Search for: All records

In half of U.S. households, at least one person faces a civil justice problem each year. These problems range from eviction to divorce, benefits denials to neighbor disputes, and medical debt to employment discrimination. Most will never reach a court or even a lawyer—indeed, most will never be solved at all. Unresolved civil legal problems cause financial instability, housing insecurity, and poor mental and physical health—burdens disproportionately borne by Black, Latinx, multiracial, and low-income Americans. Although we know a great deal about the existence and distribution of civil justice problems, we know much less about how to solve them. Doing so requires empirical research about help-seeking: where people go for assistance, why they pursue some resources but avoid others, and whether and how race and class shape patterns of help-seeking. We need solutions that align with everyday people’s lived experiences. This Article investigates help-seeking from the perspective of ordinary people. Its findings can better equip lawyers, justice innovators, and program designers to create novel access to justice solutions from the perspective of ordinary people. Leveraging data from a nationally representative survey, this Article analyzes over 47,000 quantitative responses and 100,000 words of open-ended answers, unearthing powerful findings about how Americans think about getting help when they face a complex, early-stage problem with legal implications: here, an eldercare scenario. People gravitate towards sources they view as experienced and private, and those which offer advice, not information—a crucial distinction in light of legal regulatory regimes. They gravitate away from sources they view as bureaucratic, uncaring, or too extreme; these perceptions hinge on source type. Identities such as political affiliation and religiosity are crucial predictors of help-seeking behavior, denoting a need for diversified outreach strategies to polarized groups. By focusing on help-seeking for early-stage problems, this Article shifts the conversation from the existence of legal needs to laying the empirical groundwork for interventions that center the perspective of ordinary Americans. Doing so will better equip us to forge tools that can stop the corrosive effects of unsolved civil legal problems.