When Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome Crosses an Ethics Line for Family Law Attorneys

Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome is the kind of work that rewards practitioners who treat it as a multi-year investment rather than a one-week project.

This piece is for family-law attorneys who already have the basics and are deciding whether to make Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome a focus area.

For family-law attorneys, Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome usually shows up in active matters with specific procedural deadlines. The work has to integrate with discovery timelines, motion calendars, and (in litigated matters) trial preparation. Practitioners who carve out time for Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome analysis outside the immediate procedural pressure produce better work than those who squeeze it between filings.

The most common opening question

Clients usually have an implicit theory of what Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome can do for them — sometimes wildly optimistic, sometimes pessimistic. The early conversation should surface that theory and address it. A client who thinks the engagement will solve a problem the analytical framework can’t actually solve will be disappointed regardless of the technical quality of the work.

The single most common question clients ask in their first Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome call is some version of ‘how long will this take?’ The honest answer is usually between three and eight months — but with hard variability based on the responsiveness of opposing parties, third-party document custodians, and (in litigated matters) the court calendar. Practitioners who give clients a range with specific factors that could lengthen or shorten it produce more realistic expectations than those who quote a single number.

What experienced colleagues say new practitioners miss

A common mistake among experienced general practitioners moving into Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome is assuming their general competence transfers automatically. Some of it does; some doesn’t. The technical and procedural specifics of Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome differ enough that practitioners who shortcut the deliberate learning end up making errors they don’t notice until a senior colleague points them out.

Many family-law attorneys undervalue their work in Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome matters because they’re comparing their hours to their general practice rather than to other specialists in the area. The right comparison is to others doing the same work, not to your past general practice. Practitioners who recalibrate their pricing against the right peer group price their work appropriately.

Recent shifts in the practice area

Professional standards in Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome have been evolving across the major credentialing organizations. The credentials themselves matter less than they used to (because client research finds them) but the underlying curricula have improved. Practitioners going through current credential programs emerge with better-built frameworks than those who credentialed a decade ago.

Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome has shifted in three meaningful ways over the past five to seven years. First, the volume of data available in most matters has grown dramatically — bank, brokerage, retirement, and credit records are routinely available in electronic form, which both enables deeper analysis and creates more work to organize. Second, the regulatory and tax environment has shifted (most notably the 2019 federal alimony tax change for divorces). Third, the client population has become more sophisticated; clients increasingly come to Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome matters having done meaningful online research. For deeper reference, see Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement.

Should you commit to this area?

Considering Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome as a focus area is a five-year decision, not a one-year decision. Practitioners who commit to a year and then evaluate usually conclude the area isn’t producing returns — because year one almost never does. The decision is really about whether you’re willing to invest the next five years.

A simple test: do the matters in Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome that you’ve already handled interest you? Practitioners who genuinely enjoy the analytical work and the relational dynamics tend to build sustainable practices in Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome; practitioners who found the matters tedious tend not to, regardless of the market opportunity.

None of this is shortcut work. The practitioners who own Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome in their markets earned their position the slow way — consistent attendance at the same conferences, careful case work compounding over years, relationships built deliberately.

How VennBoard fits in

VennBoard supports the kind of case-management discipline Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome engagements benefit from: organized case files, integrated communication with co-professionals, deliverable versioning, and the kind of operational consistency that makes the difference between burning out at twenty matters and running a sustainable practice at fifty.

Practitioners interested in seeing VennBoard’s case-management infrastructure for Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome work can learn more at VennBoard.com.