Do Not Make their Trauma Your Trauma: Coping with Burnout as a Family Law Attorney

In the field of family law, attorneys frequently expose themselves to highly emotional and traumatized clients. Litigation is by nature a high‐stress occupation, demanding a high level of intellectual and emotional engagement from the contesting lawyers. Adding the burden of inherently distressing content to litigation can impair a lawyer's functioning. The effects are often referred to as “secondary trauma.” This Note proposes that state bar associations should take a more active role in providing mental health support to prevent burnout in family law attorneys by (1) offering voluntary classes to educate attorneys about the dangers of, and ways to cope with, the burnout that comes with working with traumatized clients in family law and (2) organizing support groups among local family law communities.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Claims against family law practitioners account for the third highest percentage of all malpractice claims against lawyers.
• Burnout is a serious problem for family law attorneys.
• Programs sponsored by state bar associations are available and need to be expanded.
• The American Bar Association's Model Rules require that a lawyer shall not represent a client or, where representation has commenced, shall withdraw from the representation of a client if the lawyer's physical or mental condition materially impairs the lawyer's ability to represent the client.
• The unique nature of family law, centered on relationships and emotions, puts family law attorneys at a higher risk for experiencing the effects of secondary trauma than other areas of law.
• Lawyers at risk for secondary trauma can avoid its effects by educating themselves about such effects.

     

Judicial and Litigant Perceptions in Dutch Court Cases: Perceptions of Outcome Importance Overlap,Perceptions of Procedural Justice Diverge

Social Justice Research - The current paper aims to provide insight into judges’ perceptions of how fairly they treat litigants and how important case outcomes are to litigants, and whether...     

Evaluating essential health packages from a human rights perspective

Many countries at all levels of development have formulated an essential health package, sometimes also referred to as a health benefit plan or a health benefit basket. As defined by the World Health Organization (WHO), essential health packages (EHPs) are “health service interventions that are considered important and that society decides should be provided to everyone.” Although EHPs are not often formulated from an explicitly human rights perspective, since they are conceptualized as a guaranteed minimum of health services, much like core health obligations, they have obvious human rights import. This article evaluates the principles from which the plans are developed, the content of the packages, and the experience of countries seeking to implement them from a human rights perspective. In the process, it seeks to gain greater clarity about the health service requirements of the right to health.