For all the answers and efficiencies that the likes of ChatGPT might bring to some areas of life and work, there are many areas where there is no replacement for human knowledge and experience.
That’s certainly true when it comes to making key legal decisions in our lives.
In all areas of legal practice, there is evidence that people who try to use AI as a substitute for tailored, human legal advice can find it a false economy.
Alison McKee, Partner in our Family Law team, says: “I am seeing that especially in my area of family law, where AI can provide misinformation, causing further stress at some of the most difficult moments in people’s lives. When negotiations are sensitive, and trust is crucial, it is vital that both parties can access accurate information, and that conversations are not derailed by either party relying on incorrect information generated by AI.
“Some might say that I am bound to say this - that it’s not in the interests of lawyers to say that AI has all of the answers. But this is about ensuring people understand the options available to them and get relevant advice.
We are spending increasing amounts of time advising clients who have been wrong-footed by AI - or rectifying steps they may have tried to take without having the proper information. One of the biggest challenges with relying solely on AI is that the advice generated is not always relevant to Scots law. For some, that has proven costlier than if they had turned to us from the outset.
“And, while the most amicable separations and divorces are those where couples can agree as much as possible themselves, it is helpful when this can be done against a background where both parties are aware of the range of options available to them, and the practical considerations that need to be factored into making good decisions.”
An AI bot will not be able to consider your specific needs and the precise dynamics of your family’s situation. Ultimately, the process of separation or divorce is about trying to reach a settlement that works for you and your family, including arrangements around finances and childcare, which are often the most challenging to resolve. There is no correct answer, and one size doesn’t fit all.
AI does not share objective human advice. Indeed, you can often keep asking questions until you eventually get the answer you are looking for - even if it is incorrect or irrelevant.
It also does not understand human reactions – or how someone you have been in a relationship with might respond to the steps you have taken.
I would be wrong to suggest that AI is not useful for research – for example, to broadly understand options. But, when it comes to complex, contentious or emotional legal affairs, it should be seen as simply a starting point.
“AI also will not offer options such as collaborative law, where lawyers - and perhaps experts including financial advisors and life coaches - sit around a table with couples in an attempt to resolve more challenging issues.”
When you negotiate, you can agree anything you choose, whether that be around tax implications or the practicalities of implementing a workable divorce settlement agreement, including finances and access to children - with the certainty that it can then be followed through legally.
Trying to draw up an agreement using AI does none of that. It is - literally - a robotic approach.
Sometimes there is no substitute for the human touch.
