Will junior lawyers grow up without legal skills in a world of AI?

And why AI tools can't afford that to happen.

The Netherlands is not known for it’s cuisine. There’s a reason the only Dutch restaurant in London is a pancake house.

Dutch food mostly consists of potato and cabbage based mush. With a sausage thrown on top, to try to make something happen.

What’s fascinating though is that this wasn’t always the case!

As recent as 150 years ago, Dutch food was seen as exciting. Similar to French food, but quite open to experimentation.

Full of flavour and using spices and ingredients from all over the world, thanks to the old Dutch trading empire.

A 1669 Dutch cookbook for example has a recipe for roast goose with turmeric root and candies made from quince paste.

So what changed?

In short: one seemingly innocent initiative killed the entire cuisine.

In the early 1900s the government created a new type of ‘domestic school’. Aimed at teaching young women from poorer backgrounds how to make simple, quick and cheap potato based dishes.

However, the schools became more popular than initially intended. Girls from all social classes ended up going there.

One generation later, and most old family recipes were lost..

Current AI tools rely on us still having skills

This is a relevant story for the current state of the world.

Take self driving cars. In a few years, self driving features will become the new normal.

But they still require human intervention in certain scenarios.

That seems both sensible and fine. Most drivers have years of experience to fall back on to take over.

But what about the next generation of drivers who grew up with it. Will they have the skills to take control when needed?

Applied to Legal

A similar question will appear in our sector.

For example, at DraftPilot (follow our progress here), our AI tool helps lawyers create contract markups in minutes.

It’s designed so the lawyer can keep an eye on it every step of the way and course correct where needed.

Again, seems both very necessary and very sensible. And most of today’s lawyers are well placed to do this. We learned our legal skills the old fashioned way.

Whilst we may get lazy and rusty if AI tools make our work (too) easy, I don’t think we’ll lose those skills.

It’s a bit like riding a bike, we have a lot of muscle memory.

But what about future lawyers who grow up with these tools? Will they have the experience to course correct the AI?

My worry is, that if we’re not careful our profession may end up like Dutch cuisine. Devoid of many skills.

[The irony of me saying this as the creator of a Legal AI tool is not lost on me by the way.]

Solutions

It’s worth thinking about how other industries solved this.

For example, pilots used to fly manually. Now they rely on autopilot, but must remain available to step in.

They maintain their manual flying skills through rigorous practical training and annual flight simulator checks.

We’ll need to create something similar for lawyers, to ensure the next generation is still across the basics.

Here are some ideas:

• 👨‍🎓 Shift law school focus to practical skills like drafting and negotiating.

• 📝 Include more skills-building in continuous professional development courses.

• 🛬 Implement "flight simulator checks" in performance reviews, forcing lawyers to work without AI tools.

I'm not 100% satisfied with these though. They need fleshing out.

Or am I misguided and advocating for pen and paper calculating in an age of calculators?

I’m honestly not sure!

As usual, I’d welcome your thoughts.

Daniel

—

Daniel van Binsbergen
CEO at DraftPilot