By Michelle Blouin, Communications Associate, Access to Justice Lab
Marriage in the U.S. typically requires a marriage license, payment of a nominal fee, and often a short waiting period from the license signing to marriage. Divorce, on the other hand, typically involves lawyers; courthouse visits; comparatively higher fees; and, in some cases, antiquated roadblocks just to implement this federal constitutional right. The result is that divorce can be an access-to-justice issue for low-income individuals who are faced with trying to pay for a lawyer they cannot afford or navigate unnecessarily complex divorce filing procedures on their own.
A 2016 study conducted by the Access to Justice Lab, in collaboration with pro bono legal organization Philadelphia Volunteers for the Indigent Program (VIP), looked at the effect of providing legal assistance to low-income individuals seeking divorce in Philadelphia County. This week’s Proof Over Precedent podcast episode reunites some of the researchers and original authors of the study report, including Jim Greiner, faculty director of the A2J Lab; Roseanna Sommers, Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Michigan; and data scientist Tom Ferriss. The original study was published in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Arts and Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS).
“It seemed like the key ingredient that would’ve helped a lot of people is, you know, a human expert to sort of guide them or offer them some information,” said Sommers in sharing her observations.
Study Details
The study began in 2011, when the researchers noted that no empirical evaluations had ever been conducted to determine if pro bono matching programs improved access to justice for low-income individuals for any legal problem, let alone simple divorces. Likewise, they could find no evidence of statistical data measuring access to justice for individuals seeking divorce without a lawyer, either. The resulting randomized controlled trial enrolled 311 participants, mostly women, who were randomly assigned to a Philly VIP attempt to match them to a pro bono attorney or to a referral of self-help materials or the Modest Means Program, a phone answer and referral service for those who qualify. All of the participants sought a straight-forward divorce (no child custody, financial disputes, domestic violence, etc.). Researchers had no cause for ethical alarm with the study’s set-up, since Philly VIP’s pro bono matching services were oversubscribed, and the researchers had no evidence showing that attorney assistance would help in divorce cases.
To better understand the help that would be provided (by pro bono attorneys) or sought (by pro se litigants), it helps to know the legal landscape for individuals seeking a divorce in Philadelphia County at the time. Among the features or requirements:
- Withstanding multiple waiting periods despite an earlier two-year separation period and desire by both parties to divorce
- Knowing legal jargon, such as “Praecipe to Transmit the Record to the Prothonotary”—the name of the form to request the divorce record be sent to Court for filing
- Knowing Latin, such as “In Forma Pauperis” the name of the online petition that would excuse low-income individuals from paying the associated filing fee
- Navigating pro se divorce filing without any statewide, court-approved pro se forms on the court’s website*
- Navigating pro se divorce filing without assistance from the courthouse self-help center
- Conducting pro se filing research ten blocks from the courthouse, at the Jenkins Law Library, including purchase and perusal of the 166-page self-help divorce packet
- Paying $328.98 in filing fees in 2014 (in 2025, fees amount to $333.73)
- Finding and using a typewriter to fill out required forms (no White-Out allowed) **
*An online brochure now offers FAQs for divorce in Philadelphia County
**It appears that Philadelphia County no longer requires divorce forms be completed with a typewriter, as the website does not currently and explicitly note this
The bullet points above add up to what the researchers referred to as “hassle factors.”
“When we talk about hassle factors, we talk about things that make it difficult for people with limited time and cognitive bandwidth to get it done,” Sommers explained.
The Attorney Advantage
The researchers noted the difference in success rate for divorce filing within 18 months in Philadelphia County between the two study groups was 44 percentage points.
“It’s actually the largest effect I’ve ever seen in a legal services study of any kind,” Jim said in the podcast discussion.
The presence of a lawyer—or even potential presence, given that the data measured “attempts” at matching lawyers—was enough to support individuals in nearing their goal. The gap between the two groups in Philadelphia County actually reaching a divorce within 36 months was 40 percentage points—meaning, a participant who had the opportunity for pro bono support was 40 percent more likely than a participant who did not have a lawyer to succeed in divorcing.
The data demonstrates the value that lawyers bring to their clients; but what does it say about the process that divorce is most accessible to those who can afford it (or rather, who can afford a lawyer)?
An Access to Justice Issue
If we were to use 100 percent access to justice as the barometer for the study—a goal proposed by the Conference of Chief Justices and Court Administrators—then those participants assisted by pro bono lawyers should have “roughly the same” results as those pursuing a divorce through self-help means.
The data does not support this goal. Instead, it demonstrated Philadelphia County Court’s lack of pro se accessibility; to be fair though, it appears (at least through online research for this blog) that Philadelphia County no longer requires a typewriter to file for divorce.
One sign of pro se inaccessibility stems from a finding by the researchers that, rather than filing in their own county, some study participants filed for divorce in two rural Pennsylvania counties shown to be more “divorce-friendly” (i.e., the counties accepted divorce filings via postal mail and fees were significantly less than Philadelphia County itself).
The researchers discussed, in both the report and the podcast, the psychological effect of multiple obstacles in reaching a goal. Perhaps the process would benefit from a few minor updates—dropping the use of Latin and legalese, adding more pro se self-help materials, including organized checklists of divorce filing requirements, and streamlining the waiting periods.
Is the solution, then, to ensure more lawyers are accessible to individuals filing for divorce, or to ensure the process of filing for divorce is made simpler and more pro se accessible for straight-forward divorce cases?
If you’re interested in more on this topic, listen to our Proof Over Precedent podcast episodes:
Episode 24: Till Death—or an Affordable Divorce—Do Us Part
Episode 25: Legal Labyrinths Reveal Divorce Filing Woes