Report comment

Anon 1737

In broad terms, there is obviously some force in what you say, however, from a purely personal perspective I do not believe that the limited scope of the help I provide requires insurance. That apart, your argument, if followed, has the potential to leave many in the lower echelons of our society with absolutely no one to turn to; it is a matter for the consciences of others as to whether that is appropriate.

Aside of the issue of whether it is appropriate for them to charge for services rendered, it seems to me that the biggest single problem is differentiating between the McKenzie Friend who, historically, simply provided moral (or for that matter factual) support and the one who seeks to act as a 'lawyer' (whatever that means).

Entirely by the by, the name is Blomfield.