What is the implication of a lawyer being a part of a joint representation for clients with divergent interests?

The implication of a lawyer being involved in joint representation for clients with divergent interests is that it can only proceed if the lawyer obtains written informed consent from all parties involved. Joint representation can lead to conflicts of interest, especially when the clients have opposing interests. To ensure that each client is fully aware of the potential risks and disadvantages of such representation, and to protect the integrity of the legal process and the clients' rights, the attorney must provide clear disclosure about the nature of the conflicts and obtain their consent in writing. This process is crucial in maintaining ethical standards and ensuring that all clients are properly represented.

Options suggesting separate legal counsel, court approval, or automatic unethics fall short because while those may be considerations in specific situations, they do not directly address the requirement for informed consent in joint representations involving potential conflicts of interest. The necessity of written informed consent is a fundamental ethical obligation that ensures clients are making informed decisions regarding their representation.