William and Mary Law Review
I have always admired the adversarial advocacy with which Professor Carrie Menkel-Meadow attacks adversarial advocacy. Also, given her postmodern skepticism that there can be any certainty in truth, I respect her certainty about her own version of truth. She exhibits both of these qualities in her Article, The Trouble with the Adversary System in a Postmodern, Multicultural World.
I premise my own system of lawyers' ethics on individual dignity and autonomy. Accordingly, I believe that people should be able to choose how to resolve their disputes. It is possible, therefore, that I have no disagreement with Professor Menkel-Meadow. If she means only that parties to a dispute should be allowed to use whatever nonviolent means they choose, we are in complete accord. In fact, though, such choice is widely available. I assume, therefore, that Professor Menkel-Meadow calls for displacement of the adversary system with some institutionalized alternative(s).
Monroe H. Freedman,
The Trouble with Postmodern Zeal, 38 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 63
Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/41