorney-client privilege, the need for something less than legal advice, such as compliance consulting, is sufficient (and, some argue, less costly).
Based on my experience, I disagree that the attorney-client privilege is an antiquated concept. In my experience, the attorney-client privilege is more than just a discovery tool for litigation. It is symbolic of the legal profession in its purest form. The attorney-client privilege reaches beyond client confidences and instills a sense of trust even among those who are not our clients. As an example, I recently had lunch with a colleague who said he shared information that he would not share with a nonlawyer. Even though that information is not subject to any kind of privilege, the fact that it exists for me in other contexts provided a veil of trust in our relationship.
So, regardless of whether individuals or organizations are more willing to bargain away their privileged communications, the attorney-client privilege still serves a valuable purpose. It provides clients and others within our communication circles with an air of confidence and trust in what we as lawyers say and do. Earning and keeping that trust and confidence with others is priceless.
