Embedded Files
This week focuses on professional judgment—the choices lawyers make when there may be more than one competent or ethically permissible way to handle a situation. As you gain experience in your placement, you are not only learning what lawyers do; you are also beginning to decide what kind of professional you want to be.
Professional identity often develops through observation. You may see a supervisor, attorney, judge, or other professional handle a client interaction, negotiation, workplace challenge, or strategic decision differently than you would. The fact that you would have approached the situation differently does not necessarily mean that the other person acted improperly. Instead, these moments can help you identify the values, communication practices, and decision-making habits that you want to carry into your own practice.
Write
For this week's reflection, identify one specific interaction or decision from your placement that gave you pause, but that did not involve a clear ethical violation. Focus on a subtle stylistic, strategic, communication, or prioritization choice.
Your reflection has three parts:
The Friction Point: Describe objectively what happened and identify the specific observable behavior that caught your attention.
The Core Value: Consider why the interaction mattered to you, what personal or professional value it implicated, and what it reveals about your emerging professional identity.
The Counterfactual: Explain specifically what you would have said or done differently while still achieving a competent and effective professional outcome.
The goal is not to critique or judge another professional. It is to use your observations from practice to develop a more deliberate answer to a question you will encounter throughout your career: When several approaches are professionally acceptable, how will you decide how you want to practice?
Page updated
Report abuse