Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have a medical problem, you go to a doctor. If you have a legal problem, you go to a lawyer. If you can't afford a lawyer you might as well roll over right now because that will be the end game. The idea that some advice given in an online forum would reduce the need for finding a lawyer is akin to taking medical advice from a forum. You have no idea what the qualifications/experience/jurisdictions are of the…
In the US maybe. In the UK, most of my lawyer friends would tell you that lawyering up is the last course of action you want to take, as it tends to make issues more complicated, expensive and combative, though you might want to be careful what you admit / agree to. My wifes a solicitor. :)
Not sure if the incentives are the same in the UK, but in the US, most lawyers retained in matters like this work for the client.
In that lawyers advise, the client decides, and then the lawyers attempt to realize the goal the client has chosen (if they decide to keep working for them).
Most people in the US seem to look at legal counsel as "Do what the lawyer says," when it's actually "listen to what the lawyer says, ask about alternatives, and then choose the course you want to take."
Or as I've heard it explained: a lawyer's default is to counsel the courses of action that will allow them to win a hypothetical jury trial two years from now.
When in reality, most things never get there, and some optimal courses of action for trial are antagonistic in a pre-trial context.