Introduction

There are many (almost overwhelming) numbers of self-help resources regarding mental health and wellness in the legal profession. Most of these resources seem to focus on individual behaviours that support physical (and sometimes emotional and spiritual) wellness. These approaches might include: eating well, exercising, fasting, sleeping, taking breaks, avoiding alcohol and/or other drugs, and so on. Of course, these can be helpful for people in general; however, the link to health practices and better workplace wellness is tenuous. Research in other disciplines has demonstrated that what actually helps in high-stress environments, especially in environments prone to secondary trauma, is lower caseloads.

Protective Factors

Cadieux’s 2022 study focused on both the risk and “protective factors” for legal professionals in Canada. Some risk factors were discussed earlier in this Chapter. “Protective factors” are those elements that mitigate the negative impacts of an otherwise stressful situation. Cadieux identified several of these factors listed here from most positive impact to least:

“Autonomy. The legal professional is free to decide on working methods.

Consistency of values. The legal professional’s values and goals are aligned with those of the workplace.

Support from colleagues. Colleagues listen and offer help and recognition listen when the professional faces problems in the implementation of their work.

Career opportunities. The legal professional feels that they can progress quickly within the organization, that they are being offered opportunities for advancement.

Telework: The legal professional teleworks on an occasional or regular basis.” (p. 71)

Cadieux identifies all these factors as associated with lower levels of “stress, psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and burnout.”

What Works at Work?

Cadieux’s findings regarding “consistency of values” echoes work by other academics. In fact, there is evidence that certain conditions in law practice can bring satisfaction and a sense of purpose. Here, there are a few distinct bodies of somewhat contradictory research. In the Kreiger et al line of research referenced above, there appear to be certain conditions under which lawyers achieve career satisfaction. Here, extrinsic factors (grades, money, etc.) seem to lead to less happiness than intrinsic factors (choices, psychological factors, etc.). (see Lawrence S. Krieger and Kennon M. Sheldon, “What Makes Lawyers Happy? A Data-Driven Prescription to Redefine Professional Success” (20150) 83 George Washington Law Review; See also related publications including “Does Legal Education Have Undermining Effects on Law Students” (2004) 22 Behavioral Sciences and Law 261., “The Inseparability of Professionalism and Personal Satisfaction” (2005) 11 Clinical Law Review 425, and others). Notably, the psychological factors negatively impacted during law school appear to be those most important for lawyer satisfaction and wellbeing. Overall, the personal factors important for happiness in the general population equally apply to lawyers.

Another line of research comes to quite different conclusions (again, in a US context, and in this case studying lawyers in the first 10 years of practice). In these studies, most lawyers seem to be relatively or very satisfied with their career choice. Similar overall levels of satisfaction are found regardless of employment context; although some aspects of one context might be unsatisfactory, it is typically balanced by another aspect. (Ronit Dinovitzer et al, “After the JD: First Results of a National Study of Legal Careers” (NALP, 2004). See also “After the JD II” and “After the JD III: Third Results from a National Study of Legal Careers”).

In Canada, the NALP (National Association for Law Placement) surveys give some insight into law practice generally, although not quite as pointedly in the area of mental health, wellness and satisfaction (also note the small sample size). Respondents report 80% plus levels of satisfaction with their jobs primarily due to “fit”, “level of responsibility” and “job security” (which corresponds with some markers of satisfaction in other surveys); however, support for mental health and wellbeing in a work context was rated poorly. Interestingly (and as echoed in Cadieux’s work), women overall fared worse than men in terms of pay, perceived advancement opportunities, level of responsibility, commitment to EDI issues, and so on (National Association for Law Placement, “Study of Law School Alumni Employment & Satisfaction: Employment Outcomes Three Years After Graduation (Class of 2017, Canada)” (NALP Foundation, 2020).;  National Association for Law Placement, “Study of Law School Alumni Employment & Satisfaction: Employment Outcomes Three Years After Graduation (Class of 2018, Canada)” (NALP Foundation, 2020).

Adding potentially further depth to this work is research by Patrick Krill and his co-authors on the values of the employer. In their article, “People, Professionals, and Profit Centers: The Connection between Lawyer Well-Being and Employer Values”, the researchers investigated how an employer’s values are linked to the health of the lawyers in their firms. They write:

“Based on our findings, our hypothesis that a businesscentric approach to practicing law has the potential to negatively impact the health and well-being of lawyers appears to be confirmed. Lawyers who work in environments that value professionalism, skill, and humanity over productivity and availability are in better health and experience lower levels of stress than their counterparts in other work environments.”

The Cadieux study notes that “protective factors” for psychological distress and burnout include good relationships with colleagues and clients, recognition and career opportunities, social support, and increasing age (Nathalie Cadieux et al, “Research Report: A Study of the Determinants of Mental Health in the Workplace Among Quebec Lawyers, Phase II – 2017-2019”, Research Report, Université de Sherbrooke, Business School, 2020).

This and other research supports increased attention to lawyer wellness from institutional perspectives.

Wellness & Community

Certainly, individual behaviours have an impact on wellness. However, as noted above, this is only part of a more complex story. Often, alleviating problems in people’s lives such as lack of basic income, abuse, racism, pain, and so on also improves wellness. Focusing solely on what an individual can do sometimes hides the true source of a problem.

For many, wellness is found in community. State-led institutions and white dominated spaces have complicated histories of purposely making poor people and/or racialized people and/or Indigenous people and/or members of LGBTQIA2S+ communities and/or others unwell – sometimes life-threateningly unwell. As such, dominant prescriptions for wellness – particularly those that focus on individual responsibility – may not resonate for everyone. For many communities, one’s personal or individual wellness is also intimately bound up with the wellness of one’s community, Elders, land and water. As Anishinaabe Elder Art Solomon noted, “[t]o heal a nation, we must first heal the individuals, the families, and the communities” (see Songs for the People:  Teachings on the Natural Way (NC Press, 1989). The Audre Lorde Project (a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Two Spirit, Trans and Gender Non Conforming People of Color centre for community organizing) has many important tools and resources, including a practical toolkit that supports self care. This project in particular focuses on self-care but within the context of radical community care and justice.

Some Good News

While there are very concerning trends in law practice, there is also evidence that some legal workplaces are attempting to address mental health and wellness. Examples of these are:

• mentorship programs
• case conferencing/ case rounds to strategize difficult situations and prevent secondary trauma
• check-ins at the beginning and end of the day, either in person or via WhatsApp, Signal, or other online tool
• leadership that notices when breaks or other supports are needed
• sabbatical or leave programs
• good pay and benefits
• supported parenting and elder care leaves, and supports for new parents or grieving children re-entering the workforce