For instance, the opposing counsel, “hired to safeguard and advance the interests of one person or group,” may face SRLs who expect “advice and assistance to both sides” (Blishen, 2006, p. 118). In fact, during the judicial process, “[l]awyers for the parties opposing a SRL are more likely to have to assist the SRL in the preparation and lodgment of court documents” and have to “address irrelevant issues and evidence as part of the SRLs case” (Richardson et al., 2012, p. 32). Moreover, “to the extent that court personnel or judges are at all sympathetic to efforts by self- represented litigants to receive assistance in conducting their cases, the other party to the dispute may feel that the fundamental tenet of neutrality has been breached” (Berenson, 2001, p. 113-114). In fact, this dispute holds legitimacy as judges have expressed concerns “that enforcing rules of procedure less rigidly against self- represented parties might be perceived as being unfair to the represented party” (Berenson, 2001, p. 114). In addition, although self-represented litigants are not subject to lawyer fees during the judicial process, they may “increase costs for all parties due to a need for more pre-trial proceedings, poor issue identification, greater time responding to unclear and irrelevant evidence and more time spent in hearings” (Richardson et al., 2012, p. 14).…