Lawyers under stress

There is nothing quite like a vague concept such as stress for resulting in prolonged and costly litigation .

.

.

lawyers simply can't lose".

(The Daily Telegraph, November 18, 1994.)Occupational stress is something of a double-edged sword for the legal profession: it generates work and revenue, yet, ironically, lawyers themselves seem prone to suffer from it .

In 1996, nine out of 10 UK lawyers surveyed (See The Lawyer, 1996, May 7.) said stress was a problem, with partners over the age of 45 being particularly susceptible.

Speaking about the "quality of life" conference organised by the Young Solicitors' Group in 1995, chairman, Andy Unger said, "the image of fat-cat lawyers remains a big problem for the whole profession .

.

.

But the reality is that life is very tough for many lawyers." (Law Society Gazette, 1995, May p 15.)Two questions need to be answered: why is legal life so stressful and what can be done about it? In 1936 Hans Selye defined stress as a bodily reaction to a stressor.

So, as a reaction to a stimuli it can be positive or negative.

In this sense, stress is a normal part of everyday life and existence would be impossible without it.

Problems arise when the pressures become too much.

The Health and Safety Executive has defined our current understanding of stress as "the reaction people have to excessive pressures .

.

.

It arises when they cannot cope".

(Observer, September 17, 1995.)One approach is to view stress as a personal issue, as something you are likely to get more or less of depending on the type of person you are.

Psychologists are fond of dividing people into two main types: A and B.

Type As are characterised as being competitive, restless, impatient and prone to "feelings of being under pressure of time and under the challenge of responsibility".

(Stress Medicine l989, 5, pp 17-27.) Bs, on the other hand, are supposed to be more relaxed and easy-going.

Since As are inclined to seek challenging work environments, it is often suggested that they are likely to suffer from higher stress levels than Bs.Retired solicitor, Paddy Marsh, has said: "Increasingly a solicitor's work is stressful, not least because he is always racing against the clock .

.

.

pressures of speed and accuracy are set against a background of rapidly changing legislation and procedures." (Psychodynamic Counselling 1996, 2(4), pp 517-532.)It could be argued then, that the reason why the legal profession is plagued by stress, is because it is populated by type A personalities, attracted by its demanding environment.

The very nature of legal work is then likely to exacerbate the type A's innate vulnerability to pressure.A rather convenient theory, but it has some serious flaws.

It would be unwise to necessarily assume law firms always choose dynamic A types.

Just the opposite has been suggested by Jungian analyst, Murray Stein, who says stress arises because firms "pick 'introverted, thinking-type' graduates and then require them to do 'extroverted' tasks, like .

.

.

performing in public".

(The Times, July 13, 1995.) In addition, proof is far from conclusive that type As suffer more stress than type Bs.

Friedman, Hall and Harris (Stress Medicine 1989, p, pp 17-27.) have further divided As into charismatic and hostile personalities and Bs into relaxed and tense.The latter category within each type is particularly stress prone.

It is also overly simplistic to assume people can so easily be slotted into one or other of the personality types -- human beings are far more complex and changeable than some psychologists would have us suppose.Treating stress as an individual inadequacy might be tempting for employers, but such an attitude is not likely to lessen the pressure felt by their employees.As Taylor and Cooper have well said: "Whilst personality does play a part in the stress-health relationship, reaction is also time, context, experience and stress-load dependent." (Stress Medici ne 1989, p, pp 17-27.) The norms of legal life may perform a significant role in stress generation.

"Among solicitors competitiveness is part of the culture .

.

.

in some large City firms .

.

.

monthly figures will be circulated in each department showing the 'billing' of each solicitor within that department .

.

.

solicitors -- even partners -- who do not perform well by these financial criteria are dismissed.

An atmosphere of considerable anxiety is thus created." (Psychodynamic Counselling 1996, 2(4), pp 517-532.)Within such an environment senior partners are probably not disposed to look sympathetically upon lawyers who appear not to be coping under pressure.

One female partner has said: "When I was facing a nervous breakdown the only thing my partners could say to me was 'go home and get over it'." (The Times, April 18,1995.) A lawyer who had a stress-related drinking problem was given similar advice: "I was suspended to 'sort myself out'.

I spent six weeks alone in my flat drinking heavily.

I went back to work and was sacked.'"Dr Ellen Carni, a New York psychiatrist, believes lawyers' attempts to present themselves as logical, seekers of truth can also be a source of stress: "The human element is taboo, so after a while the lawyer becomes like a steam pipe with the valve shut.

Emotions manifest themselves outside work .

.

.

difficulties with relationships, depression, or even psychosomatic illness." (The Times, July 13, 1995.)Stress-laden lawyers seem to occupy an unenviable catch-22 position.

If they make their predicament known, there is a strong possibility that they will be viewed as a problem rather than as a person needing help.

If they keep quiet and soldier on they may be making a bad situation worse.

As Wilson and Pimm (The Lawyer, 1992, November 24 p 11.) have said: "an inability of a lawyer to admit that they cannot cope .

.

.

is the certain path to the development of unbearable stress, ending in burn-out."Life in individual law practices takes place within the broader context of the legal system as a whole.

Elwork and Benjamin (The Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 1995, Summer pp 205-229.) argue that adversarial legal systems encourage "suspiciousness, hostility and aggression".

In turn, such traits "raise performance anxiety, encourage workalcholism, and damage relationships".

Equally worryingly, the above authors also note, from their review of the literature, that female lawyers report even more stressful working lives than their male counterparts and experience the additional stressors engendered by sexual harassment and job discrimination.Research suggests that even if law's adversarial nature could be curbed, lawyers' problems would be far from over.

Christopher Clulow (The Legal Executive Journal, 1994, May, pp 28-29.), of the Tavistock Marital Studies Institute, has pointed out that the movement in family law away from adversarial battles in favour of mediation brings with it new challenges for the lawyers involved.

Stripped of their trusted armour of pomp and ritual, lawyers are thrust into more open, less formal relationships with their clients leaving them "feeling more exposed than they used to be".

(The Legal Executive Journal, 1994, May, pp 28-29.) Such changes in client-lawyer relationships are significant as they encourage the ditching of dissociation -- according to Marsh (Psychodynamic Counselling 1996, 2(4), pp 517-532.) one of the traditional defences of the lawyer -- and can lead to increased emotional involvement on the part of lawyer and, potentially, concomitant increases in stress lev els.It would seem, then, that clients themselves are prime sources of stress.

As Dr Ian Chung (LSJ 35(2) 1997.

See Website http://lawsocnsw.asn.au/resources/lsj/archive/mar1997/64), a principal counsellor with the Australian organisation LawCare, has noted, people who seek legal help are often under considerable stress and going through a traumatic period in their lives.

They may have unrealistic expectations about what the lawyer can do to extricate them from their current predicaments.

Clulow (The Legal Executive Journal, 1994, May, pp 28-29.) argues that a client's anxieties are easily caught by the lawyer.

Paddy Marsh goes further, suggesting that, "some clients will unconsciously project their anxiety .

.

.

onto their solicitor and .

.

.

seek to make him feel responsible for the outcome of their behaviour." (Psychodynamic Counselling 1996, 2(4), pp 517-532.)So, save refusing to see clients, what can be done to reduce lawyers' stress levels? You could seek professional help from a counsellor or psychiatrist.

A US lawyer might contact a bar association Lawyer Assistance Program (LAP), the ideal of which, according to Benjamin, Sales and Darling, (Law & Psychology Review, 1992, 16 Spring pp 113-136.) is to offer confidential advice and counselling, unconnected with any disciplinary authority.

Preventative education should also form an important aspect of the service, with presentations being given at law schools, conferences and bar association meetings.Ian Watson, Secretary of the UK's Institute of Legal Executives, has told me that stress workshops are usually provided at the Institute's National Conference and are well-attended.

Barry Pritchard runs SolCare, set up in February 1997 to help solicitors with alcohol/drug problems and those suffering from stress or depression.

SolCare offers a 24-hour telephone helpline, confidential advice, assessment and referral to self-help groups and professional counselling services.

It also sees a broader role for itself in educating the legal profession about the above issues.

SolCare has produced an information pack which includes tips for reducing your stress levels: learn to say "NO"; listen rather than talk too much; break tasks down into bits; do one thing at a time, be realistic about deadlines; build some breathing space into your day; take up exercise.

At least this latter suggestion has been adopted by one or two of the larger law firms which offer sports facilities for their staff.Merrilyn Astin Tarlton (See her Website http://dev.abanet.org/yld tyl/june97get.html), a management consultant to law firms in Denver Colorado, is the author of an Internet Web page -- "Twelve Ways Lawyers Can find their Humanity and lose Stress":-- Align your work with your personal values and career goals.-- Lead a balanced life.-- Manage yourself.-- Value relationships.-- Be an advocate, not a critic.-- Mentor -- spend time with less experienced lawyers.-- Have a vision for your life.-- Be who you are everywhere.-- Do nice things for people.-- Broaden your horizons.-- Do things because they are the right things to do.-- Laugh.In listing the above maxims, I may just have saved you a tidy sum you might otherwise have been tempted to spend on consultancy fees.Whatever the merits of the above services and suggestions they focus on the lawyer rather than the system.

And it is possible that the system is the guilty party in all of this: "If the quality of life at law firms for quite a few is relatively bad, it might well be because the quality of life for a sma ller group at the top is very good".

(Law Society Gazette 1995, May p 15.)Many law firms appear indifferent to the cries of management gurus such as Handy and Peters for less top-down structures and increased participative control by empowered employees.

If firms were less inclined to foster competition between lawyers, offered more feedback, training and mentoring, encouraged co-operative working practices and were more judicious in their hiring and firing policies, the stress levels of their employees might be appreciably ameliorated.The management style of individual firms is, however, only part of the problem.

Elwork and Benjamin (Psychodynamic Counselling 1996, 2(4), pp 517-532.) suggest that "laws, legal processes and legal institutions" themselves generate stress for the lawyer and thus need reforming.

They note Wexler's work on "therapeutic jurisprudence" which asserts that "more multidisciplinary attention needs to be focused on how laws .

.

.

cause psychological dysfunction".

They ask for the ways in which courts schedule cases to be investigated as lawyers often complain about the stress caused by insufficient "predictability or advance notice".After studying the day-to-day workings of the Canadian Crown Prosecution Service, Gomme and Hall16 came to the conclusion that the whole system needed overhauling if lawyer stress levels were to be lessened.Faced with the dual strain of too many cases and an increase in the complexity of legal work, Crown prosecutors claimed either "none of your work gets done nearly as well, or you end up spending most of your time working".

(Journal of Criminal Justice, 1995, 23(2) pp 191-200.)One of the ways the stress of Crown attorneys could be alleviated is by throwing more resources at the criminal justice system, but, as the authors note, few politicians would be willing to do this when besieged by the competing demands of health, education and social welfare.Yet, given the power legal systems exercise over the lives of the populace and the potentially disastrous consequences the work of distressed lawyers may invoke for those lives, such attitudes are short-sighted in the extreme.

Elwork and Benjamin believe in taking reform right back to the education process itself, with more emphasis being placed on the human rather than the logical aspect of legal practice.

Such an orientation might indeed help prevent the dangers of the explosive steam pipe scenario.

It would also prove a useful grounding for working on cases in which mediation rather than an adversarial style is called for.The authors believe a move away from adversarial to alternative dispute resolution practices would help reduce lawyer stress.

Yet, as we noted earlier when looking at family law, mediation brings its own challenges which lawyers may find equally stressful without the requisite training and skills.Clients were singled out as a prime cause of lawyer stress -- can anything be done to improve the client-lawyer relationship? Christopher Clulow suggests that the "best means of reducing wear and tear on lawyers, is to attend to the boundaries of the professional relationship." (The Legal Executive Journal, 1994, May, pp 28-29.)Clients need to be empowered so they can take charge of their lives and, presumably, resist the temptation to pile all their troubles on their lawyers.

This is probably easier said than done, but Clulow's advice that clients should be listened to and expectations on both sides clearly and sensitively negotiated seems sensible.

Breaking down some of the customary barriers between clie nt and lawyer might be painful, but could lead to a better understanding of the other by both parties.

It should be obvious from the foregoing that there are more causes of stress in the legal profession than there are reliable solutions.

And one would be foolhardy to believe the situation is likely to be improved in the era of the "no win, no fee" approach.However, the most positive finding from the research analysed is that stress is as much an institutional as an individual issue.

Too often, the stress sufferer is stigmatised when it is the system or organisation which needs curing of its stress generating properties.

It is perhaps time Docquier's aphorism: "The animals are not as stupid as one thinks -- they have neither doctors nor lawyers" was modified to: they have neither clients, deadlines, nor senior partners!