Being a good attorney, a good lawyer and a good listener are complementary aspects of the same professional responsibility. Knowing the law, examining the evidence and preparing a strong petition are indispensable. Yet all of this is addressed to a human being. Behind the case number on the file cover there may be a person who fears losing their freedom, their child, their livelihood, their home, their reputation or their future. The attorney's professional attention must be able to see that person while examining the legal question.
Consider a client waiting at the courtroom door in a courthouse corridor. The building, the waiting arrangements and the hearing procedure may be familiar to the attorney, but they may be full of uncertainty for the client. What is needed at that moment is not an unfounded assurance about how the court will decide. It is a calm explanation, a sense of being understood, and the presence of an attorney who knows what will happen next. Legal trust is built also through small-seeming conduct of this kind, which defines the character of the profession.
In the attorney–client relationship, transference refers to the way feelings and expectations linked to significant past relationships may be carried into the relationship with the attorney. Countertransference refers to the attorney's emotional reactions in the relationship with the client, which may also be connected with the attorney's own history and needs. These are not definitive diagnoses that explain every dispute. For the attorney, their function is to help them consider communication and professional judgment more carefully. [1, 2]
This article takes up the debate opened by Fahrettin Kayhan's work Transference and Countertransference in Attorney–Client Interaction and addresses it through current professional rules, the limits of the sources and specific proposals for practice. The aim is not to give the attorney the role of psychotherapist, but to show how understanding the person contributes to the quality of legal assistance. The example cases and conversations below were prepared for training purposes; they are not an actual client account or a concluded case. [1]
Why does the attorney–client relationship have a psychological dimension?
The economic value of a legal dispute and its meaning in a person's life are not always the same. A debt claim may, for one person, be a question of seeing the effort they have put in for years recognized. The end of a partnership may mean not only the division of accounts but also the breaking of trust. In a family dispute, alongside the legal claims there may be hurt, fear and uncertainty. By listening to what the matter means, the attorney is better placed to identify the client's priorities. This does not require the attorney to explore the client's childhood or to offer clinical explanations of their behavior.
There is also a difference of knowledge and experience in the relationship. The attorney knows the language and options of the process; the client will live with its consequences in their own life. This difference places a strong responsibility on the attorney. Using technical knowledge to assert superiority, belittling questions or imposing decisions without explanation damages trust. Giving understandable information and genuinely listening to the client's preferences is the professional way to reduce this imbalance.
Kayhan points out that overlooking the subjective meaning that a legal dispute has for a person may make the attorney–client relationship more difficult. This idea can be turned into a practical question: "What is the most important issue for you in this matter?" The answer does not by itself determine the claim that can be legally asserted; but it shows which expectations the attorney needs to clarify. [1]
The idea, which the source work discusses, that "the attorney's only enemy is the client" should also be reconsidered here. Turning the difficulties experienced into an assumption of hostility directed at every client narrows the relationship from the very first meeting. The attorney needs to set up records and a working system that protect them, but this does not require them to regard the client as an adversary in advance. Professional caution should not be a reason to stop understanding the person. [1]
What is transference, and how can it be considered in the attorney relationship?
How past relationships affect present expectations
Transference is a concept from the psychoanalytic tradition. It describes how feelings and expectations linked to people who were important to a person in the past may again become effective in a present relationship. In the attorney context, the concept can be used to consider the role the client gives to the attorney. The attorney may be perceived not only as a professional providing legal help, but also as an authority that will protect the client, a person who will judge them, or someone who might disappoint them again. The possibility of this does not replace an examination of the concrete relationship. [1, 2]
A client who, because of earlier experiences, asks for a document may think that you do not believe them. Another may fear that you will give up on them when you explain the legal risk. The first response to such reactions should not be to attach a psychological label to the person. In most cases it is more appropriate to explain why a document is needed, what purpose the risk explanation serves, and how the legal work will continue.
The professional line between trust and admiration
A client's trust in their attorney is a natural and valuable part of the relationship. Not every trust is transference, and not every thanks, commitment or admiration can be read as a problem. What must be examined is whether the trust removes the client's ability to ask questions and to take part in the decision-making process.
The statement "I will do whatever you say; you do not need to explain it to me" may appear to make the attorney's work easier. Yet the consequences will be experienced by the client. In particular, for a settlement, withdrawal from the case or other significant dispositive acts, explanation, instruction and the necessary authority must be examined separately. The client's trust must not be used as a gap that gives the attorney unlimited decision-making power. The purpose of the relationship is not for the person to hand all their decisions to the attorney, but for them to understand their legal options and form their own will.
Mistrust and conflicting feelings
A person may both need their attorney and approach them with suspicion. Feeling intense trust before a hearing and then becoming angry after an unfavorable interim decision is not, by itself, unusual. The dual valence discussed by Kayhan helps us consider how opposing feelings can coexist in the same relationship. However, the cause of such a change must first be investigated in the concrete situation: Were the expectations explained correctly? Was the decision communicated in time? Was there a real error or omission? [1]
Trying to understand the client's feeling does not remove the obligation to examine whether the complaint is well-founded.
Not confusing transference, projection and displacement
These concepts are related, but they are not synonyms. As a psychological defense mechanism, projection means attributing to others feelings or impulses that a person finds hard to accept in themselves. Displacement describes the redirection of a feeling or behavior from the person or object it was first aimed at to someone else. Transference, by contrast, focuses on past significant relationships becoming effective again within the present relationship. The theoretical boundaries of these concepts can be debated; an attorney should not be expected to determine with certainty which of them applies in an ordinary conversation. [1, 9]
For example, anger directed at the opposing party may be redirected at the attorney during a meeting, which may suggest displacement. The same behavior may also relate to a real gap in the attorney's explanation. The right professional starting point is to listen to what is happening before deciding on the concept, to review one's own conduct, and to clarify the legal need.
What is countertransference, and why should the attorney examine their own reactions?
The attorney also comes into the relationship with their own history
The scope of countertransference is explained in different ways by different schools of psychology. The common point of attention is that the person offering help takes part in the relationship with their own feelings, experiences and needs. The professional question adapted to the attorney relationship is this: "What do the things this client says and does stir up in me; how is this feeling affecting my legal assessment?" This use does not mean clinical diagnosis or treatment. [1, 2]
A file may remind the attorney of their own family experience. A criticism may trigger a worry about their professional competence. A word of thanks may lead the attorney to exceed their usual limits. The emergence of a feeling is not, in itself, an ethical violation. What matters is to examine whether the decision is shaped by the facts in the file or by the attorney's personal need.
The rescuer role and over-identification
The difficulties experienced by a client may give rise to a strong wish to protect them on the attorney's part. When this human wish turns into the thought "I must solve all of this person's problems," it expands the professional role. The attorney may begin to take on every request, act without adequate knowledge in an area they do not know well, or postpone a risk that must be explained legally so as not to upset the client.
The question to ask oneself here is usefulness before the size of the sacrifice made. Is the additional work really necessary? Are the knowledge and time sufficient for this task? Would working with another expert benefit the client? Is the client's room for decision-making narrowing? The value of the wish to help appears together with legal care and competence.
Anger, withdrawal and the need to prove oneself
Countertransference should not be thought of only as drawing closer. An attorney who avoids listening to the client, takes every question as a personal attack, or punitively reduces communication after a criticism also needs to undertake professional self-assessment. At the same time, heavy workloads, inadequate organization and conduct that clearly crosses the line must be examined separately; not every negative reaction can be explained by the same concept.
The attorney's wish to justify themselves may also get in the way of the file. Excluding a useful settlement option from consideration only so as not to appear to have "backed down" is an example of legal judgment turning into a personal contest. Recognizing the feeling allows one to rebuild the decision on the evidence, the options and the client's interests.
Not every worry, anger or criticism is transference
Psychological concepts cannot be used to make professional errors invisible. If a client has been unable to get an answer for a long time, their anger may be based on a real gap in communication. If the scope of the fee was not explained, the dispute may arise from uncertainty in the agreement. If the hearing date was not communicated, it would be wrong to explain the loss of trust only through the person's past.
Likewise, a change in a client's account should not automatically be treated as a lie, trauma or unconscious defense. Mixing up dates, a translation problem, a question that was misunderstood, a missing document, uncertainty in memory or a deliberate concealment are separate possibilities. Rather than choosing one of these in advance, the attorney should examine them through open questions, a timeline and verifiable documents. Separating statement from verified fact protects both human sensitivity and legal rigor.
| Observed situation | Concrete matter to examine first | Professional approach |
|---|---|---|
| A client who frequently asks for information | Is the reporting arrangement clear; was an important development left unanswered? | Explain the status of the file and set up a realistic communication schedule |
| A client who becomes angry at a risk explanation | Was a definite outcome suggested beforehand? | Correct the expectation and show the basis for the risk |
| A client who delays providing documents | Is there an obstacle of access, language, cost or security? | Identify the obstacle and explain the legal importance of the document |
| A client who leaves every decision to the attorney | Have the options and consequences been understood? | Give a clear explanation and identify the necessary instruction and authority |
| An attorney who becomes excessively angry at the client | Are an actual boundary violation, workload or personal sensitivity at play? | Assess the reaction and separate the communication from the file decision |
This table is not a diagnostic tool. It suggests starting the meeting with attention focused on investigating the concrete reasons. Behavior that requires explanation does not mean that the client's word is worthless or that the attorney is right in advance.
Preserving the difference between empathy and identification
Empathy means trying to understand the situation the client is living through from their point of view. It does not prevent the attorney from assessing all sides of the dispute legally, testing claims against documents, or explaining a point on which they do not agree with the client. Saying "I understand why this development has hurt you" and saying "I will carry out every action you want against the other party" are different professional stances.
The risk of identification appears when the attorney begins to conduct the client's conflict as though it were their own personal conflict. In such a case, every statement by the other side may be seen as hostility, every objection by the opposing counsel as disrespect, and every settlement proposal as surrender. The attorney's task, however, is to assess the basis of the legal claim and the routes that can be used. Article 6 of the Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations (TBB) also requires the attorney to remain outside the hostilities arising from the parties' disputes. [4]
If you lose empathy, you may narrow your understanding of the client's need; if you lose professional distance, you may narrow your capacity for legal assessment. Sensitivity and distance must be preserved together. Listening does not mean closing the legal filter. Questioning must not become humiliating the person or minimizing what they have experienced.
How can trust be given to an anxious client before a hearing?
Reducing uncertainty through concrete explanation
A pre-hearing meeting should not consist only of the sentence "We are going in shortly." It should explain, according to the type of file and the person's role as a party, which issue may be addressed that day, whether a statement from them is expected, which documents are ready, and how information will be given after the hearing. Points that are not known with certainty should be presented as uncertain.
The attorney's explanation must not turn into building a memorized narrative in place of the person. In criminal proceedings, in particular, rights such as the right to remain silent, to learn of the accusation and to the assistance of defense counsel are addressed according to the concrete situation. The suggestion here is a general approach to communication; it does not replace a defense strategy specific to the file. The professional rule that no one may be coached on what to tell witnesses or how to behave must also be observed. [4]
An original way of explaining this might be: "Today we expect the court to consider this issue in our file. We have the documents we prepared with us. I cannot say in advance what the court will decide, but we will present our claims and their grounds. After the hearing, we will review together what happened and the next step."
Keeping the truth intact while calming someone
Statements such as "Nothing will happen," "We will definitely win" or "The judge knows me" take an attempt to reassure to a false conclusion. Trust must be built on the attorney's preparation and clarity, not on personal influence or a promise of outcome. Article 34 of the TBB Professional Rules requires that it be made clear in particular that the attorney's legal view on the result is not a guarantee. [4]
Instead of the dismissive "What is there to be afraid of?", the question "Which possibility worries you most?" may be used. Sometimes a client is anxious less about the court's decision than about not knowing what will be asked or about not being able to express what they mean. When a concrete concern is heard, the explanation the attorney gives also becomes concrete. Rather than saying the same comforting sentence to everyone, understanding the need is the more careful approach.
Body language and the limits of physical contact
A calm voice, time set aside for listening and an appropriate distance can support communication that builds trust. A friendly touch on the shoulder or arm may be perceived positively by some people, but it does not carry the same meaning for everyone. Personal preference, culture, past experience and the nature of the relationship must be taken into account. Physical contact is not a required method of building trust. Where the person is not at ease or their wish cannot be understood, verbal support and respectful distance should be preferred.
A courthouse corridor is also not a private meeting room. The sensitive details of the file, health information or family matters should not be discussed in a way that people nearby can hear. A detailed meeting should take place in a suitable setting; an explanation at the door should be limited to the information needed at that moment. [3, 4]
Professional boundaries sustain the continuity of trust
Explaining communication, time and the scope of service at the outset
At the start of the relationship, it should be clear who is responsible, which work has been undertaken, through which channel communication will take place, and how urgent matters should be reported. Setting a communication boundary does not remove the client's right to ask for information. Just as an attorney cannot explain every moment when they could not answer in terms of professional independence, a client should not act on the assumption that every message will receive a detailed reply within the same minute.
What is proposed here is to set up an arrangement that can actually be run. If a specific response time has been given, it should be followed; if the period will change, the client should be told. Requiring a client who is waiting for an explanation to keep writing new messages can also increase the communication burden. When a request outside the scope of the work arrives, it should be made clear whether it falls within the current engagement and, if necessary, how it can be handled.
Closeness, gifts and requests for a personal relationship
Warm communication with a client may be natural. Whether it creates a privileged arrangement, an undisclosed financial relationship or emotional dependence must nonetheless be considered separately. When the possibility of a romantic or sexual approach arises, the knowledge and power imbalance in the relationship and the independence of the representation must be given particular attention. The matter should be addressed without humiliating the person and without blurring the professional role. The professional, legal and possible disciplinary consequences of each concrete situation are assessed within its own circumstances.
Howlett and Sharp's work on professional boundaries draws attention to situations such as constant availability, difficulty saying no, and personal sharing transforming the relationship. These observations are not directly binding legal rules for Türkiye; they offer a comparative professional assessment for reviewing our working arrangements. [5]
| Area | Matter to clarify | Value to protect |
|---|---|---|
| Communication | Responsible person, channel, response arrangement and urgent notice route | Access to information and sustainable work |
| Decision and instruction | Legal options, consequences and the special authority required | The client's informed will |
| Scope of service | Work undertaken, out-of-scope request and additional work | Clarity of mutual expectations |
| Personal closeness | Effect of special requests on the professional assessment | Independence and equal care |
| Documents and data | Access authority, purpose of sharing and secure method | Confidentiality and protection of personal data |
| End of the engagement | Notice, time limits, status of the file and transfer | Prevention of loss of rights |
Legal and ethical foundations of a humane approach
Care, loyalty and independence
Article 34 of the Attorneyship Law No. 1136 (Avukatlık Kanunu) governs performing the role with care, honesty and dignity, and acting in a manner consistent with the respect and trust the profession requires. Article 506 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (TBK) also sets out the core provisions on the agent's duty of loyalty and care. This framework does not permit the file requirements to be abandoned in order to satisfy a client's emotional expectations. Frankly explaining legal risk and objecting, with reasons, to an act that should not be carried out belong within professional loyalty. [3, 7]
The attorney's independence is protected not only against courts, administrative authorities or other authorities, but also against the pressure of the client. The statement "I am paying, so you will write what I want" does not remove the attorney's legal and professional responsibility. The client's aim is heard; the legal route to be used is assessed in accordance with the truth and the professional rules. Independence is also not a privilege to be invoked in order to avoid accountability. [4]
Confidentiality and the protection of trust
Article 36 of the Attorneyship Law and Article 37 of the TBB Professional Rules are the principal bases for professional secrecy. The client's sharing of intense feelings does not mean that what they have said may be used freely at a training session, on social media or in any other setting. Even where names have been removed, the details of an event may make the person identifiable. Consultation with colleagues and training must be arranged with confidentiality in mind and limited to the information necessary. [3, 4]
Meeting notes should record observations relevant to the legal work rather than demeaning labels about a person's character. Instead of writing "problematic client," an objective record such as "The scope of the fee was explained again during the meeting; a date for delivering the documents was given" may be used. Health information and other personal data must be assessed for the requirement of lawful processing, the link to the purpose, proportionality and security measures. [8]
Professional courage and respectful objection
An attorney defending the client's rights must not yield to pressure outside the law. However, the measure of courage is not the loudness of one's voice or a personal attack on the other side. Stating an objection on its legal grounds, taking the necessary procedural steps, putting requests on the record and using the means of seeking justice are the concrete expression of professional courage.
The client's trust in their attorney should not be built on the humiliation of others. Respectful relations with judges, prosecutors, opposing counsel and court staff do not mean giving up necessary objections. There is nothing disloyal to the client in the attorney greeting opposing counsel; where necessary, it should be explained that this is part of the proper functioning of the profession. The strength of a defense is not measured by the size of personal hostility. [4]
Trauma sensitivity and the limits of expertise
When working with people who have experienced violence, serious loss or other distressing events, the conditions of the meeting may become important. Tucker-Chellew's proposals on trauma-informed legal practice emphasize safety, transparency, protecting the person's scope of choice, and collaboration. The value of this approach for attorneys is that it offers a framework for explaining to a person what will happen and for organizing the process of recounting events with greater care. It cannot be assumed that every client has had the same experience or been affected in the same way. [6]
Drawing on this framework, an attorney may explain the legal reason for a question before moving to a sensitive subject; may suggest a break where appropriate; and may set up a file arrangement that prevents the same event from being recounted again and again without need. If the client has to hear difficult information, it should be presented in clear language and with time for questions, rather than being blurred. These suggestions should be seen as an arrangement for professional meetings, not as a therapeutic technique.
The attorney should not make a psychiatric diagnosis, recommend medication or treatment, or describe the person as incompetent because they are struggling. Psychological difficulty does not, by itself, mean legal incapacity. Where there is a concrete legal problem about the capacity to represent oneself or to make decisions, the matter is handled within the relevant legislation and, where necessary, with a specialist assessment. Where support needs go beyond the limits of legal assistance, referral to an appropriate specialist may arise; the client's personal information is not shared without a basis.
Four examples for difficult meetings
When a client repeatedly asks the same question
In the example, the client keeps asking "When will the case end?" at every meeting. Responding "How many times have I told you this?" may make the meeting more difficult. First, the current stage, the expected step and why an exact date cannot be given should be explained. Then it is useful to explore the underlying need: Is the client waiting for timing information for a payment, a move or a family decision?
An appropriate answer might be framed as follows: "We cannot give a definite end date. At the moment we are waiting for the expert report. When it arrives, we will review it and explain what it means for you. If you have a plan that requires you to know this date in particular, let us discuss it too." In this way the unknown is stated honestly, and the practical need behind the question is heard.
When a client wants harm done to the other party
In the example, the client may say, "Even if I am not right, I want to make him suffer." While listening to the anger felt, the attorney must maintain the distinction between legal work and the wish to cause harm. Unfounded applications, claims contrary to the truth, or steps aimed only at harassment cannot be legitimized by any communication method.
One might say: "I can hear the anger that what you have experienced has caused in you. Our work will be to protect your rights through legally defensible claims. Let us review the documents we have and identify which applications have a basis." The professional boundary is stated clearly without humiliating the person. The risks of claims lacking any legal basis are also explained concretely.
When a client criticizes the attorney
The first reaction to the criticism "You never keep me informed" should not be to become defensive. The notices given and the requests left unanswered should be checked. If there was a delay, it should be acknowledged; the missing information should be completed; and the arrangement that will prevent recurrence should be explained. If the records show that information was given but not understood, the conversation should not be closed by pointing to the earlier message; a clearer explanation should be given instead.
An example response: "Let us clarify together at which stage you did not receive information. I will explain the latest position in the file now, and then we will set the notification arrangement going forward." Reviewing a fair criticism does not reduce the attorney's authority; on the contrary, it makes the work open to scrutiny. If there are insults or threats, that conduct is limited separately; the content of the criticism and the manner of its expression are not confused.
When the attorney turns the file into a personal struggle
In the example, the attorney may feel an unusual emotional intensity in a file because they themselves have experienced a similar injustice. Wanting to reject the other side's settlement proposal without reading it, or treating a colleague's legal warning as personal disloyalty, are signs that call for pausing and reflecting. No single psychological explanation can be imposed on this situation.
A practical method is to put the options into a written comparison: the basis of the claims, the evidence, the costs of litigation, the time, the capacity to collect, and the client's priorities are each examined separately. A colleague's view may be obtained, with confidentiality and conflicts of interest observed. The decision should be tied to the legal conditions of the file and the client's informed preference, rather than to the attorney's need to prove themselves.
Professional learning for young attorneys and trainees
An attitude open to learning before knowledge
A young colleague may think they understand the type of file before the client has finished the sentence. Yet within the same legal heading there may be very different needs. Listening carefully as though knowing nothing is not denying what one knows; it is testing one's first assumption. The questions "What am I assuming?", "Which information is missing?" and "Which document could change this view?" keep learning alive.
Trust your intelligence and knowledge, but verify your professional confidence through your work. A strong first impression does not replace review of the file. Being able to sense a client's feeling does not reduce the need to check dates, documents and legal time limits. Maturing in the profession means that the effort to understand people and the regular work progress together.
The moments when mastery becomes visible
A trainee does not only see how a petition is written. They also learn how a client is listened to, how criticism is answered, how an unknown matter is researched, and how a mistake is handled. Article 33 of the TBB Professional Rules requires that the necessary attention and opportunities be provided for the trainee to develop well. Training should cover these dimensions of professional conduct as well. [4]
After a meeting, with confidentiality preserved, the following questions may be discussed: What was the client's real expectation? Which explanation was not understood? At what moment did the attorney rush? Was a risk passed over without being stated? Was the client left room to ask questions? The aim is not to get into a contest of analyzing the client, but to develop the attorney's own way of working.
Passion and sustainable work
Practicing law requires a desire to learn and to engage with people's problems. Passion for the profession should not be interpreted as reckless courage, constant availability or working without rest. Monitoring files regularly, asking for help when needed and managing one's workload are also part of commitment to the profession. A person who consumes all of their strength may find it harder to provide continuous and careful service to clients.
Seeking support when emotional strain becomes lasting or affects professional functioning should not be dismissed. Making a colleague's difficulty a subject of mockery may lead to problems being hidden within the team. A good professional environment creates a working arrangement in which mistakes can be discussed and responsibility is openly assumed.
Moving trust from personal effort to institutional practice
Good client relations should not rest solely on one attorney's patience and memory. The responsible person should be identified; important meetings should be recorded; promises given should be tracked; and information should not be lost when a file is transferred. The records used should not contain more personal data than necessary; access should be limited to those whose duties require it.
"Write what you do, do what you wrote, and write that you did it." This working principle is a concrete starting point for institutionalization in the practice of law. The record is kept not only so that one can defend oneself in a future dispute, but also so that one can follow the explanation given, the document expected and the next step. If it remains unclear at the end of a meeting who is expected to do what, and what the next step is, good faith on its own is not enough.
Article 52 of the Attorneyship Law requires that regular files be kept for work and cases; Article 53 governs recording the meetings that are considered necessary in a signed minute. However, it cannot be concluded from this that every meeting must be audio or video recorded. Such a recording requires separate assessment with regard to personal data and the confidentiality of communications. A file note, a signed minute and an audio recording are not the same thing. [3, 8]
| Record field | Content that may be written |
|---|---|
| Subject of the meeting | The matter the client wanted explained |
| Information given | The current stage of the file and the options explained |
| Expectation | The client's priority and the expected outcome as clarified |
| Instruction and authority | The instruction received; any additional authority to be completed if needed |
| Next step | The work to be done, the responsible person and the follow-up date |
| Notification | On which development or when the client will be updated |
This table is a proposal for internal working practice; it is not a single statutory form or a sufficient list of records for every file. Legal time limits must be tracked separately. Keeping a meeting record does not replace carrying out the required step or giving the client information.
How should a relationship be handled when trust has been damaged?
The first step is to identify the subject of the disagreement. Is it a lack of information, a dispute about the fee, a genuine error, an expectation that cannot be met, or conduct that crosses the line? Discussion should be based on the concrete facts and the record, not on judgments about the person. If the attorney has made a mistake, denying it or explaining it away with emotional reasons will not repair trust. Its effects, the possibility of correcting it and the necessary legal steps should be assessed.
Not every relationship can be sustained. Nevertheless, abandoning a file in fact after a dispute, assuming that the power of attorney has ended by blocking phone calls, or ignoring approaching deadlines is not an appropriate method. Refusing an engagement and withdrawing from an engagement already undertaken are subject to different conditions. If withdrawal is under consideration, the Attorneyship Law and the relevant procedural provisions should be considered together with the concrete file: the effect of notice, the continuing duties and the steps needed to prevent loss of rights. Mandatory appointments or appointments under legal aid are subject to special rules. [3, 4]
The client's wish to obtain a second legal opinion is not, on its own, to be seen as disloyalty. The attorney should be able to show the basis for their explanation and should maintain the professional order the file requires. The value of trust lies not in prohibiting questions, but in being able to answer them honestly.
Conclusion
In the practice of law, understanding the person is complementary to legal rigor. Seeing the client's anxiety requires explaining the legal risk without concealing it, listening to the person's expectations and respecting the space for their own decisions. The concepts of transference and countertransference can help reflect on this relationship. However, when they are turned into explanations that cover up a concrete error, a missing disclosure or a justified criticism, they lose their professional value.
The attorney, while listening to the client, must also listen to themselves. They should be able to examine why they became angry, why they took on more responsibility than necessary, which criticism they took as a personal threat, and at what point they placed their own feeling in front of the file. The effort to know oneself is part of the continuity of professional learning. When knowledge, effort, independence and humane sensitivity develop together, the quality of legal assistance is strengthened.
The trust given by an attorney who explained the process calmly to the client at the courtroom door must continue with the prepared and careful work done inside. Giving information after the hearing, carrying out the agreed steps and keeping the promises made are also parts of the same responsibility. Give your client trust; sustain that trust with your work. Try to understand your client; and do not neglect to recognize your own feelings.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does transference mean in the attorney–client relationship?
It is a psychological concept used to describe how feelings and expectations linked to a person's significant past relationships may be reflected in the relationship with an attorney. Seeing the attorney as a protective authority, or approaching them with a suspicion arising from past experience, are possibilities that the concept helps explain. A concrete behavior does not allow a definitive diagnosis; the actual conditions of the present relationship must be examined first. [1]
Is countertransference the same as an attorney's ordinary emotional reaction?
The scope of the concept varies between psychological approaches. What is useful for legal practice is to assess whether personal experiences and needs are influencing a professional decision, before naming every feeling. Being tired, angry or upset is not, by itself, a professional violation. What matters is how these feelings affect the handling of the file, communication and legal judgment. [1, 2]
Is a client who calls constantly a psychological problem?
This behavior is not, on its own, regarded as a psychological problem or an indicator of transference. An absence of information, an approaching hearing, an unclear fee explanation, a language difficulty or a malfunctioning communication channel may all be the cause. First the concrete need and the gap should be investigated; the status of the file should then be explained clearly, and a workable response arrangement should be set up.
Does showing empathy to a client mean losing impartiality?
Empathy means trying to understand the client's situation. It is consistent with the attorney's duty to represent the client's interests. What must be preserved is the ability to assess evidence and legal risks objectively, together with professional independence. Taking on the client's hostility personally, or asserting an unfounded claim solely to please them, is a different matter. [4]
How can trust be given to a client before a hearing?
The stage reached, the expected steps and the preparation done are explained clearly. The client is asked what possibility worries them; the rights and options that suit the file are explained. No outcome is guaranteed. What happens after the hearing and the next step are also communicated. A calm manner, a realistic explanation and prepared work together create trust.
Is it necessary for an attorney to touch the client's shoulder?
No. Physical contact is not a required element of trust-building communication. The client's preference, comfort and the circumstances of the relationship must be considered. Where it is unclear whether contact is wanted, verbal support, listening and respectful distance are preferable. A friendly gesture in a picture cannot be read as a professional method to be applied to all clients.
Can a client be advised to seek psychological support?
Where a need for support that goes beyond the limits of legal help is noticed, it may be suggested that the person consult an appropriate specialist, without labeling them. The attorney should not offer a diagnosis or treatment. The referral is made while respecting the client's scope of decision and confidentiality; their information is not passed to third parties without a legal basis.
Is following every instruction from a client required by the duty of loyalty?
No. Instructions are assessed for their conformity with the law, the professional rules and the scope of the representation. A request to make a claim contrary to the truth, to take an unfounded step or to use an unlawful method does not remove the attorney's responsibility. Appropriate options and risks should be explained; where necessary, the rules on refusing the engagement or withdrawing in accordance with the procedure should be considered. [3, 4, 7]
Is taking meeting notes the same as recording audio?
No. A file note, a signed meeting minute and an audio or video recording are different acts. For audio and video recordings, personal data, confidentiality and other relevant legal rules must be separately assessed. As a general working habit, secret recording cannot be recommended. The scope, purpose and access to any recording should be kept to what is necessary. [3, 8]
How can a young attorney develop these skills?
Regular file work, careful listening, self-assessment after meetings and feedback from a colleague that protects confidentiality are all useful. In trainee education, not only petitions but also client meetings, the explanation of expectations, the handling of mistakes and professional boundaries should be covered. Noticing a personal reaction is not a sign of weakness; it is a learning opportunity that can be worked on.
Sources
[1] Fahrettin Kayhan, "Transference and Countertransference in Attorney–Client Interaction" (Avukat-Müvekkil Etkileşiminde Aktarım ve Karşı Aktarım), Ankara Bar Journal (Ankara Barosu Dergisi), 2010/4, pp. 249–259. Article record.
[2] Zara Abrams, "How to Manage Countertransference in Therapy", Monitor on Psychology, 56(6), 1 September 2025. Used for conceptual assessment, on condition that the clinical context is not transferred directly to the attorney relationship. American Psychological Association.
[3] Attorneyship Law No. 1136 (Avukatlık Kanunu), in particular Arts. 34, 36–38, 41, 52–53. Mevzuat Bilgi Sistemi.
[4] Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations (Türkiye Barolar Birliği Meslek Kuralları), in particular Arts. 2–6, 17, 24–25, 27, 33–38. The consolidated text published by TBB. Official text.
[5] Rebecca Howlett and Cynthia Sharp, "The Legal Burnout Solution: Creating Healthy Boundaries with Clients", GPSolo eReport, April 2023. A comparative professional source, not a binding rule for Türkiye. American Bar Association.
[6] Lynae Tucker-Chellew, "Tips for Trauma-Informed Legal Practice and Support", 5 October 2023. American Bar Association.
[7] Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, Art. 506. Mevzuat Bilgi Sistemi.
[8] Law No. 6698 on the Protection of Personal Data, in particular Arts. 4–6, 8–10 and 12. Mevzuat Bilgi Sistemi.
[9] American Psychological Association, APA Dictionary of Psychology, Displacement; U.S. National Library of Medicine, MeSH, Projection. Consulted for limited definitions of the concepts.
Date of review of sources and legislation: 10 October 2026. The text is a general assessment of the professional relationship and ethics; it does not replace an individual file review or a psychological diagnosis and treatment.