What do we hope to achieve with this research? 

There are four key aims for this research:

1. To understand the prevalence of work-related distress experienced by New Zealand lawyers and judges as a result of indirect trauma.
2. To understand what risk-mitigation strategies lawyers and judges are currently engaging in (and how effective they consider them to be).
3. To assess the profession’s receptiveness to alternative risk-mitigation strategies.
4. To assess the viability of alternative risk-mitigation strategies in a New Zealand context (including cost, implementation and enforcement/monitoring).

We will survey and interview legal professionals to generate a baseline picture of the prevalence of work-related distress and the impacts of indirect trauma exposure.

What is indirect trauma?

Broadly speaking, indirect trauma in the legal context refers to the cumulative effects of exposure to clients’ trauma and/or traumatic or distressing material relating to legal proceedings and representation. 

‘Indirect trauma’ is an umbrella term that includes the terms ‘vicarious trauma’ and ‘secondary traumatic stress’. 

We refer to distress holistically, encompassing: psychological, emotional, physical, spiritual and social wellbeing. 

Exposure to indirect trauma can result in negative impacts on the mental health of the professional, including: burnout, depression, anxiety, alcohol/substance abuse, social withdrawal, emotional dysregulation, aggression, sleep difficulties, intrusive imagery, cynicism, and disruptions in core beliefs. The impacts of this can result in difficulty in personal and professional relationships and difficulty managing boundaries with clients. 

What factors are important to consider? 

It is crucial to understand not only the prevalence of work-related distress but also:

1. What factors contribute (including personal background, work environment and practice area);
2. Whether mitigation strategies used in other professions (such as psychology and social work) have the potential to translate appropriately to a legal context; and
3. What any barriers to implementation or uptake of risk-mitigation strategies might be.

As such, we want to hear from a wide range of legal professionals, including those who already have successful strategies in place or have suggestions for how to mitigate the impacts of indirect trauma.

How does indirect trauma sit alongside the issues faced by the New Zealand legal profession?

Our legal profession is grappling with high rates of attrition and has minimal policies to retain women or to attract Māori and Pacific legal practitioners. While valuable steps have been taken to address mental health, wellbeing and a culture of bullying and discrimination, these issues are by no means resolved.

The legal profession has a duty to the participants in our system: our clients, victims, defendants, children and others who we serve, and to provide adequate legal services. It is arguable that unmitigated indirect trauma and work-related distress hinders that duty and leads to competent lawyers leaving the profession altogether. 

What does international research tell us?

It is well established in international research that lawyers suffer from higher levels of stress and mental distress than the general population and to comparable professions.[1] Unsurprisingly, research has also shown that lawyers working in high trauma areas such as criminal,[2] family,[3] refugee and asylum[4] law have heightened experiences of indirect trauma. 

More recently, research focusing on judges has established that they also suffer from higher levels of work-related distress than the general population.[5] Some research also suggests that those working in courts equivalent to our District Court experience higher levels of distress than appellate judges.[6]

International research also indicates that both lawyers and judges suffer from a higher level of negative mental health impacts (such as burnout) and problematic alcohol use than the general population, or similar professions.[7]

How will this research contribute to the New Zealand legal profession? 

The responses will be used to recommend the development of education and policy reforms, and will inform further research to test intervention strategies and long-term policy development in this area.

[1] Grace Maguire and Mitchell K Byrne “The Law Is Not as Blind as It Seems: Relative Rates of Vicarious Trauma among Lawyers and Mental Health Professionals” (2017) 24(2) Psychiatry Psychol Law 233; Natalie K Skead, Shane L Rogers and Jerome Doraisamy “Looking beyond the mirror: Psychological distress; disordered eating, weight and shape concerns; and maladaptive eating habits in lawyers and law students” (2018) 61 Int J Law Psychiatry 90; R T Michalak Causes and Consequences of Work-Related Psychosocial Risk Exposure: A Comparative Investigation of Organisational Context, Employee Attitudes, Job Performance and Wellbeing in Lawyers and Non-Lawyer Professionals (PsychSafe Pty Ltd, 2015); Andrew P Levin and others “Secondary Traumatic Stress in Attorneys and Their Administrative Support Staff Working With Trauma-Exposed Clients” (2011) 199(12) J Nerv Ment Dis 946; Beaton Consulting Annual Professions Survey (beyondblue, April 2007);  Sharon Medlow, Norm Kelk and Ian Hickie “Depression and the Law: Experiences of Australian Barristers and Solicitors” (2011) 33 Syd LR 771.

[2] Lila Petar Vrklevski and John Franklin “Vicarious Trauma: The Impact on Solicitors of Exposure to Traumatic Material” (2008) 14(1) Traumatology 106.

[3] Sherrie Bourg Carter “When the Enemy Lies Within: Risk for Professional Burnout Among Family Lawyers” (2006) 20(3) Am J Fam Law 160; Jennifer Brobst “The Impact of Secondary Traumatic Stress Among Family Attorneys Working With Trauma-Exposed Clients: Implications for Practice and Professional Responsibility” (2014) 10(1) J Health & Biomed L 1.

[4] Lin Piwowarczyk and others “Secondary Trauma in Asylum Lawyers” (2009) 14(5) Bender's Immigr Bull 263; Line Rønning, Jocelyn Blumberg and Jesper Dammeyer “Vicarious traumatisation in lawyers working with traumatised asylum seekers: a pilot study” (2020) 27(4) Psychiatr Psychol Law 665; Neil Graffin “The Emotional Impacts of Working as an Asylum Lawyer” (2019) 38(1) Refug Surv Q 30; Helen Baillot, Sharon Cowan and Vanessa E Munro “Second-hand Emotion? Exploring the Contagion and Impact of Trauma and Distress in the Asylum Law Context” (2013) 40(4) J Law Soc 509. 

[5] Carly Schrever, Carol Hulbert and Tania Sourdin “The Psychological Impact of Judicial Work: Australia’s First Empirical Research Measuring Judicial Stress and Wellbeing” (2019) 28 JJA 141; David M Flores and others “Judges’ Perspectives on Stress and Safety in the Courtroom: An Exploratory Study” (2009) 45 Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association 76; Jill Hunter and others “A fragile bastion: UNSW judicial traumatic stress study” (2021) 33(1) Judicial Officers’ Bulletin Published by the Judicial Commission of NSW 1.

[6] Jill Hunter and others “A fragile bastion: UNSW judicial traumatic stress study” (2021) 33(1) Judicial Officers’ Bulletin Published by the Judicial Commission of NSW 1.

[7] Alcohol use: Patrick R Krill, Ryan Johnson and Linda Albert “The Prevalence of Substance Use and Other Mental Health Concerns Among American Attorneys” (2016) 10(1) J Addict Med 46; David Swenson and others “Stress and Resiliency in the US Judiciary” [2020] Journal of the Professional Lawyer 1; Beaton Consulting Annual Professions Survey (beyondblue, April 2007); Carly Schrever, Carol Hulbert and Tania Sourdin “The Psychological Impact of Judicial Work: Australia’s First Empirical Research Measuring Judicial Stress and Wellbeing” (2019) 28 JJA 141. Burnout/mental health: Andrew P Levin and others “Secondary Traumatic Stress in Attorneys and Their Administrative Support Staff Working With Trauma-Exposed Clients” (2011) 199(12) J Nerv Ment Dis 946; Andrew P Levin and Scott Greisberg “Vicarious Trauma in Attorneys” (2003) 24(1) Pace L Rev 245; R T Michalak Causes and Consequences of Work-Related Psychosocial Risk Exposure: A Comparative Investigation of Organisational Context, Employee Attitudes, Job Performance and Wellbeing in Lawyers and Non-Lawyer Professionals (PsychSafe Pty Ltd, 2015); Stuart L Lustig and others “Burnout and Stress Among United States Immigration Judges” (2008) 13 Bender’s Immigr Bull 22.