Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    College Advising
    Serving Higher Ed
    Chronicle Festival 2025
Sign In
The Review

The Lessons of Legal Ethics

By Leonard M. Niehoff May 12, 2006

I teach ethics to law students. That always draws a laugh, or a sarcastic remark like, “Must be a short course.” My favorite response, though, came from a fellow who works at the local feed store and asked what I did for a living. When I told him, he shook his head and said, “Wow, and I thought dairy farmers had a tough job.”

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

I teach ethics to law students. That always draws a laugh, or a sarcastic remark like, “Must be a short course.” My favorite response, though, came from a fellow who works at the local feed store and asked what I did for a living. When I told him, he shook his head and said, “Wow, and I thought dairy farmers had a tough job.”

It is a tough job, indeed, for several reasons.

Most students have little or no interest in the course when they enroll in it, which they do only to meet the curricular requirement. Surveys tell me that students sign up for the course with indifference, or even hostility. I understand why.

Some students think we cannot find provably correct answers to ethical problems. Those students entered law school with an easygoing, skeptical relativism they acquired as undergraduates. Others think that we have already found the answers and that they’re obvious. Those students entered law school with a moral certitude they acquired from their family or faith. Both kinds of students have something in common: They enroll in my class thinking it a waste of time.

That attitude presents a collection of challenges. I have to engage uninterested students. I have to show some students that more can be said about ethics than they think. And I have to show others that less can be said.

The greatest challenge, however, comes in helping students understand that they may not even have framed the issues correctly. After all, thinking about ethics as a series of questions and answers may capture how those issues arise in academe, but it does not capture how they tend to arise in life, or, more pointedly, in the practice of law. In those complex contexts, ethical problems come to us as problems, not as hypothetical questions that invite abstract answers. That distinction is important because we do not seek to answer problems but to solve them, and solutions tend to be complex, organic, and communal in ways that answers often are not. Throughout the term I try to lure my students away from the question-and-answer model and invite them to consider other sorts of models.

Of course, my job is also a tough one because I am teaching law students. Their course work has already introduced them to an idea that influences a good deal of the theory around legal ethics: that lawyers hold a special place in our society. Most of them therefore come to the course recognizing, at least to some degree, that serving as someone’s lawyer may allow them — or even require them — to engage in conduct we would otherwise regard as morally obnoxious. They have some understanding, even if rough-hewn, that their professional obligations may compel them to depart from their personal morality, and that those obligations justify that departure.

At the beginning of the course, I often ask them to consider the following scenario. Your best friend comes to you and asks if you will keep a confidence. You agree, and he tells you he has a terrible confession. A few nights ago, while driving down a dark country road, he accidentally hit a young girl. He leapt from the car, checked her pulse, and discovered he had killed her. In a panic, he lifted her body into his arms, carried it to his car, and drove deep into the woods — where he buried the body. The incident tortures him, but he knows that disclosure to the authorities will ruin his life.

Some students immediately conclude that you have no obligation to keep this secret. They do so for different reasons. For example, some think your friend extracted the promise unfairly or believe that competing considerations outweigh whatever obligation of confidentiality may have arisen from your promise. But those students reach that decision without a struggle. Others resist at first, but as we add more facts — for instance, the child’s parents appearing on television every night pleading for information regarding the whereabouts of their beloved daughter — almost everyone comes to a point at which they decide that you can, or even must, reveal what you know.

Then we change the scenario: The conversation does not take place between best friends but between an attorney and a client who wants to understand the legal consequences of his actions. We go back through the decision making. A few students see no distinction; they think that in both cases you may breach the confidence. Most students, however, quickly conclude that the second scenario differs from the first in significant ways. In defense of their conclusion, they discuss “the greatest good for the greatest number,” try their hand at some sort of cost-benefit analysis, or even invoke ideas taken from game theory. When pressed, however, it turns out that all of their arguments finally depend on the special role of the attorney in our society. Again, most of them bring some version of that idea into the room with them and so resort to it immediately when the sledding gets bumpy.

For many years, I thought this was the most interesting aspect of legal ethics: Attorneys must sometimes do things that our moral sensibilities would ordinarily condemn, or refrain from doing things that our moral sensibilities would ordinarily direct. The students seem to find this issue fascinating as well. After all, it confirms an idea they’ve already encountered, underscores their special role in society, and gives them a dramatic glimpse of the brave new world they plan to enter.

ADVERTISEMENT

We still explore those issues in class, but over time I’ve concluded that law students need to learn two other lessons from a legal-ethics course as well. I have come to think of them as the two most important messages the course conveys, and, at the risk of overstating matters, have come to believe that the moral fabric of our profession depends on students’ learning those lessons — and retaining them.

The first lesson is this: Many solutions to the problems of legal ethics turn not on the unique role of the attorney, but rather on the unique role of the attorney-client relationship. Students don’t take to this immediately. Toward the beginning of the course, I ask my students to identify the unique characteristic of the legal profession, and they overwhelmingly point to qualities they associate with lawyers: aggressive, critical thinkers, educated in the law, and so on. Only one or two will respond by pointing to the distinctive attorney-client relationship.

Once we’ve put that on the table, however, we discover that many of the rules of legal ethics were written to foster a particular kind of relationship between the attorney and the client. More important, we discover that the relationship those rules strive to create has a great deal in common with the relationships we try to build with our families and friends. In studying the characteristics of a sound attorney-client relationship — trust, loyalty, honesty, open communication, availability — we therefore end up learning a great deal about our life beyond the law. Of course, that has the added benefit of reminding the students that such a life exists, a fact newly minted lawyers often have trouble remembering.

The second lesson is this: Engaging in ethical decision making is much more difficult in practice than in the classroom. I illustrate that point with the example of mountain climbers, who decide while still at base camp the precise minute they will turn around from their attempt to reach the summit and head back down. Mountain climbers understand that they will not engage in their best decision making at high altitudes; the thin air, the apparent closeness of the summit, and the pressures of success will compromise their judgment. The best climbers have done all their good thinking at base camp, and they carry it right up the mountain with them.

ADVERTISEMENT

The analogy to the practice of law is obvious. I teach some of the brightest young people in the country. They will become heads of law firms, business leaders, in-house counsel to major corporations and organizations, attorneys general, judges, legislators, prosecutors, and — perhaps most challenging of all — small-town, solo practitioners. They will find themselves at high altitudes. Summits, many of them false, will tempt them to keep climbing after the point of no return. My job is to help my students build their ethical base camps. And that is the principal reason my job is tough — wonderfully and gloriously so.

Leonard M. Niehoff is an adjunct professor of law at the University of Michigan Law School and an attorney at Butzel Long, in Ann Arbor. He is the author of “What We Believe: Geoffrey Stone’s ‘Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime’ and the Assault on Individual Conscience” (Rutgers Law Journal, 2005).


http://chronicle.com Section: The Chronicle Review Volume 52, Issue 36, Page B5

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Pro-Palestinian student protesters demonstrate outside Barnard College in New York on February 27, 2025, the morning after pro-Palestinian student protesters stormed a Barnard College building to protest the expulsion last month of two students who interrupted a university class on Israel. (Photo by TIMOTHY A. CLARY / AFP) (Photo by TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty Images)
Campus Activism
A College Vows to Stop Engaging With Some Student Activists to Settle a Lawsuit Brought by Jewish Students
LeeNIHGhosting-0709
Stuck in limbo
The Scientists Who Got Ghosted by the NIH
Protesters attend a demonstration in support of Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, March 10, 2025, in New York.
First-Amendment Rights
Noncitizen Professors Testify About Chilling Effect of Others’ Detentions
Photo-based illustration of a rock preciously suspended by a rope over three beakers.
Broken Promise
U.S. Policy Made America’s Research Engine the Envy of the World. One President Could End That.

From The Review

Vector illustration of a suited man with a pair of scissors for a tie and an American flag button on his lapel.
The Review | Opinion
A Damaging Endowment Tax Crosses the Finish Line
By Phillip Levine
University of Virginia President Jim Ryan keeps his emotions in check during a news conference, Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Charlottesville. Va. Authorities say three people have been killed and two others were wounded in a shooting at the University of Virginia and a student is in custody. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)
The Review | Opinion
Jim Ryan’s Resignation Is a Warning
By Robert Zaretsky
Photo-based illustration depicting a close-up image of a mouth of a young woman with the letter A over the lips and grades in the background
The Review | Opinion
When Students Want You to Change Their Grades
By James K. Beggan

Upcoming Events

07-31-Turbulent-Workday_assets v2_Plain.png
Keeping Your Institution Moving Forward in Turbulent Times
Ascendium_Housing_Plain.png
What It Really Takes to Serve Students’ Basic Needs: Housing
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin