Justice, Labor, Research, and Power: The Significance and Implications of Parent-Reported Outcomes in Medical-Legal Partnership.

As a legal aid union president in New Haven, laboring within shouting distance of a different large research university, I recall how our membership rolled our eyes when Professors Greiner, Pattanayak, and Hennesy of Harvard published their study providing evidence, through a randomized control trial, that law clinic housing work made no difference for clients.¹ Representing, as I was, "lawyers, secretaries, and paralegals who have dedicated their careers to serving poor clients in crisis,"² the authors' conclusion generated first shock, then denial, and then an anxious realization that somebody's job was to research and disseminate such conclusions. In a 2013 United States where there was one legal aid lawyer for every 8,893 people who qualified,³ where federal Legal Services Corporation funding had dropped 40% over ten years in real dollars,⁴ and in an America that spends as much on Halloween costumes for its pets as it does legal aid for the poor,⁵ the inquiry felt like a pile-on. It made no more sense to us than asking if a teacher is "good for students," a nurse "good for the sick," or a chef "good for the hungry."⁶.