Will Google Replace Lawyers in 5 Years?

As technology advances many are concerned that some jobs will disappear over the next decade.  This discussion has focused on robots replacing manufacturing jobs and self-driving technology replacing truck drivers.

We believe other more educated professionals may be at risk if they do not adapt to changing demands for their services.

Let’s take a second to look at Doctors and Lawyers and see if their jobs are safe in the future.

In the past, doctors and lawyers held absolute power over their patients and clients as they had exclusive access to the medical and legal books out of reach from the general public.

This previously hidden knowledge is now available on the internet.  Clients can educate themselves before they go in for a consult and in some cases, it is annoying and outdated professionals who are not used to being questioned.

At Millars Law, we believe an informed client is a better client.  We encourage clients and patients to ask questions and to not be intimidated by degrees or fancy officer.  You can, and should, have ownership of your life-threatening issues and work with your professional as opposed to just doing what they say.  They are not perfect.

Let’s look at two possible examples:

Example 1

Choose a Doctor:  It’s Your Life on the Line

You are sick, and you have 3 serious symptoms.  The proper identification of the cause of the symptoms could save your life.  Failure to properly diagnose the illness immediately could result in further suffering, or worse…. your unnecessary death.

What are some relevant factors to a proper diagnosis?  Family history, your medical history, your blood work, your exposure to a hostile or contaminated environment and an accurate and reliable ability to recognize what the symptoms individually and collectively could be telling the telling doctor.   Doctors can identify a fairly rare but deadly condition based on your symptoms if he remembers his textbooks or has seen the condition before.

Now with that in mind, which of the following two options are you more comfortable with:

  1. You visit your family doctor (much better than a walk-in clinic). She has been practicing medicine for 30 years. She has tonnes of personal experience but is older, seems uninterested, maybe tired, and seems rather unengaged. Your file is a big one full of papers. Your doctor doesn’t seem to use a computer much and dictates her notes into a voice recorder.  She has never treated your parents or any family member in the past.
  2. A powerful computer programme has your whole family history on a database that can be cross-referenced with your relative’s past conditions and risk categories. This family history is run through an algorithm against all known conditions and the symptoms that present themselves with a % risk and list of conditions that must be excluded from most serious to less serious. Every medical textbook and journal publication are searched, and relevant new findings are listed in an annex for consideration. A detailed printout is provided with suggested follow up care and suggested tests to be ordered. The report is handled by a nurse who can arrange follow up visits and tests. You never see a doctor until a computer diagnosis is made and then you are sent to a specialist for further analysis and treatment.

Which Option do You Choose and Why?

Example 2

Choose a  Lawyer: Difference or Deference?

You have a life-threatening legal situation that could ruin you, your finances and your reputation. A powerful organization is suing you with much more money and influence than you. You believe you are in the right and don’t understand why the law would not be on your side. You face the reality of a lengthy and possibly bankrupting legal battle, and you have no idea who to hire or what will happen.

Given two options which one would you choose?

  1. You go to the biggest law firm in town, with the most advertising and most expensive office, you ask for the best lawyer in the firm. You wait almost an hour for your meeting when finally, a well-dressed elderly man meets you in a large conference room with very expensive art. He seems rushed for time and quickly starts hitting you with questions. He seems overconfident, well established in his routines, enjoys his seniority and reputation. He graduated 30 years ago and has a brand-new lawyer diligently taking notes. He barks a few directions on researching some cases to his junior and tells you that you are in good hands. He is very busy but will take your case, but he needs $25,000 upfront as a retainer and can’t tell you how much this will cost, but you should trust him because he has done this before.

But what you don’t know is if you lose, he will be paid and pass on his condolences, and your life will be ruined


  1. A new firm has an online software system that allows you to enter the details of the legal dispute including the jurisdiction, the nature of the battle, and has dropdowns that allow you to select what is most important to you, what the other side wants and additional information its algorithm can search. The program provides a summary of similar cases and relevant law that gives you an opportunity to read in simple language the factors involved in a case like this.  Once you and the lawyer have reviewed the first level of cases you enter more specific information into the software. The program provides a list of lawyers and judges who have been involved in similar cases. You also receive an analysis of public perceptions to factor in how a jury could see the case. At the of the analysis, the program presents an offer to the top lawyers identified to defend the case; asking them to bid on your file– you have the power, you can negotiate, and you are not at the mercy of the lawyer.

The program also identifies any new laws, most recent cases, and analyze these against prior cases to find relevant information. It is able to produce statistical probabilities of success for different options and does all of this in under a 100th of a second.

What Option Would You Choose and Why?

So,  Google will not replace Lawyers and Doctors but professional industries do need to evolve with computers in order to provide premier service and reduce errors.  Humans are still necessary, but the skill sets need to change. We no longer need encyclopedic brains that can memorize textbooks and cases, because Google can do that. Instead, the effective Lawyer and Doctor need to be able to ask the right questions. Professionals need to be trained to read the situation and have the humanity to dig deeper to get more accurate information that can be put into the computer. Medical and Law schools will be slow to adapt, and in the interim, we believe clients and patients must push back and do their own research as they often encounter professionals who do not want to adopt technology and it can hurt them.

A few years ago, lawyers and doctors would get angry if a client or patient would come in with an opinion they looked up. In fact, I have seen many lawyers and doctors laugh at clients who dared to do their own research, but we believe that using computer software and research combined with human skills is the only way to do it.

In fact, MILLARS Lawyers encourage our clients to do research in order to ask questions and gather information. At MILLARS, our Lawyers understand the changing landscape and combine technology with an elite understanding of human behaviour.

MILLARS Lawyers use this understanding to maximize your chance of winning.

Contact Millars Lawyers today for a FREE consultation (519) 657-1LAW or Info@ml-dev.thirdeyeinsights.ca

By: Phillip Millar

Read our most recent post

Is your Non-Resident Client or Counterparty on the Hook for Withholding Taxes?

When is GST Payable on the Sale of Residential Property?

Con Artists and their Strategies: You are More VulnerableThan You Think

L.Gen Whelan Statement of Claim

Here is the Certified Copy of the Statement of Claim filed with the Court on May 21 2024 in the above named file. As per R. 133 the Registry has served a copy of the Notice of Application on the Attorney General of Canada on your behalf.