"Approximately one in six individuals aged 60 and older have experienced some form of abuse or exploitation in the past year, with 20-40% of those cases involving financial exploitation. The U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging reported that seniors lose an estimated $2.9 billion each year as a result of exploitation and undue influence. Many sources suggest that figure is a dramatic underestimate, with some loss estimates reaching more than $35 billion per year. That’s greater than the gross domestic product of half the countries in the world. Given the ubiquity of the problem and the stakes involved, it is no surprise that, 'Undue influence is the most commonly asserted ground for invalidating a will.' And the crisis is expected to only get worse.

As key advisors to those most susceptible to this type of exploitation, estate planning attorneys are particularly well-situated to protect clients and their estates. But what, exactly, are we obligated (or even allowed) to do? The specter of undue influence presents a minefield of complex ethical issues that lawyers must navigate carefully. To further complicate matters, scientific developments in recent years have 'call[ed] into question many of the premises of … how "rational" or "free will" decisions are made,' changing the way estate planners need to think about undue influence. Deciphering this area of law can seem an insurmountable task, like understanding ERISA or getting through Thanksgiving dinner without a family member saying something uncomfortable. This article aims to do three things: 1) demystify the frequently misunderstood doctrine of undue influence, 2) explain some of the key ethical obligations and pitfalls in this area of the law and 3) equip attorneys with the tools to identify (and hopefully prevent) undue influence in the estate planning context."