In addition to the other points made below, I'd like to advance a further idea. An unqualified person may indeed be able to read legal documents and prepare th

In addition to the other points made below, I'd like to advance a further idea. An unqualified person may indeed be able to read legal documents and prepare themselves for taking on a legal case. But lawyers have had years of study in which their preparation has been legally challenged, followed by years of practice in which their preparation has been legally challenged. a) They not only know the law, but also the likely approaches an opponent might make to arguing against it. Forewarned is, somewhat, forearmed. But also. b) They probably end up very good judges of how prepared they are. I suggest this is a variant of the Dunning-Kruger effect. An untrained person might be able to study law and defend themself. I'm sure there are cases where it's easy and cases where it's hard. But, being unexperienced, they will not be good judges as to their chances of winning, what their best strategy is, or whether they have done sufficient prep to meet likely objections. i.e. more than anything else, experience lets people judge their own progress. A beginner would be clueless in this aspect.