Path to Well-Being in Law

Path To Well-Being In Law Podcast: Episode 10 - Terry Harrell

CHRIS NEWBOLD: 

Hello, and welcome to the National Taskforce on Lawyer Wellbeing Podcast Series, the Path to Wellbeing in Law. I'm your co-host, Chris Newbold, Executive Vice President of ALPS Malpractice Insurance. As you know, our goal here on the podcast is simple, to introduce you to interesting leaders doing incredible work in the space of wellbeing within the legal profession. In the process, build and nurture a national network of wellbeing advocates, intent on creating a culture shift within our profession.

CHRIS: 

Once again, I'm joined by my friend, Bree Buchanan. Bree, we're 10 episodes into the podcast. They said it couldn't, it would never happen, but we are here, what a milestone. I'm curious what your impressions have been thus far within the podcast experience.

BREE BUCHANAN: 

Yeah, hello, everybody. I think it's been great. One of the things I've enjoyed so much is being able to really get to know and dive with some of these people who are really leaders in the wellbeing space, and get to know them a little bit more. We get to interact with them by Zoom or email, but this is a really unique opportunity, so it's been great. I can't believe we already have 10 episodes in the can, so to speak. Time flies, so this has been great.

CHRIS: 

It has, and like you, I like the fact that we get to have more in depth conversations with what I would call the movers and shakers of the wellbeing movement. It really allows us to delve into some issues a little bit deeper than we could probably do through CLEs or some other forums.

CHRIS: 

So, well let's shift to our topic today. We shift the conversation a bit to one of the foundational bedrocks of the wellbeing movement, and that's our lawyers assistance programs. We're very excited to welcome our friend and fellow taskforce on lawyer wellbeing member, Terry Harrell, who resides in the Hoosier state of Indiana. Bree, I'm going to pass the baton to you because you've known Terry for a considerable amount of time and have worked with her on a variety of different issues. So if you could introduce Terry, we'll get the conversation started.

BREE:

I would love to. Terry occupies a very special place in my life because she was really the person who was responsible for getting me into this. I'll say a little bit more about that in just a minute, but Terry Harrow is a lawyer and a licensed therapist. She's been the Executive Director of the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program, might refer to it as JLAP, for 20 years, following a decade of work in the mental health field.

BREE:

Terry is the past Chair of the ABA's commission on Lawyers' Assistance Program. She served in that role from 2014 to 27, and then at some point near the end of that, she snookered me into taking the reigns for the next three years. So yeah, she was really instrumental in getting me and she was, you are, Terry, the person who got me into this. So thank you.

TERRY HARRELL: 

You're welcome, Bree. I do remember with the taskforce saying, "You've got to come do this, you have to come to this meeting. We're going to form this national taskforce."

BREE:

That's right.

TERRY:

I'm wondering whether you'd kill me later or thank me.

BREE:

Yeah, well here's the thank you. So as Terry became a leader in this space, that was certainly recognized in the ABA President at that time, appointed. It was Hillary Bass out of Florida, appointed Terry to lead the working group to advance wellbeing in the legal profession, which was an all-star group of people who were responsible for launching the ABA's Employer Wellbeing Pledge two years ago, which has been wildly successful. We have now about 200 signatories of some of the largest legal employers on the planet. Terry continues to be very involved in that. She's been a key partner within the national taskforce since its inception back in 2016.

BREE:

So, Terry, what did I miss? Welcome to the program.

TERRY:

You did a wonderful job, thank you, Bree. Happy to be here and I need to tell both you, I hadn't realized you'd done 10 already. I was aware of your podcast but I'm impressed, I'm impressed.

BREE:

So Terry I'm going to start off by asking you the question that we ask everybody is, what brought you to the lawyer wellbeing movement? What experiences in your life are behind your passion in this work? We found that people who really get involved and in the center of the circle of what we're doing, tend to have some real passion that's driving what they do. So, what's yours?

TERRY:

Yeah, that question makes you think back and I think it started young because my dad was a lawyer. I remember running with my dad and one of his partners in high school, I loved doing that. Of course we called it jogging, I won't tell you how old I am, but that gives it away. We'd go jogging and they would talk about how that helped them to stay more focused at work and improve their mood. As a child of a lawyer, I can testify that evenings when better when my dad went, stopped by the YMCA on his way home and exercised first before he came home. He was a trial lawyer, I think that I learned early that transition from work to home can be really helpful.

TERRY:

Then in high school, I had a friend who died by suicide, and then the father of a good friend also died by suicide. So I think that sparked my interest in mental health and my decision to major in psychology in undergrad. But then I went to law school, and actually, I loved law school. I'm probably a geek, there aren't many people who will say that but I made really good friends, I enjoyed it. Went to work in big law where I saw both some examples of probably good wellbeing practices and then some very bad practices, but I also learned that for me that work was not where my passion was. I learned what a burden it is to try and work that hard about something that you're not really passionate about.

TERRY:

Bree, I know you understand this, because you and I have spent our Christmas break working on policies before. You have spent I know, breaks working on tax documents and you only do that if you really, really care about what you're working on. To do that about something that isn't terribly meaningful to you is torture, to me at least.

TERRY:

So then I went back, after I worked in law for a couple of years, went back, got my MSW, worked in mental health in a variety of positions which was great. Loved it, but then I heard about this Lawyer Assistance Program and I thought, wow, I'd always wondered if I would get back to my legal roots somehow. Started working at the Lawyer Assistance Program, absolutely loved it. First as the Clinical Director, then as the... I became the Executive Director. Then it was really through the ABA Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs, that I started thinking more broadly about lawyer wellbeing. At the LAP we were already thinking, and we can talk more later, but we were thinking about ways to talk about prevention with lawyers a little bit. Didn't have a lot of capacity and bandwidth to do that. But it was really through the commission that I started thinking about structures, the fishbowl in which we are swimming, as opposed to just dealing with each individual lawyer himself or herself, if that makes sense.

BREE:

Absolutely, yeah. At some point you want to go, get tired of pulling people out of the stream and you want to go upstream and stop what the real problem is, yeah.

TERRY:

Yeah, exactly, exactly.

CHRIS: 

Terry, many people attribute the start of the wellbeing movement around the report that the National Taskforce released back in, surprisingly, 2016. The 44 recommendations and that, but we all know that the forerunner to that was the work of the Lawyer Assistance Programs. So I was hoping that you could give our listeners some perspective of just that history of the Lawyer Assistance Programs and how wellbeing has played a role and what you do. While it's probably taken on a more prominent role of late, but still being a centerpiece of what ultimately the programs were designed to do.

TERRY:

Yeah, I would love to do that. Begins to make me feel like I'm an old timer, but when you've been doing it for 20 years that happens, I guess.

TERRY:

Yeah, the LAP idea of lawyers helping lawyers, which is originally what we called a lot of the LAPs. Lawyers helping lawyers has been around for many decades, at least since the '70s. I believe much earlier than that, but it was a very informal, just volunteer, and it was mostly lawyers in recovery from addictions trying to help other lawyers who were struggling with addictions, and primarily alcohol, that's what they were. But then in the '80s, staff programs starting popping up, people started realizing, this could be a lot more helpful if there was a phone number, one phone number to call, one person who is the point person because it was hit and miss with the volunteer network on who found them and who didn't find them.

TERRY:

So states around the country started creating Lawyer Assistance Programs where they'd have an office with a phone number and a person assigned there. At that time, the ABA formed a commission, it was called the Commission on Impaired Lawyers. Tells you how far we've come. It was about helping impaired lawyers. It was very basic and the primary goal was to help states create a formal program to do this work. I forget exactly when, somewhere in the '80s I believe or early '90s, we changed it to the Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs, which I think is a much better name. I don't know exactly the timing, but by 1997 when Indiana created our program, the stronger programs all over the country were what we called broad brushed, in that they dealt with mental health issues, including substance use issues but much broader. I think the earlier programs probably did assist a few lawyers with mental health problems, but that's not what they were known for.

TERRY:

Over the '90s I would say, and early 2000, almost I think all of the LAPs today are broad brushed, in that they will help lawyers with almost any problem that they come against, not just substance abuse problems but that myth still persists today. Even though Indiana, for an example, we've been a broad brushed program since 1997 and yet I will go out and speak and some lawyer will walk up to me and say, "Wow, I wish last year I'd known that you dealt with problems other than alcohol because Wilma Flintstone was grieving her husband's death and we thought she was really depressed, but because we know she didn't drink, we never thought to call the Lawyer Assistance Program." So that kills me and I want to get that word out there. I'm sure Bree has heard those stories as well.

BREE:

Absolutely, yeah.

TERRY:

So the LAP was doing our work, helping lawyers that were either brought to our attention or came to us voluntarily wanting help. All along, I kept thinking, we should also be doing some more prevention work. I'd like to offer some lawyer's running group or do some more education, get some more education out there. I couldn't believe how many years I've been doing JLAP 101 presentations.

TERRY:

One of our state bar presidents said, "Terry, what if we create a wellness committee at the state bar, will that upset the LAP? Would we be taking your turf?" I said, "Absolutely not. You can help us because you can do more of those proactive things, like have healthy eating seminar for lawyers or sponsor 5Ks and do some more of that front end work than what the LAP has the bandwidth to do." We work together very closely. I mean, I was a Co-Chair that first year, I'm back being Chair again, Co-Chair again this year. In fact, the way it works is the wellness committee supports a 5K run but you know who's there at 6:30 in the morning to organize the whole thing? It's always staff from the Lawyer Assistance Program. So we really worked hand-in-hand and we're still having discussions about, how do we work together to be able to do more and not duplicate efforts and not cause each other any hard but actually do more? Because there's certainly lots more work to do, tons more work.

BREE:

Yeah, and Terry, I'm interested in... because you've been so central in this space and know all the players and people. Particularly since the report has come out, what do you see in the area of, I think of it as prevention work, but a lot of times it comes under the heading of wellbeing or wellness. What are some of the things that you're seeing that the LAPs are doing now?

TERRY:

I think we're offering, we're increasing the breadth of our programming, which is good. We're focusing our marketing efforts, if you will, on those things. I know in our LAP, we found that our care for the caregivers support group is one of the more popular groups, that and our grief group have been more popular. They've helped people to understand that there are certain issues that may impact everyone or at least any one of us can encounter. By being part of some of these wellness efforts with the state bar, I think people started to perceive us more as wellbeing people and it's a good thing to be seen hanging out with those people, as opposed to in the past when they saw us as the alcohol police. They really didn't want to be seen with us, or I'd walk into a cocktail party and someone would put his drink behind his back. It's like, we're not the alcohol police, we're all about wellbeing. I think that has started to come through, and it's helped with collaborations.

TERRY:

With the report coming out with these very specific recommendations, I was able to talk to the state bar and the LAP and the state bar put on a symposium for legal employers talking specifically about the recommendations for legal employers and what they can do to improve wellbeing. That was fabulous, actually, we had wonderful speakers from a lot of the law firms and corporate council groups around the state. That was just great. We're still getting our normal referrals, and of course those remain confidential, but we're doing so much more that doesn't have to be confidential, like offering yoga and offering a mindfulness session, that I think we're more visible to. We're not this mysterious hidden group any longer.

TERRY:

With more emphasis on wellbeing and the taskforce report coming out, and the pledge from the ABA. Even my own supreme court decided to create a wellbeing committee specifically for supreme court employees. So we're a 250-person group ourselves, so we've added that. So I mean, I just think raising the visibility and the emphasis on wellbeing has had incredible results for us.

CHRIS:

Terry, as you think about... I mean I'm not as familiar with the Lawyer Assistance Programs, although being on the malpractice prevention side, we certainly have partnered with... I mean, we work a lot in rural states, so we were aware of certain states that still did not have a Lawyer Assistance Program. My sense is now that I think all 50 states actually have one. Not knowing when you started with the Indiana program, I would just love to hear your perspective on where we were then versus where we are now from an evolution perspective. You got to be pretty excited because this feels like there's a lot more with the innovations going on in the wellbeing side, I like to always think of the Lawyer Assistance Programs as, you guys are the heroes in the trenches every day. I think that there's a great appreciation for the work that you do but it's been a lot of work to get to the point where the issue has become back on the front burner as a national topic of discussion.

TERRY:

Absolutely, absolutely. Yeah, I mean even when we created our program in '97, there was still a lot of states that did not have a program at all. Now, there were a lot that did. Indiana is rarely first, but we're rarely last. There were also states that only served lawyers, they didn't serve law students, they didn't serve judges. So I'll make a plug for my state, I was very proud of my state that they looked around and said, "Looks like the better programs serve law students, lawyers and judges, the entire legal community, and they're broad brushed." We made that decision but it took a while, into the 2000s I'd say. Now we're at the point where I think almost every state... let me phrase it this way. I think every state has a Lawyer Assistance Program, some are more robust than others. There's a fair number that still have only one employee and there might be one that's still voluntary, but there's definitely someone we could get a hold of at every state that is concerned with Lawyers' Assistance. So we've come so, so far.

TERRY:

I remember in the day when it was hard. I mean, we knocked on doors to get... we wanted to get our message out at various lawyer conferences, and we really had to work at that. Today, everyone wants a wellbeing program at their conference, whether it's prosecutors or defenders or trial attorneys, judges, everyone wants a wellbeing program. So now, I mean I talk to my staff about we may have to start to get selective because we're doing so many presentations throughout the year that we've got to make sure we have time to take care of our clients as well. That's the most important part of what a LAP does, but it's a great problem to have to work at. I think a lot of that credit goes to the wellbeing movement, that it's on people's radar. So organizations that I wasn't even aware of who never thought to contact are now contacting us.

BREE:

That's great.

TERRY:

That's huge.

BREE:

Yeah, that is.

CHRIS: 

Yeah, and let's take a quick break because one of the things I'd love to come back and talk about is just how the demand has evolved over time, because I've got to think with COVID and other things, the demand was already high but we're at an even more interesting place with the pandemic.

CHRIS: 

So, let's hear from one of our sponsors, take a quick break, and we'll be back.

—

Advertisement: 

Your law firm is worth protecting and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and find coverage all in about 20 minutes.

Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com.

—

BREE:

Welcome back, everybody. We are so honored today to have Terry Harrell, who is really a leader, the leader, one of the leaders in the Lawyers' Assistance Program world. She has worked at every level of that experience. Terry has been the Executive Director of the Indiana JLAP for the past 20 years, so brings a wealth of experience.

BREE:

So I'm guessing, Terry, that you have a finger on the pulse of how things are going with the LAPs during COVID? The level of demand and how they're meeting and what they're seeing. I mean, early on in the pandemic, what I knew in talking to the LAP programs is that they felt that people were hesitating to call. The demand went down at first, but I don't think that's the case now. What are you seeing?

TERRY:

I think you're right on spot, Bree. I think when... My experience, and I think I heard this echoed correct with the other LAPs is that last spring, calls dropped off. I think two reasons. One, all the law students got sent home from law school. We couldn't do our onsite support groups for law students any longer or meeting one-on-one with law students. Those calls, I mean they went dead silent. We heard nothing from the law students for months.

TERRY:

But the lawyers and judges also dropped off. I don't know, my thinking is, and this is just Terry Harrell speaking. I think the lawyers and judges were busy trying to help others, trying to help their firm or their court staff deal with what was going on at work, trying to help their families, trying to help their communities figure out what had to happen. As usual, as lawyers will do, they put themselves last and they just sucked it up and did the work they had to do because as the pandemic continued, and I think this is true for all the LAPs, I know it's true for us, the calls began to come back. Lawyers and judges are calling us, we're starting to have our normal calls again, as well as, it's funny, the COVID stress calls don't come in directly. Someone will call me, concerned about another person, say, another lawyer in the firm.

TERRY:

Then next thing I know, we're talking. Well, how is this isolation and the pandemic, how's that affecting you? Next thing I'm talking to that lawyer about their stressors. To where we've all noticed, they come in sideways because lawyers as usual, are busy trying to help other people, but they're getting to us now. I'm really pleased with that, that our normals are back up to normal.

TERRY:

What I would say, I hate to say there's a bright spot in a pandemic because there's nothing good about this pandemic, but one of the things, I guess a silver lining of a bad experience, has been our support groups. We had before pandemic, we had, I don't know, eight maybe support groups going around the state, but if you lived in a smaller community, there wasn't one close to you. We just couldn't justify having support groups in some of those communities that had few lawyers in them. Even if you go into Indianapolis, to get to the downtown support group, if you work on the north side to get done with your work day and drive 45 minutes to downtown Indianapolis for a support group wasn't real. Then 45 minutes home, wasn't realistic.

TERRY:

So when the pandemic hit, we moved everything to Zoom. We talked about it but we'd never done it. We just did it because we didn't have any choice. It's been great because we've been able to include people from more rural areas. It no longer matters geographically and so people have come to groups that normally wouldn't have. They've been much more effective than I would've guessed.

TERRY:

We also added a group, that just called our Connection Group. So everyone who is practicing law or going to law school or serving as a judge during the pandemic is eligible. We're all eligible, it's just to connect with other members of the legal community. It's robust and people get on there and talk about the challenges that they're facing. They also laugh as most support groups, they also laugh and have a good time.

TERRY:

So I think when it's over, we'll go back to having some in person, I mean because doggone it, sometimes there's nothing like a hug or an arm on your shoulder, but I think we'll continue with the Zoom support group meetings because they are more effective than I ever would've guessed. It allows us to get to those people in rural communities. I mean, this may be something, Chris, for those states like North Dakota and Montana, where you just don't have big populations of lawyers. If they can do things by Zoom, I have been shocked at how well that has gone.

CHRIS:

Yeah, I think you raise a good point, because I think that in some ways the legal profession is now more connected because of the necessity of having to utilize technology to connect with one another. One of the things that I've seen in the bar association world is that fairly significant rise in participation in CLE program. Obviously that all went virtual, but they're seeing, particularly in rural states, record numbers of people sitting in on getting their CLEs and connecting in an entirely different way. So that's going to be really interesting to see how that plays out from a support perspective in the longterm, but like you said, I'd be rather optimistic that we feel like people are not as far away even though we're physically not together. There's connection points that we can certainly rely on as we move forward.

TERRY:

Absolutely.

BREE:

Terry, I know the... and just to emphasize and reemphasize this as those in the LAP world always do, that everything is confidential about the calls, 100%. But of course abiding by confidentiality, can you talk about maybe any trends that you have seen in the kind of calls that you're getting? I mean since they've started to pick back up, do you see more extreme situations? Have the type of calls changed, or just going back to what they were before?

TERRY:

I would say it's really, it's amazing but I think they're going back to the mix we had before, which has tended to be more heavy on mental health recently than addiction, which is interesting. Although, sometimes we find out there's also an addiction issue there, of course, but it's in the same mix of lawyer with dementia, demeanor issues, depression, alcohol. We have had two... again, thinking about confidentiality, I have to think what I saw but we've had two pretty dramatic relapse situations and I don't know if those were due to COVID or not. It's too new but they were two people that we thought had a really solid recovery. So I will be over time I'm sure, we'll figure some of that out and see if that played into it or it was just the course of addiction itself.

BREE:

Sure.

TERRY:

But yeah, I haven't seen a big change in the type of calls we get, other than it's almost like the pandemic is just one more layer. It's one more stressor on top of everything else.

CHRIS:

Terry, I'm curious that the pandemic I think for a lot of people has been an opportunity to reflect on their current state of life. I'm just curious particularly with your social work background, just your perspective on... people are evaluating all parts of their family and their professional life, their relationships, and how that ultimately... I'm sure there will be books and book written post pandemic about the impacts of that as a reflection point. We're just curious on your perspective of lawyers in particular and as they had to work from home and not be as connected. I've heard some lawyers say, "I really never want to go back to an office again." So I'm just curious on that, on your perspective on that.

TERRY:

Yeah, I mean like you say, it'll be years before we know the total impact, but I definitely think it has caused people to think about, what do I really need to do? Do I need to be going this hard? Do I need to travel that much? Maybe I want to take a job where I can, if my employers let me continue to stay at home, maybe I'll quit that job and find a job that allows me to work from home. I'm aware of at least one retirement that was, not caused by the pandemic, but hastened by having that time to reflect on what's really important in life. The lawyer decided, you know what? I was going to wait two more years but why? Why am I doing that? I want to spend this time with my family, I'm going to go ahead and retire. So I think there'll be changes in workplace policies, and I don't know how that will all fold out.

TERRY:

Yeah, and I think there'll be some career changes because I think there will be some people who have decided what's most important to them, that there may be some shuffling around. People may make some career decisions because they've had time to sit with themselves and decide what's really meaningful and what works for them, instead of just jumping into the daily grind thoughtlessly every day. I think we'll see some changes.

CHRIS:

Yeah, and employers may need to adapt as well. Again, I think it's going to be very interesting to see that if nothing else, the work-life balance has been called into question. As we think about wellbeing as wanting people to feel like they've made a good decision in are professionally satisfied in the practice of law. Having a pandemic in the midst of a career has an opportunity for you to rethink your position in that world.

TERRY:

It really does. I mean, there's some dramatic instances. I've heard of lawyers who went into the courtroom and the judge said, "I won't let you go forward unless you take your mask off," where they thought it was... something like that can make you think, well, is this really worth risking my life to do big things? Then maybe employers will change. It's turned out there's some people who are very rigid about, I want you at your desk working 8:30 to 4:30 or whatever, very rigid hours. They may have learned that actually if you tell people, "This is the work you need to get done but you can be flexible about when you do it," and it still gets done, that may open up some possibilities for people. Yeah, it will be very interesting to see what happens.

CHRIS:

Terry, you've been very involved in the work to create systemic change in the legal profession, both as it relates to wellbeing and both in Indiana and on the national front. Could you talk with us about some of the projects that you're currently involved with? Again, both at home and on a national level?

TERRY:

I would love to. Bree mentioned earlier that Hillary Bass created the working group to advance wellbeing in the legal profession, but that was a working group that was sunset a couple years ago, but one of the major initiatives of that group was the ABA Wellbeing Pledge. That pledge was meant to continue and to continue to be there to encourage and support employers to make changes in the workplace to benefit lawyer wellbeing. So CoLAP took that under their umbrella and created a wellbeing committee at CoLAP, which I'm still involved in.

TERRY:

I'm particularly involved in our subcommittee that's working on that pledge. We have, I don't have a current number, it's approximately 200 people have signed the pledge. That's a very rough number, but more people are signing on. We're starting to get feedback on what the legal employers are doing. I want to stop, it's easy to say firm, we mean legal employers. This is for anyone who employs lawyers in their workplace, whether it's a government agency, law school, law firm, in-house council. It's broad, broader than just law firms, I want to be clear about that.

TERRY:

We've seen some big changes, we have seen law firms are updating their policies to be respectful of mental health and encourage people to get the help they need when they need it. I've seen law firms hire wellbeing directors and I've seen them go a different way and hire an actual in-house therapist to be available to their staff. There's just been explosion of wellbeing activities and programs in the law school, that go on and on about that. Now, I do think most of those are aimed at the students, which is great, but I think we need to circle back and remind the law schools that they also employ a whole lot of lawyers on staff and make sure that those wellbeing initiatives are also including their own employees, because I'm not sure it's been interpreted that way at the law schools.

TERRY:

Legal employers are doing things to reduce the emphasis on alcohol, either by having events that are not built around alcohol or by having more options available or limiting the amount of alcohol served. I think there's still a lot of thought going into how to do that by the legal employers. All legal employers are offering some sort of wellbeing training, whether that's learning about mindfulness, financial wellness, nutrition, learning about your Lawyer Assistance Program and your EAP. A fair number are offering some fitness coaching kind of alternatives, there's a lot of creative work being done. I know Bree's been following some of those signatories as well. She's also on that wellbeing committee. It's fun to see and I just can't wait to see what else comes out of those initiatives with the legal employers.

TERRY:

I'm going to talk about the policy committee briefly, but did you all have anything you wanted to say about the pledge? I know Bree, you've been really involved in that as well.

BREE:

No, but I think that it really is beginning to change the way things are done. It also, we're creating opportunities for these pledge signatories to come together and share information and strategies. So it's a great project and one that's just getting started.

TERRY:

Right, in fact I should mention, in March we're going to have a virtual event for those law firm signatories. So if anybody's thinking about joining, I would suggest you join before March so you can take part in the March virtual, of course, event.

TERRY:

I'm also on the ABA policy committee today, and that group is looking at the taskforce recommendations, particularly ones on what the regulators should do, because the taskforce report asked that regulators take action to communicate that lawyer wellbeing is a priority. I think that means getting it into written policies and rules so that it's there for the long term, not just something we talk about at one CLE and move on. So policy committees looking at the model rules of professional responsibility, with an eye on how can we emphasize wellbeing as an aspect of competence. I'm not going to go into more detail on that yet because I think there's a lot of moving parts there, but I hope that we will be able to make some change in the model rules that institutionalizes wellbeing so it doesn't go away. So that law professors can talk about it in their professional responsibility classes, so that CLE ethics can tie to it. I think there'll be all sorts of benefits to institutionalizing the idea in the model rules. We're watching other policies where there's an opportunity to add that in.

BREE:

Yep, so foundational. [crosstalk 00:35:23] about what's going on in Indiana. You guys have taken the lead in some initiatives. The character and fitness questions.

TERRY:

Yeah, in terms of systemic change, I think this is a really important one. For those who don't know, most bar examiners historically ask... years ago, they asked a really intrusive question about, have you ever been diagnosed with or treated for a variety of mental health conditions? I think the question had been narrowed by most states but it was still there. CoLAP has continued to push and I've not been directly involved in those efforts, but to tell states that the question needs to come off the bar application. It's okay to ask about misconduct or behavior that's concerning or problems with performance, but it's inappropriate to ask whether someone has a diagnosis or has sought treatment for something.

TERRY:

We went to our Chief Justice, I guess it was six months ago now maybe. Once we explained it to her, she said, "You're absolutely right, we should not be asking that question, period. Let's take it off starting today. Let's just remove it." We even had had a few applications come in and she said, "Just strike it from the few applications that have come in. We are not using that question anymore-

BREE:

Wow.

TERRY:

... starting today," which was fabulous.

BREE:

I didn't know that, that's great, Terry.

TERRY:

She did it, because we thought we'd have to wait until the next round because it had still been on the application. She's like, "No, we'll just mark it out on this one and then take it off the next one and we're done with that question right now." That was fabulous, and we're not the first state. I know New York for sure has done that. I think there's a couple others that I can't recall, but I'm hoping that the snowball is rolling and that more and more... because that's something that sends a message to law students, it sends a message to lawyers, that getting treatment is a good thing. That's a positive thing, not a weakness. It's so important.

BREE:

So essential before they join the legal profession. So Terry, this the capstone question. So, are you ready?

TERRY:

Okay.

BREE:

So pull out your crystal ball and tell us, I think you're one of the best people I the country to talk about this. What does the Lawyers' Assistance Program of the future look like? I mean, what would be ideal? Then talk about it if you can, what it takes to get there.

TERRY:

Well what's in my head is more of a picture, it may not have the details in it yet, maybe you two can help me flesh it out, but one of our volunteers for years has always said that her vision for JLAP, for our LAP, is that it's a coffee shop. It's this friendly, open coffee shop where lawyers can stop in, get a cup of coffee, connect to others, talk over their challenges. There's no stigma to coming in, it's a very welcoming and encouraging place. I really think that idea, that is the LAP's role, it's helping lawyers to connect, whether it's to a volunteer, another lawyer, a support group, or to professional treatment of some kind, or just reconnect with themselves. That's the key, I think, underlying LAPs.

TERRY:

Wellbeing is very individual, so it's maybe the LAPs are helping all lawyers to stay on track with their own wellbeing, whatever that means. Thriving and performing at their highest level. I can envision, what is LAPs, every lawyer did an annual checkup just like you do with your primary doctor?

BREE:

Great.

TERRY:

Let's pause, push the pause button, sit down with someone from LAP and just say, "Am I taking care of myself? Am I thriving, or am I merely getting by, or am I really sinking here?" Wouldn't that be great, to just pause once a year and meet with somebody and have that discussion? That would obviously probably take a few more staff, so maybe a little more funding, but that's my big vision.

BREE:

Great, and in the report, one of the recommendations under that, the LAP section, was to make sure that there adequate funding for the programs to be able to meet the need. A part of that need, it's the calls and it's also be able to get out and do all of this public education that is now being requested. We've seen some successes in that around the country, particularly we had the podcast from Virginia and how they got an increase in funding that, I don't know, tripled?

CHRIS:

Yes.

BREE:

What they were able to do and able to hire full-time professional staff, and that's really made all the difference. So there's always that piece too.

TERRY:

There really is. Two things about that. I need to give a shout out to my Supreme Court for supporting us, fully supporting us with funding, helping us with staff, but also during the pandemic with laptops and speaker or headsets and cameras and all that's necessary to do our work. The other piece is, yes, you have to have a LAP that's well funded because we have people that are out doing these presentations, which you can't just walk away in the middle of a presentation. We have calls coming in and we also have these crisis situations that come in where suddenly one or two staff people may have to just take off and go deal with a crisis situation. Whoever's left has to pick up whatever they were supposed to do that day. So the funding is a tricky... funding and staffing is a sticky, interesting issue.

BREE:

Yeah, absolutely.

CHRIS:

I think it's interesting, Terry, that first of all, I love your coffee shop analogy because I do think that we're ultimately trying to create a space that's a very welcoming space. I know how much you have been emboldened in your mission because of the support of your Supreme Court. I almost think of the judiciary as being the baristas in those coffee shops because if they are offering us a wide menu of options and also helping with the systemic change and being supportive, I think so much of what we've been able to achieve in the wellbeing movement has been because of the support of the judiciary. Most notably the state Supreme Courts.

TERRY:

Absolutely.

CHRIS:

... and the development of the taskforces. We struck a nerve with a group of individuals who, let's be honest, are the leaders in our profession. The more that they're sitting at the table in that coffee shop as our baristas, I think the more effective we will ultimately be, not just in the success of the Lawyer Assistance Programs but in engineering this culture shift that ultimately is our longterm goal.

TERRY:

That's absolutely right. We've had such good support institutionally from our court and from our Chief Justice. We also have two of our justices are actually JLAP volunteers. One justice in particular, he goes around and will speak with us and say flat out, "It is okay not to be okay. It happens to everyone from time to time, it is okay to ask for help. We don't expect perfection from you, we expect excellence and that means taking care of yourself." It's fabulous when lawyers here that from that level, that kind of leadership.

BREE:

What a great message, yeah.

TERRY:

It is, truly is.

CHRIS:

Well, this has been... this again, Terry, you are one of the pioneers in our space here, working in the trenches. You've been so giving of your time, talent, resources, expertise. We're thrilled to have you in our midst, we're thrilled to have you on the podcast. We just can't say enough.

CHRIS:

Bree and I both served on the ABA working group and the amount of work product that came out of that group under your leadership in that short period of time was really impressive.

TERRY:

Well, thank you to the two of you for taking that ball and then running with it. It's been fabulous and I'm really excited to see where we go in the future with the wellbeing.

CHRIS:

Awesome, Bree, any closing thoughts?

BREE:

Just to echo what you've said, Chris. We are so appreciative, Terry. It's great to spend some time with you.

CHRIS:

All right, so we will be back in a couple weeks with our next podcast. A lot of great things, I think, on the horizon, in the wellbeing movement. Bree and I think, as we think about the long term sustainability of our movement, there's some real exciting things happening. A considerable amount of outreach and conferences on the horizon. So there's just a lot of good stuff happening out there, both at the state level and the national level. So we certainly hope to be a part of being able to promote those things that are on the horizon because it just feels like more and more things are cropping up on the calendar and that's good for ultimately where we're trying to take it.

CHRIS:

So, for everyone out there, be good, be safe, be well. We will see you on the next podcast. Thanks for joining us.

 

Path To Well-Being In Law Podcast: Episode 9 – Chief Justice Paul Reiber

Paul L. Reiber was appointed to the Vermont Supreme Court as an Associate Justice in October 2003 and Chief Justice in December 2004. In 2010 he served as Chair of the Vermont Commission on Judicial Operations resulting in historic legislation that unified the state court system. He now Chairs the Vermont Justice Reinvestment II Working Group, and Co-Chairs the Chief Justice Task Force for Children and the Vermont Commission on Well-Being of the Legal Profession. He is the immediate past president of the Conference of Chief Justices, 2018-2019 Chairman of the Board of the National Center for State Courts, and involved in several other efforts devoted to access to justice and the rule of law. He is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation, the American Law Institute and active in his local chapter of the American Inns of Court.

 

Transcript: 

CHRIS NEWBOLD:               

Hello and welcome to episode nine of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being podcast series, the path to well-being in law. I'm your co-host Chris Newbold, executive vice president of AlPS Malpractice Insurance and as you know, our goal here is simple, to introduce you to interesting leaders doing awesome work in the space of lawyer well-being and in the process build a nurture of national network of well-being advocates intent on creating a culture shift within the legal profession. Once again, I'm joined by my friend, Bree Buchanan. How are you today, Bree?

BREE BUCHANAN:

I'm doing great. Hello, everyone.

CHRIS:               

Awesome, and today we're going to continue our march around the states and many of the states have really taken charge in the well-being movement, engaging in initiatives, commitments and success and we've previously on the podcast talked to leaders in Virginia, in Massachusetts, in Utah and today we turn our attention to the Green Mountain State, otherwise known as Vermont and we're very excited to welcome our friend and fellow National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being member, Chief Justice Paul Reiber to the podcast. Bree, would you be so kind to introduce Chief Justice Reiber to our audience?

BREE:             

I would be delighted to do so and it's a real honor. The chief, you can imagine, very distinguished individual, but as you will hear over the course of this podcast, a really delightful human being and that wasn't in the bio, so I just had to add that, so I'm going to give you [crosstalk 00:01:41]-

CHIEF JUSTICE PAUL REIBER:             

Thank you. That's very nice.

BREE:        

... The official bio. Paul Reiber was appointed to the Vermont Supreme Court as an associate justice in October of 2003 and a year later as a chief justice in 2004. In 2010, he served as chair of the Vermont Commission on Judicial Operations, resulting in historic legislation that unified the state court system. He now chairs the Vermont Justice Reinvestment II Working Group and co-chairs the Chief Justice Task Force for Children and the Vermont Commission on Well-Being of the Legal Profession and we'll hear more about that in a few minutes.

He most impressively, I think, there's many impressive things, but he is immediate past president of the Conference of Chief Justices. He is the 2018-2019 chairman of the board of the National Center for State Courts and involved in several other efforts devoted to access to justice and the rule of law, which includes his sitting on the board effectively at the National Task Force. He is a fellow of the American Bar Foundation, the American Law Institute and active in his local chapter of the American Inns of Court. Chief Reiber, welcome to our podcast. We're so delighted to have you here today.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:             

Thank you so much, Bree and Chris. Thank you, it's a pleasure to join you here.

BREE:              

And, a question we ask, we've sort of a tradition here of asking each of our guests at the very beginning about their... What is behind their passion for the lawyer well-being movement? What brought you to this work? Because you and I have been working on this together for, I'd say, three years and I know that you are very passionate about this, so if you could talk a little bit about what brings you to this work.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:             

Well, it's a good question and I'm glad you asked it. I was not a trial judge before I came to the Supreme Court. So, I was appointed directly out of private practice and I was a trial lawyer in private practice and I think as is not uncommon among members of the bar who engage in the same kind of practice. As I told the Vermont Bar Association when I spoke to them the first time about this subject a few years ago, I said, "All of us have got challenges in our lives, but in particular those of us who practice law and those of us who go to court, many of us suffer from anxiety and depression and substance abuse."

And I said, "And, I have checked off all of those boxes." So, I had a very personal real world interest in this and was excited when a report came out several years ago, which presented to the Conference of Chief Justices at our annual meeting in Philadelphia and a resolution was passed there and I came home back to Vermont and we immediately started to address it.

CHRIS:             

It's interesting that I think you came back and I think that your first probably act was to begin a dialogue about developing a commission on the well-being of the legal profession there in Vermont.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:         

That's right.

CHRIS:               

Talk to us about how that got started, what your role was [crosstalk 00:05:30].

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

Right, all of us have got close friends that we collaborate with and brainstorm with on different issues and a good friend of mine who was on the trial bench at the time and has now joined me on the Supreme Court is Bill Cohen and Bill and I had practiced together. He also was a trial lawyer. We were in the same firm, had offices down the hall from each other, shared cases, tried cases together. Good friends, have known each other for a long time and I brought it to Bill and I'll tell you who else, Teri Corsones, who was then and is now the executive director of the Vermont Bar Association, and another great guy both of you may know, Mike Kennedy who is our bar council here in Vermont and really is a terrific contributor in many, many ways to the well-being of the profession and the four of us sat down together that fall and I want to say it was the fall of 2017, but I'm not exactly sure. It was right after the report the National Report issued-

BREE:          

Right, that was fall of 2017.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:             

Okay, and we met two or three times. One of the things that I thought was very important, we all thought was important, was not only that we get a project started, but that we make sure that we had the full and unequivocal support of the entire Vermont Supreme Court, my colleagues on the court. And so, we outlined a program that we wanted to pursue. Essentially, by forming a commission that simply mirrored exactly the outline that was provided in the National Report. We did that, we put it in writing, presented it to my colleagues on the court. They were enthusiastic and supporting it and the court eventually issued, and I don't mean this to suggest there was a delay, but the court issued what we call a charge and designation, which is an administrative document that reflected on the need for this effort to be undertaken, reflected on the fact the National Report had issued, recited the resolution that the joint conferences of chief justices and court administrators had passed earlier that year in Philadelphia as I said.

And then, concluded that an effort need to be made here in Vermont to evaluate this concern that we all shared about mental health, substance abuse among members of the bar. And so, we began that process with a commission that was formed under the charge and designation the entire court signed off on.

Bree Buchanan:               

And, Chief, that charge and designation, by the way, is on the National Task Force's website lawyerwellbeing.net.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

Oh good.

BREE:              

We've actually offered that up to other states at times who are trying to figure out how to get it started in their own state, how their own Supreme Court have the authority, I guess, to move forward. And so, it's been a useful document and a sample for other courts.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

Well, I'm glad to hear that, Bree. I wasn't aware of that. One of the things I thought was very important was that we put a timetable on the effort. And so, we called for the commission that we formed to report back to the court I think it was within 12 months, by the end of 2018 with specific recommendations and in fact, we can discuss this down the road as well, but we have renewed that charge and designation by the way as a result of the fact that the first charge expired on its own terms.

CHRIS:                 

There's a couple of things, Chief, that I just love about what happened. First of all, Vermont, I'm guessing it's a lot like Montana where these smaller bars, it's just very easy to know lots of people, right?

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:         

Yeah.

CHRIS:             

And, to bring people to the table because you really did jump out in front of the movement, so to speak, in terms of... The report was released, but that was a call to action that you answered and we needed states like you to answer that call. That was such an important part of the growth of the well-being movement because you guys just kind of took the baton and ran.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

You know, Chris, there's sobering... Not meaning to make a pun, sobering things that are going on that really are very important for us to pay attention to. There's suicides, there are lawyers who are suffering from depression, anxiety, substance abuse. There was a front page... This is one of the things that motivated me by the way. In the front page article, you both may remember, in the business section of the Sunday New York Times about that time, about the summer of 2017-

BREE:             

Absolutely, yeah.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:   

Profiled a young father very, very successful lawyer in California who had two homes, as I remember it, including a home in, I think Nevada or one of the Western states, but lived in California, a very successful guy with a young family, two young kids and committed suicide. This is really a problem. I'll tell you something, you say we got out in front of it. It's not exactly you suggest that. Between the time that my court issued its charge and designation and the day I gave a speech to the bar in March of 2018 about the importance of this problem, we lost two lawyers in this state, two lawyers in this small state.

This is a problem that we cannot allow to languish. We have to bring attention to it, we have to bring our best efforts to trying to make sure that people understand this is something that has to be addressed.

BREE:            

And unfortunately, there are so many people when I get up and speak and talk to people in the audience about the issue of suicide, there are so many people, if you've been in the profession for very long at all, you know someone or know of someone-

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:             

That's right.

BREE:            

And, the only silver lining to that situation is that it has spurred a lot of changes in the profession.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

Bree, the first time you and I met was when telephoned you on your honeymoon, if you don't mind me bringing this up, I hope you-

BREE:            

You called me in New Zealand.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

In New Zealand. I got your number and you said, "Who is this guy trying to get a hold of me?" And, I was on a panel, I think with Shaheed maybe down in Miami at the University of Miami Law School.

BREE:            

Judge David Shaheed.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

Great guy, great, great guy and Jaffe was there was well.

BREE:              

David Jaffe.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

David Jaffe, our friend from American University Law School and we were there talking about this problem to a group, a very broad cross section of people by the way, and I remember telling them that our profession has changed, it has changed, it already has changed, and of course, we need to continue on this trend, but when I started practicing law back in the 70s and I mentioned this, lawyers I know, including myself by the way, would mark a trip to a court in another city 60 miles away, let's say Burlington, Vermont, by the number of beers that you would consume on the trip.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

All right? So, we would say, "Oh, I've got to go to court." Now, I'm not suggesting that we'd necessarily drink before the hearing, although many lawyers did, believe me, but it was the trip home. "I've got to go to court in Burlington this week, that's a two beer trip," somebody would say. This was very commonplace in my state and alcohol... There was a bar in my home of Rutland, Vermont called the Carriage Room and I'll bet there's a story similar in many, many other locations around the country. Lawyers would try a case down the street and go to the Carriage Room and wait for the jury's verdict and the clerk of the court knew where to find you.

You call the Carriage Room if you want to find Paul Reiber because that's where he's hanging out drinking with his buddies. That's the way it worked. So let me say, I gave up drinking many years ago because of the finally recognizing the problem. It was beginning to dominate my life. We had two kids in high school, I was drinking wine with dinner every night. My wife doesn't drink, she never has. It was not right and I felt like I was letting my family down and I gave it up and I'm pleased to say that, but this was very, very common among the trial bar in my state and I suspect that's not a unique story.

CHRIS:                 

Chief, let's talk a little bit about the state action plan. So, you brought the constituencies, the stakeholders together, you guys got to work. I love the notion and I love the recommendation that you're making to others who embark on this to set it up in a time frame basis [crosstalk 00:17:07]-

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

Right.

CHRIS:               

[crosstalk 00:17:07] let the clock start ticking in terms of what we needed to do, yet you really came out, and again, we're going to publish this in conjunction with the podcast on the National Task Force site, but your state action plan is really a phenomenal roadmap for recommendations and opportunities to advance well-being. I'd love for you to talk a little bit about what you're most proud of that's come out of that process on the state action plan front.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

Well, I'll tell you, to be honest, what I'm most proud of are the number of lawyers who have stepped forward to contribute to this effort. We had, as you know, Chris, several different committees that we formed, again, following the outline of the National Report, so we had a law school committee that was chaired by the dean of... We have one law school in Vermont, great guy named Tom McHenry. He's the dean and he chaired that committee. We had a lawyers committee that actually was co-chaired by an attorney from Burlington who essentially represented the large firm sector of the state and then a woman from the Northeast Kingdom part of Vermont who represented, if you will, the small firm segment of the state.

We had a regulators committee, we had a judges committee that my friend Bill Cohen chaired. These are people who... And, they each had, by the way, several volunteer lawyers and with the dean's situation, students and faculty, who stepped forward to participate in the effort, and the thing I'm most proud of is the fact that all of these people put themselves out, spoke publicly about the importance of this and brought their perspective on moving the ball forward with regard to addressing the real needs that I think the attorneys have and the judges by the way. I don't mean to leave judges out. I think the bench is a very important part of this and the student body, the students as well, law students as well.

BREE:        

Absolutely, and what I've seen just across in states is where the people who come to the table to work on this project find it so fulfilling. Lawyers care about the legal profession and one another, and so to be able to take affirmative action and step forward and do something about a problem that we all see, maybe not on ourselves, but over the course of our career and actually take some positive action. I'm wondering, out of the state action plan... That's the name on the document that came out from your work.

Some of the states have like a report and yours actually has a state action plan. Can you talk about some of the pieces in that action plan, the recommendations that you made that stick out?

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

Yeah, absolutely. The recommendations included, and these are things that we've actually done as well through the court's interventions, we amended the comments to rule 1.1 of the Vermont rules of professional conduct to acknowledge that maintaining a lawyer's well-being is an important aspect of maintaining competence in the practice of law. We amended the mandatory continuing legal education rules to require at least one credit hour per reporting period of attorney wellness programming.

We promulgated rule changes to create a bar assistance program within Vermont's professional responsibility program, those are changes that actually we just adopted and will take effect in, I think it's February 1 and I think importantly as well, we extended, as I alluded to earlier, the commission and commission's charge and designation and called upon the commission to annually review the progress of the state action plan and to report back to the Supreme Court on its progress, something that the first annual report under the renewed charge and designation issued just earlier this year in June.

So, that the focus is to attempt to bring life to the work in a way that acknowledges that there is no off/on switch to fixing this. It's not a matter that you simply... What we're talking about are problems in the human condition. These are behavioral problems, problems that need to be addressed through a thoughtful, respectful, empathetic means that help people along and bring them to a better understanding of their situation and feeling better about where they are and in particular about the practice of law.

CHRIS:               

I think the thing that's really exciting about what you have done there in Vermont is obviously, you took the National Report and used that as a template to build state-based, engaged lawyers around the committees. Again, for all our audience, this is about a 100-page report and it's chock full of... In each of the committee areas, the judges committee, the bar association, the regulators, the law school, legal employers. I know you've made some progress on the lawyer's assistance program front [crosstalk 00:23:53]. Again, I play the small role from the professional liability carrier.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

You sure did. You did and thank you for that.

CHRIS:               

And, it's really interesting because I think each one of those committees have both identified and begun to enact recommendations. There's five to 10 recommendations in each area, so if you're looking for ideas about what Vermont's done. Again, Vermont's a smaller state, obviously less than I think 5,000 lawyers and so-

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

That's right.

CHRIS:                

This is a really interesting template for a lot of other rural states out there that I think face similar issues in terms of either geographic distance or just demographics of the profession and I think our office was a little bit different when you get to the smaller bar size.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

And, the bar size does make a difference, the office size. We have a lot of sole practitioners in the state, small firm profiles in the state, and this is a problem that crosses all boundaries, large firms, small firm, and people have taken... The evidence is that people are taking this seriously and really I think putting effort into addressing the needs that we've got.

CHRIS:               

Excellent. This is I think a good time for us to take a break. Let's hear from one of our sponsors. This is an awesome conversation and I just love what's going on in Vermont, and so we'll be back right after the break.

—

Advertisement:

Your law firm is worth protecting, and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and buying coverage all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard, our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com.

—

BREE:            

Welcome back, everybody. This is Bree Buchanan and we have our guest today Chief Justice Paul Reiber of the Vermont Supreme Court and we're having a wonderful, very candid conversation here today. And so, Chief, we've heard about the process of developing the state action plan for Vermont and it's been about two years, I believe, since that was published, coming up on... I think the date on it is December 31st, 2018.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:             

Right.

BREE:              

What has been the trajectory of the well-being movement in Vermont since its publication?

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

Well, one of the things I'd like to do is sing the praises of the Vermont Bar Association. Teri Corsones, and the leadership, the board, the president, these folks have been extremely instrumental in keeping the news of the need for lawyers to address this alive. We are seeing it's a little bit difficult to put your finger on it given the virus and the fact that face-to-face meetings have suspended for the last several months, but the bar association had their regular meetings and we have an independent bar association by the way. It is not connected to the court. It's not within the court, but they have specifically identified wellness seminars for everyone of their meetings that they're offering, which is terrific.

In addition to that, Mike Kennedy, terrific Mike Kennedy and Teri Corsones in the VBA are publishing regularly in the Bar Association Journal a story about a lawyer in Vermont who... I forget the title of it, but it's basically about how to maintain balance in your life, how to... They profile an attorney who has a great road running program that they follow and profile that. Somebody else who is very involved in art in a way that, it's a project that helps them maintain balance in their life.

This is I think very, very important to keeping this issue fresh in people's minds and in addition to this, Mike tells me that some of the larger firms actually are bringing him in to speak to their lawyers during the noon hour. Again, this was before the pandemic, to provide them with ideas and incentive for maintaining balance in their lives. So, I'm very, very pleased about the work of the bar in this respect and I give credit to the folks that are really carrying the heavy load on it.

CHRIS:               

It sounds like there's been a real commitment on behalf of, again, all the players involved to just keep this issue front and center because it's, again, if we don't tackle it, nobody's going to tackle it because it's the life, that's the profession that we're currently in and there's certainly room for improvement there.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

Well, years ago I met with a great trial lawyer out in Salt Lake City about reforming the civil rules in my state, something that they had done in Utah and were very successful with and I had this lawyer's name who spearheaded the project and I had lunch with him and I said to him, "Francis, tell me, how can I do this back home in Vermont?" He said, "What you need is a guy like me." Because he was the one who really pushed it through. He was a trial lawyer and he headed the thing up.

Well, I would tell you that I've got people like Teri Corsones and Michael Kennedy who writes a blog the two of you may be aware of, which is really excellent and frequently addresses wellness issues. Mike is just a champion in this regard, so we have real heroes in this respect and I think this is one of the keys to making this work is to find people who are willing and have a genuine interest in committing to addressing this problem.

CHRIS:                 

Well, let's not negate your role from the head of the judiciary. Again, I think I'm making an observation I think is true, which is when we have seen judiciary engagement on well-being, the wheels of progress and the wheels of success and creativity and initiatives has really flourished. So, I'd love for you to just talk about, again, your role from the chief justice perspective and then I know how much this issue has also caught hold as something that's being discussed amongst the Conference of Chief Justices.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

It is, yeah.

CHRIS:             

Which is really, I think, impressive in terms of your... As leaders of our profession, you're contemplating and appreciating just how important this is to the health and well-being of our profession and out ability to serve society.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

I think it actually is remarkable how the interest... This has sparked an interest for reform if you want, in this area in terms of some of the rule changes that I've mentioned that we've made here and simply embracing the need to bring the problems to the forefront and talk about it and get people's attention on it, it has, across the country. I see colleagues, chiefs in other states, one after another who have formed these commissions. I'd like to remember, as a matter of fact in that regard, my friend Ralph Gants who passed away suddenly about a month ago, was a chief justice of the SJC in Massachusets.

BREE:              

Right.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:    

Ralph had started, before he died, and I attended his memorial virtually actually, but of course that was put on by Northeaster University Law School, a really wonderful tribute to him, but he had started a project just like this. We had talked about it. As a matter of fact, he and I were on a panel at a New England Bar Association meeting a few years ago, along with Paul Suttell from Rhode Island and we all talked to the members of the New England Bar about this and the interest that we all shared in promoting this in our respective states and Ralph had done great work in this regard in bringing it forward with the Massachusetts Bar, but I see it... Hawaii, Mark Recktenwald is the chief out there.

Mark has started a project. He and I talked about that. It is really taking hold across the country and I think it is a recognition of the need for sea change from those days I mentioned. Back in the 70s when I started practicing law, and the trips, the court, and I think everybody is recognizing that this is a moment that we need to change our perspective and I'm really pleased to see it.

BREE:              

It's really encouraging and it makes you feel like it's the right idea at the right time the way it has taken off and-

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

Isn't that true?

BREE:            

Yeah, and on the homepage of our website, the lawyerwellbeing.net, if you scroll down, there's an interactive map where you can see all the states that are taking this on and it's just such a delight every time we can go in and highlight another state where a Supreme Court or a state bar has taken this one and done a multi-stakeholder initiative and I think there's 32 or 33 states, so-

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:  

That's terrific.

BREE:            

Absolutely. Chief, before we go, I don't want to pass up all the opportunity to ask you about just any lessons learned in this process. Any lessons learned that you can pass on to other states, maybe other Supreme Court justices or just people, state bar leaders that are thinking they want to start their own well-being task force or something similar? What would you share with them?

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER: 

You know, Bree, I think picking up on what I said a few moments ago, I think a key to getting it started is identifying two or three people in your jurisdiction who are thoughtful in this direction and interested in this direction and begin to put together the seeds of a project like ours and then build it and build it in a way that it has the force and the authority of the Supreme Court, something I would imagine is available in every jurisdiction once they have attention brought to the issue.

I think the people, and identifying the right people is extremely important, but the other thing I would say is don't wait. You can't wait. There are people who are dealing with these problems, they need help. We need to be in the forefront of helping them. We are in a profession that has susceptibility, great susceptibility to these issues and as leaders, we need to tackle those issues. So, don't wait, identify the key people who can help get the project off the ground and then engage your court to support the effort into the outset.

CHRIS:               

One final question that I would ask you is, as we think about where this movement goes, I live in the business world and we're always talking about what our key success indicators are and how do you think about the well-being movement in the health and the vibrancy of our profession? I'm just kind of curious to your perspective on, how do we measure success in terms of getting to a point that we feel better than obviously we are today in knowing that there's a long road ahead of us, but how do we measure success?

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

You saved the toughest question for the last, Chris. That's not fair. How do we measure success? Huh? That's a tough question.

CHRIS:             

It's a little off-script [crosstalk 00:38:13]-

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:             

No, no, no, no, that's all right. I don't mean that. That's a tough chore. I think part of what we do is we make sure that we're accountable for the work that we start. I don't like the idea of just starting a project like this and letting it mature on its own schedule, on its own timetable and then not having some accountability back to an authority like the Supreme Court. It doesn't have to be I suppose, but I think that the court and the justices can play a very important role in that regard.

So, accountability and putting people on a time I think are very, very important in terms of trying to find success, but measuring success, boy, I don't know what the answer to that is. I have a feeling that there is success in this regard just because of the work the two of you have done and obviously the success that you're having in bringing this word out to the profession, but data, I don't know. I don't know how you would do that.

I think the problem is, I mentioned, it's part of the human condition and it is something that we all struggle with in a fashion in our own personal lives and it's not something, like I said before, that you just can turn the switch on and off. So, I think it's a very important problem that we have in front of us and we have to keep talking about it.

CHRIS:           

For sure.

BREE:            

Absolutely.

CHRIS: 

Well, thank you so much, Chief Justice Paul Reiber of the Vermont Supreme Court. You've been a leader in our movement and I know that you just brought an idea home and I got things rolling, but these are the small steps that lead to the big steps that lead to a ripple effect that ultimately allowed Vermont to go out front and start to pave the way to a pathway toward a recognition that to be a good lawyer you have to be a healthy lawyer and that ultimately our ability as a profession to be able to deliver to society is premised on perhaps speaking about the way that we attack the profession in just a little bit of a different way.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:           

Well, thank you both for what you're doing.

BREE:              

Thank you.

CHIEF JUSTICE REIBER:             

Much appreciated.

CHRIS:               

Absolutely. All right, so we will be back in a couple of weeks with another well-being guest and until then, stay well out there. I know we're in the midst of the pandemic and I know we are at a point now around the country where numbers are as high as they've ever been, which again, I think creates more challenges when it comes to both the administration of justice, but also the health and well-being of lawyers and probably time for us to bring in a couple of guests to actually talk specifically about how COVID has impacted the well-being of lawyers, so stay tuned for that on the horizon and until then, be well. Thanks for joining us.

BREE:            

Thank you.

 

Path To Well-Being In Law Podcast: Episode 8 - Martha Knudson

Martha Knudson, J.D., MAPP is the Executive Director of the Utah State Bar’s Well-Being Committee for the Legal Profession working with Utah’s judges, lawyers, and law students to enhance engagement, performance, resilience, and overall well-being. As part of her role, she also advises researchers at the University of Utah conducting empirical research of lawyers and law students in the western United States. Prior to working in the well-being field, Martha practiced law for almost 18 years. She earned her law degree in 1999, graduating magna cum laude. After passing the bar Martha became a litigator in private law-firm practice where she rose to the rank of shareholder. She later became General Counsel of a leading real estate management company where she was provided legal over-site on all aspects of the company’s national operations, advised leadership, and worked with the messy reality of keeping a business and its people thriving. In 2015, Martha earned a master’s degree in Applied Positive Psychology from The University of Pennsylvania where she has since served as an Assistant Instructor to the graduate program. Martha also works with private clients and regularly speaks and publishes articles on well-being in the law. She recently contributed a chapter in the book The Best Lawyer You Can Be: A Guide to Physical, Mental, Emotional, and Spiritual Wellness.

 

Transcript:

CHRIS NEWBOLD:                

Hello, and welcome to episode eight of The National Task Force on Lawyer Wellbeing Podcast Series, The Path to Wellbeing in Law. I'm your cohost, Chris Newbold, the executive vice president of ALPS Malpractice Insurance. And our goal here is simple, to introduce you to cool people doing awesome work in the space of lawyer wellbeing, and in the process, build and nurture a national network of wellbeing advocates intent on creating a culture shift within the legal profession. I'm joined today by my friend and fellow co-chair of The National Taskforce, Bree Buchanan. Bree, welcome.

BREE BUCHANAN:               

Thanks, Chris. Good to be here.

CHRIS:                

Yeah. And today, we're going to continue an evolution that we've done over the last two podcasts, which is kind of a march around the states. We started in Virginia. We spent some time with Heidi Alexander in Massachusetts, and we really do kind of feel like the states are really kind of getting out front, testing new wellbeing initiatives and commitment, making investments in wellbeing in terms of the health of their members and the health of the profession. And as we know, movements generally are driven by things that happen at the grassroots level. And so today, we're going to kind of continue that. And a few states have jumped out front. One of them is the state of Utah. And we're very excited to have us joined today by Martha Knudson, who is the executive director of the Utah State Bar's Wellbeing Committee for the Legal Profession. And Martha is the byproduct of some work that's happened in Utah, and we're really excited about some of the things happening in Utah and excited to welcome Martha to the podcast. So Bree, would you be so kind to introduce Martha?

BREE:               

Absolutely. And Martha, just welcome. We're so delighted to have you. So Martha Knudson, prior to working in the wellbeing field, she practiced law for 18 years. She was a litigator in a private law firm practice. She was also general council of a leading real estate management company. And then, of course, I imagine there's a story here, hopefully we'll hear it, in 2015, Martha's career took a turn and she pursued ... Well, she earned at that point in time, a master's degree in applied positive psychology from the University of Pennsylvania. And she now regularly speaks and publishes articles on wellbeing in the law, as well as the great work that she's doing at the Utah bar. So welcome, Martha.

I wanted to ... We always ask our guests a question at the very beginning. And it's about what brought you to the wellbeing movement, what experiences in your life are really drivers behind what I know is that you have a passion for this work.

MARTHA KNUDSON:            

That is a great question. And as you so deftly noticed, there is a story. I was attracted to the wellbeing in law movement for very personal reasons. Because I really suffered from burnout, depression, and anxiety that got kind of manifested when I was in private practice, about the third year of practice at my firm. I remember just suddenly not being happy. Life had no color. I felt like I was going to grow old and die behind my desk, but I kept putting my head down and working and working because I wanted to excel in the profession. I wanted to learn how to be a litigator. I wanted to make partner, and I did all those things. Right?

But it wasn't like ... I always thought, "I'll be happy when." But by the time I got to 10 years into my practice, I was miserable, burnt out, all the rest, and so I walked away from my partnership, and thought I was just washing my hands of it. I really figured that I could either do well as a lawyer, or be happy in my life. So retirement didn't last long. I got talked out of it to go work for a great company as their general counsel. And as I made the decision to do so, I thought, "I want to do this differently. I want to see if I can do well at work and as an attorney, and be well in my life."

So I went out and I started doing research. So all good research is me-search. So I came across, as I'm looking. How can you thrive in your career in your life? So I found the science of positive psychology, which is really the science of optimal human performance and thriving. And I learned about focusing on strengths and protective factors, and how to work better with my emotions and cognitive processes, and all the different things that science tells us goes into increased wellbeing. And I learned that doing well, or being well in your life, really drives doing well [inaudible 00:05:31]. Yeah. I'd be making a false choice.

So that is what led me back to school, so ended up going and getting my master's degree while still working full-time and remodeling my house. So that actually probably was not the best wellbeing choice, little overloaded there. But yeah, and as I came out, I made the decision to step back from the practice in favor of serving the profession.

BREE:            

Yeah. I just want to echo some things that you said earlier that really popped out to me when you talked about being in the practice, and you said, "Life had no color." And that's just a great phrase, really. When I was with the lawyer's assistance program in Texas for about a decade, and I heard that, and I could just envision that as when I had so many people call, they were just really unhappy in their lives and unhappy in their practice. And it was manifesting as depression, or anxiety, or et cetera. Yeah, I just wanted to kind of capture that a little bit.

CHRIS:                

Yeah. And Martha, what a bold move. Right? I mean, most people don't have that willpower to be able to say, "I've climbed the mountain. I'm at the partnership level," but then to really kind of look inside and say, "But am I really, truly satisfied in where I'm at?"

MARTHA:            

Well, thank you. It felt like a lifesaver for me at the time. But I know I had lots of colleagues that ... Well, it was interesting. I had some that were scratching their heads. But I had others, I had partners that came into my office and said, "I will deny this if you ever use my name, but I wish I could do what you're doing. Go. Run free. Be free." And that was interesting to me to hear that from people that they were envious of the decision that I was making. And it's too bad because it doesn't need to be that way. And the more that I've learned about the science of wellbeing and performance and the rest, and the more I interact with attorneys on this end, it really doesn't need to be that way. The law is an incredible profession, and we all deserve, and frankly, society deserves for lawyers to be doing well.

BREE:          

Well said.

CHRIS:                 

Well, let's talk a little bit about Utah. Right? And I'm curious, and I have a little bit of experience with Utah because I was actually on your task force, although not as probably actively involved as I should have been, but which oftentimes happens. But obviously, the Utah Supreme Court, you have a couple of great leaders in Justice Paige Peterson and your former bar president, Dickson Burton. And you guys get going, and you launched this task force. Talk about that process and how that came together, how long the task force worked, and how you finished that phase of where that phase took you, and where we are now.

MARTHA:              

Great. Well, so it really was the brainchild of Chief Justice Matthew Durrant. And this came as a result of the incredible task force report that you folks were a big part of. So Justice Durrant and Justice Peterson, they just dove into that report, and they answered the call that was made to states, bar associations, courts, et cetera, to take a look at lawyer wellbeing. And so they brought in Dickson Burton, who was an incredible leader, and they formed this task force. And it was really important to Justice Peterson and Dickson Burton to have thought leaders on this task force, thought leaders in firms, in law schools, in small practice, solo practice, across the courts, different judges, and to also have different experts be a part of this because they wanted to put something out that people would notice and listen to.

And so I was fortunate enough to be on this task force because of the combination of my experience practicing law and my positive psychology expertise. So we sat down together about once a month for I think it was nine or 10 months, and we really used that national task force report as a blueprint for how to operate. And we followed along with the recommendations that were in that task force report, which was beautiful not to have to reinvent the wheel. And we came up with different recommendations for the various stakeholders in the Utah legal profession, for example, the courts, lawyers, law students in law schools, the bar, regulators, et cetera.

And one of the primary recommendations that the task force made, and this was near and dear to my heart, was to have a baseline assessment done using scientific measures by the science guys to figure out where Utah sits. We have that national study, which was so instrumental in galvanizing this movement. But does Utah look just like that? Are we the same? Are we different? Are we better in some areas, worse in others? And we also wanted to try to drill down to see. Are there pockets of different types of practice, or age, or whatever, or rural versus urban, where lawyers are doing better, or lawyers are doing worse? So we can get some clues on where we should be focusing our efforts.

So we are working with the University of Utah School of Medicine, an occupational epidemiologist named Dr. Matthew Thiese. And he came in and we worked together to put a survey out. So that is, so the recommendations and the beginning of this lawyer study kind of started at the same time. And in the midst of all this, the decision was made to convert the task force to a permanent standing committee under the Utah State Bar's umbrella. And the purpose of the task ... Excuse me. The purpose of the committee is to carry out the recommendations of the task force. And so that is where we are now, is we are working on those recommendations and the study is ... We have results back on the baseline study, and we are still analyzing data and working forward on that as well.

BREE:            

I had heard about the study that you were doing, and really excited about it and the implications that it can have for other states as well. Do you have a sense of when it's going to be completed or the data will be available?

MARTHA:            

Yes. I actually can give you some of the data now. So we continue to pull in more data using the same survey. But the preliminary data was made available at the beginning of 2020. And I'll tell you a little bit about that. And then we continue to collect data as we go along, and the study will morph. But the preliminary data that we are seeing is there's some good and there's some troubling. Let's start with the positive. Right? So we are seeing actually, there are areas that lawyers in Utah are doing really well. About 46% of us have a moderate or high level of job satisfaction, which is awesome. And there's things that lawyers have answered when we've asked, dug in on why that is. Lawyers in Utah that say they are satisfied with their job, they really enjoy collaborating and working with others. They like that connection piece, which we know from the science, how important that is to motivation and wellbeing and performance.

They like intellectual challenge. Those folks enjoy knowing that their contributions matter, that they have a sense of meaning and purpose in their work. And all those things are really great to find that out because we're seeing that those are areas that are right for us to go and see if we can create more of that for more of the population.

BREE:            

Absolutely. Yeah.

MARTHA:          

So those are the positives. There were some really troubling results though that we found. So as we did this research, we were really mindful about how we set it up because we used a lot of different measures. But one measure in particular that we used is called the PHQ-9, and it's a measure that is used a ton. There's really reliable, valid, and it measures depressive symptoms or likelihood to have clinical depression and also measures suicide, or your suicidal ideation and those kinds of things because that's something that we've been concerned about because of what we've seen nationally and also anecdotal evidence. And we also chose that measure because there is a national data collection set that comes out every couple years called the NHANES. And we wanted to be able to compare what our population here in Utah, the Utah lawyers, look like compared to people in the national general working population. How do we compare?

So what we found is that lawyers in Utah are five times more likely to experience depressive symptoms than the general working population. About 44.4% of responding lawyers reported feelings of depression. And from our data, we are seeing that it indicates about 15% have a serious depressive disorder, and that is really troubling.

BREE:        

That is. And so Martha, let me ask just real quick. When you talk about comparing lawyers with the working population, is that just all workers in the population? Or is that lawyers?

MARTHA:            

That's all workers in the population.

BREE:          

Okay. Okay.

MARTHA:        

Yeah. So we want to see: If you're a lawyer, rather than just generally employed individual, does that increase your risk of developing some of the occupational hazards that we too often see in our profession? And so along those lines, I'll give you two more numbers, and then but I think there's a lot more encouraging that's coming out. But we're seeing about 48.7% of the Utah lawyers responding are reporting some level of burnout. And burnout I think is something a lot of us can relate to on some level. And it's very common, can happen to anybody in any job. But it is a risk factor for developing some of these other more serious problems that we see.

BREE:          

And Martha, just real quick. Is that 48.7 burnout, percent of burnout, I assume that's pre COVID. Right?

MARTHA:              

Yes. Yes. This is all pre COVID data. The data that we collected is pre COVID that's going into these numbers that I'm telling you. And then we'll see. I'm curious as we move forward with continuing data collection, if we see an uptick in some of these, both positive or negative. Right? Because it could be that we see some positive things come out of that as well. But one last number that I'd like to just share with you because it is really guiding a lot of our work here in Utah and I think it's something that nationally we all should be paying attention to.

So there is a question in that NHANES measure that we talked about that asks: How often do you have thoughts of being better off dead or of hurting yourself? And what we have found is that lawyers in Utah are 8.5 times more likely to report thoughts of being better off dead or hurting yourself than compared to the general working population, and that is very sobering.

BREE:        

That is. Let me real quick, because I think people will be listening, and they're trying to compare thinking about their state compared to what you're talking about. How many lawyers in Utah? What size is the bar?

MARTHA:          

We have a little shy of 10,000 that are active.

BREE:              

Okay. Yeah. That's helpful.

CHRIS:                

And your survey sample size ended up being generally what?

MARTHA:            

Our survey sample size was about 700, so we had a statistically significant number. And we sampled from across geography, age, gender, all the things. So we have a really good sample that is very reliable.

CHRIS:              

Yeah.

BREE:          

That report, has that been written up, reduced to writing, and is that available anywhere?

MARTHA:          

So the preliminary numbers that I talked about today, they are available. They came out in an article to the Utah State Bar. They're available on our wellbeing website, which is wellbeing.utahbar.org, under data on Utah lawyers. And then there are, we're drilling down even further into the data on a lot of the other measures we're looking at. And we've got some articles that are out for publication right now, and so those are not available yet, but they should be available hopefully within the next few months. [crosstalk 00:20:30]. And I'm happy to answer questions to anybody that's interested. Or I could connect them with our researcher. I know Dr. Thiese has been speaking with several other states about using the same survey we developed, and all of us working together on this.

BREE:              

Great. Right. So for people who are listening, if you scroll down if you can see this online, in the transcript, we'll have links that Martha was just talking about if people want to be able to access that.

CHRIS:                 

Yeah. Martha, first of all, I want to commend again the leadership there because I think, I mean, obviously, we're an evidence-based profession. Right? And I think that probably goes to kind of one of the things that you were thinking about, which is we need to be able to document the issue as it relates to Utah lawyers to then kind of know where we're at and where we need to get to. I'm curious how much you needed to spend for the survey because I know one of the things that I oftentimes recommend to state task forces is some type of a survey apparatus. Sometimes it's more of the informal, unscientific method, which is still important because you're still doing a lot of education through the survey tool itself. You went a much more kind of academic scientifically based method, so I'm just kind of wondering what type of resources you invested to be able to produce that.

MARTHA:            

Well, we pulled a rabbit out of a hat a little bit here. And the bar originally, and the courts were thinking of hiring a survey company. And myself and a couple other members of the task force really lobbied against that because we wanted to have that evidence-based scientific survey, so we could know that what we were asking, we were getting correct, reliable answers. So then we can measure again to see if we moved the needle, all those things. And we were fortunate enough to have connection to Dr. Thiese, and he comes at it from the population standpoint instead of an individual, looking at what's going on in the population.

And we talked to Matt, and he was willing to pitch in and do this for us for a very reasonable sum. At the time, I believe we paid him less than 15 grand to do this. And I'll tell you, he has put in so much time and effort and resources above and beyond that amount, that it's been phenomenal. And I know he's very willing to work with other states on this and to help them out and do what he can with the resources that they have. But also, we're out right now in the community talking to other organizations, working on getting grants because what we'd like to do with this research is expand it far beyond Utah and start doing some interventional studies where we get in and you tweak something to see if it changes.

And Dr. Thiese and his partners are out there right now trying to find grant money so we can do this. So support of anyone listening that would like to be involved in this is invited.

CHRIS:

Yeah. Very interesting. And I'm curious whether the scope at all addressed any of the corresponding causation issues. Or was there any movement into that area in terms of just the overall scope of the survey?

MARTHA:              

Yes. The data that's come out thus far has been very focused on what we're finding with some of these outcomes, I guess, if that's the right way to say it. But we also, we could've had a huge, long survey. And I was like, "Let's add this, and let's add this," and using all my positive psychology background. But we decided, we pinpointed a few areas to look at, to see if we could get some clues. Right?

So one of the areas that we are looking at, and did look at with the survey, is social support, and the perceptions that people have that they are supported, belong in their organizations, in the community, in their lives outside of work. So social support is something that is incredibly important, and we are doing the analysis right now to see correlations between perceived social support and where you sit on some of these other measures. So we looked at that, we looked at work engagement. We looked at how often people are moving, on the physical movement piece of that. I'm sure I'm forgetting stuff. It's been a while since I've looked at the survey.

But yeah, we are definitely trying to look at the causation piece, and that's something we will continue to dig into because this survey, we see it as a real starting point because that's what we want to do, is get to the causation. Right? We want to see what's going on and why this is happening. So this gives us a place to really drill down. For example, if you see one area of practice, like family law, and if we see that folks in family law tend to be having a harder time with some of these wellbeing measures than others. What are they doing differently? So we can go back and work with some of these same study participants. The University of Utah can. This is all confidential. Right? I don't know who said what, and nor should I know, nor should the bar know. And they won't. But to see what clues we can get, so then we can start build out some ... To find out the cause, and then build out interventions.

CHRIS:

Yeah. Awesome. It's interesting having kind of looked at this issue and monitored obviously over the last several years that the growth of the scientific approach in our space is something that is a real opportunity for us. And I think we're all thankful that both you and Utah in general is kind of jumping out in front because I think that documenting the issues and understanding causation, that's going to allow us to ultimately to be more surgical in our approach on what levers we need to pull to improve the overall wellbeing of the profession, which obviously then leads to a better legal system in general.

MARTHA:              

Right. One thing I didn't mention that I'd love to just throw out there for all the listeners is the focus that Utah is moving toward on organizations. As part of our study, we have enrolled, oh gosh, I can't remember the exact number, but I think it's nine, between nine and 12 law firms to participate in the survey as an organization. So we can start to suss out: Why is one organization doing better than another? So we can see some clues there because organization and culture has such an incredible impact on wellbeing. We talk about wellbeing a lot as individual things that we all can do, and they're very important. Right?

But the fish bowl that we swim in is just as, if not more so, important to our wellbeing. So the more we can see what our culture is like, what our organizations are doing that help our wellbeing, and that could cut against it, I think the more we can really get to the bottom of what's happening to cause some of these problems. And what are people doing that are lending ... What are organizations doing that are helping lawyers to thrive?

CHRIS:              

Yeah. Well, let's take a break here. I'd like to come back, Martha, and talk more about just kind of where you're at in your day to day, what you're hoping to accomplish as you kind of think about the various pathways that you've selected to pursue. And then obviously, words of wisdom that you have for other states who are embarking either on this journey or embarking on the journey, so let's take a quick break and we'll be back.

— 

Advertisement:                       

Your law firm is worth protecting and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and find coverage all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com.

— 

BREE:          

Welcome back, everybody. We've got with us today, Martha Knudson, who is the director of the Utah Bar's Wellbeing Committee for the Legal Profession. And we've been talking about some really interesting data that's coming out of the survey that they're doing. But Martha, I wanted to hear. What else is the committee working on right now?

MARTHA:            

Well, there's a lot. Let's see if I can give you some broad areas that we have been working on and seeing some success. One area that Utah has really done well with is communicating that wellbeing is important. And we're doing so using several mediums. We regularly have wellbeing related articles in our bar journal. At every CLE conference that we have, there is a track that is discussing different wellbeing related areas, so we're seeing that. We've got social media that is posting. We are using our monthly e-bulletin and putting out little wellbeing bites and news on that area. So we're really promoting and getting out and talking about the importance of wellbeing. And we're seeing that branch to beyond the wellbeing committee into other committees that are starting to take up the same push with the importance of wellbeing.

We're also working on increasing education and teaching people about what are the protective factors to some of the things that we're seeing. And also, many of us don't ever experience those things. But how can we go from where we are to even doing better? How can we really thrive in the practice of law? And it was recently after COVID hit, we did a three part resilience series for lawyers, and had an overwhelming response. I was amazed. We had over 500 people on every session that we offered.

BREE:      

That's amazing.

MARTHA:       

Yeah, that was super encouraging to see lawyers talking about that, so we're doing those things. We're working on stigma reduction. We are really pushing awareness of resources available. How do you get access to them? Gosh, what else? I could go on and on. We're working on amending some of the rules of professionalism to expand the definition to allow for more programming in that area. And that is something is very supported within the MCLE board and the rest, and that's pending.

BREE:              

That's great. That's such an important piece.

MARTHA:            

Yeah. The law schools are doing awesome things. Both law schools have dedicated counselors for the students, so we're really seeing a push. But right now, so much of it has to do with education, getting people to recognize or understand. What is wellbeing? Why does it matter? And how do we start? And we put together a couple of phase one best practices for organizations and individuals to give people that place to start.

CHRIS:            

Yeah. One of the things that we talk a lot about on the podcast and encourage our guests to opine on is: What are ultimately the drivers of the culture shift that we're trying to engineer? And it sounds like in Utah, you've put a lot of your marbles into the education space. The more that we can make people aware, the more that we can build a set of practitioners and others associated with the legal professional that are aware of the realities of our profession, that's going to go a long way in terms of ultimately having us think through just a different lens than we do today.

MARTHA:           

Right, right. And I think in Utah, we put our eggs in, let's see, probably three broad baskets. I might add one as I speak, but we'll see. So one would be research. Where are we? So we know where we are and where we're going. We talked about that. The other one is education. What is wellbeing? And why should you care? Even if you don't care about people being happen, even though it's the right thing to do, you should care because it makes you a better lawyer. And better lawyers can pack the bottom line. Right? Organizations, your lawyers are your assets, so that.

And number three, resources, providing ... What are the things that people can build within themselves and within their organizations? Which is part of education. Right? What can you do to actually start to move the needle? Where do you start? So those are probably the big three that we have focused on first. And within those, there's just so much stuff going on. But yeah, that's really where we're starting because if you want to ... Culture change is hard. Right? It is very hard to turn the Titanic. Well, I guess that's probably not. I shouldn't say Titanic. It's really hard to turn a really large ship. Lawyers are not the Titanic. That was probably a bad use of example.

But culture is hard to change, and it takes education. It takes leaders being willing to stand up and talk about why wellbeing is important, and then walk the talk. This is COVID and the coronavirus is actually something I think, one of the silver linings is that I think that is going to drive a culture change because it's been speeding up the process of getting our profession to recognize that wellbeing is bound up with everything that we do as a lawyer. Our wellbeing is vital to our ability to practice well and do so sustainably. And so where it was even eight months ago, we're starting to see the conversation get bigger and bigger. But it's also easily put by leaders and a lot of organizations kind of pushed aside, or pushed off to HR or something, that just HR deals with.

And now we have this situation where work is disrupted, and things have gone a little bit bonkers. And you have law firm leaders that are recognizing they have to care about the wellbeing of their people if they want this workforce to be sustainable. And so I think that is going to drive culture change in a really positive way.

CHRIS:             

Those are interesting insights. I think we've all spent time in our shelter in place positions, and just had a lot of time to reflect. Right? What is it that we want? And what is our position? What is our family? What is our firm? I'm really kind of thinking about those big picture issues that I think you're right, that the pandemic has been a very interesting time I think, and potentially a real disruptive force for the betterment on the wellbeing front.

MARTHA:            

Agreed.

CHRIS:              

Yeah. Let's talk a little bit about, Martha, your role. You're the executive director. I presume that you're working full-time. But talk to me about just kind of your commitment because we do need folks who play the point guard position and can kind of lead the symphony, if you will. And I'm just kind of curious on you and your role with the Utah State Bar.

MARTHA:             

Yeah. My role with the Utah State Bar looks a little different I think than my counterparts. There's the few of us out there. So I actually am not a full-time employee of the bar. I contract with the bar for about 10 hours of my time a week to focus on wellbeing efforts and to take the recommendations of the task force and now the committee and move them forward. And this is really, this position was really the brainchild of Justice Paige Peterson, who she thought, "We have all these great ideas, and we have all these folks on the committee and in the court and the bar, who really care about wellbeing." But unless you have somebody that's paid for it, it's really difficult to make that the top priority. Right?

So that's my relationship with the bar, so I do that work. And then I do other things as well. But yeah, that's how it's worked out. And it's really been interesting to me how much we can get done with that amount of time. [crosstalk 00:38:42].

CHRIS:              

I think there's oftentimes, we kind of feel like, boy, if we can't have a full-time person, we're just not going to be able to make a difference. And I think that you're proving in Utah that in fact, with very limited resources and a limited allocation of a state bar, a state supreme court, you can actually make a huge difference with something that's far less significant than what we're seeing in states like Virginia and Massachusetts, where you're actually seeing kind of lawyer assessments on bar dues. Right?

MARTHA:            

Right.

CHRIS:        

That there's some real opportunity out there for smaller states, let's call it states less than 25,000 lawyers to really invest in wellbeing, but to do it in kind of innovative and contract labor-based ways.

MARTHA:           

Right, right. Yeah. I think that it would be absolutely wonderful to have access to more resources. And we'll see where that all goes, not just in Utah, but in other states. But I think if you want to get your state moving forward with wellbeing, you certainly need to have a group of thought leaders in the community that people listen to, so you need a group of those folks. And then if you can have somebody that is dedicated [inaudible 00:40:05] with their time, paid, to moving initiatives forward, I think that makes a huge difference. And I would say it's very important to have an attorney do that if at all possible.

The benefit that I have with my position, and I'm certainly not super unique in this, I guess I am to some extent, but that I have ... I practiced law for 18 years. I know what it's like to be a law firm partner. I know what it's like to be general council and run cases and try cases and do all the things. So I know what it's like. And then I also have the positive psychology expertise side of it. So you don't have to have necessarily that expertise. But I think to have someone that has experience as an attorney take this forward is something that does make a difference. But it is definitely something that states can do on a limited budget.

BREE:            

And so Martha, I'm just really, one of the things we like to ask is: What are the secrets to your success, your state's success so far? And one common theme, which I definitely see in Utah is that you have strong leadership from the Supreme Court in getting this started. Are there other secrets to your success that you want to share that you haven't already?

MARTHA:         

Well, yeah, you're right on the strong leadership. Having folks that are visible in the community and that walk the talk is a definite benefit. Right? That's a secret to our success. I think the science side of it, really look at evidence based decisions is something that is valuable. Another secret to the success that we've been seeing, I think is a willingness of those same leaders that we discussed being able to be vulnerable and authentic about why their wellbeing matters and what they do to take care of it.

And we've had a push, and this is part of the anti stigma campaign too, we've had several of our leaders that are on the committee and otherwise, stand up. And of course, we've had some that are in recovery and have said, "Hey, look. This is my path. This is what happened to me. This is what I do now to stay on track." And then we have others though that say, and well respected in the community, that we've had panels and that have stood up to say, "Look. This is how I take care of my mental health." The old stereotypical law firm male partner, I go to therapy every couple weeks. I schedule time to do this. I schedule time with my friends. I make sure I do this. And so we have those leaders that people are like, "Well, that guy can do this. I can do this." So I think that is huge.

BREE:              

It is.

MARTHA:            

And also, I have to give a shout out to the culture of the Utah Bar. Folks here tend to be pretty helpful and care about each other, so that has been a secret to our success, is just that we have that culture.

BREE:            

On the flip side, are there any things I guess that you've learned the hard way that you'd want to warn other folks about trying to follow in Utah's footsteps?

MARTHA:            

Yes. One of the big ones that I keep seeming to have to learn and tell myself and our committee, we have to tell ourselves, is you can't eat the elephant all at once. It is small steps. Right? One step at a time. And celebrate small wins, and recognize that, hey, look where we were five years ago compared to now. So one small step at a time and recognize that this is a marathon, not a sprint because it's easy for me to get in my head and start thinking, "Oh, we should already have this all done by now," which is crazy talk, but that is ... So you can end up getting in that bucket.

Another lesson that I have learned the hard way through a lot of different experiences, but I've tried to use that lesson now, is the more you can make small shifts in things that are already happening, meet people where they are, and make small shifts. For example, we want to get the message out about wellbeing. And so I thought, "Some states have done a whole new wellbeing newsletter, all these things," and that's wonderful. But we don't have the budget or the bandwidth to build that up. So how can I use what's already there to start pushing that message out? So that is a big lesson.

And also, another thing that I've had to keep reminding myself, and I think I said this, meet people where they are. So in the world that I have become immersed in with wellbeing, both working with the University of Pennsylvania positive psychology program, being on the wellbeing committee, talking to all you folks nationally, is you start to forget that there's a lot of folks that still need ... They don't know what we're talking about with wellbeing. They need to understand the basics again, and again, and again, and again, and again. So that's you can't just say it once and then jump to the next five things.

BREE:              

They don't see the world through our eyes.

MARTHA:            

Exactly. Exactly. You've got to meet people where they are.

CHRIS:                

Heidi, one ... Sorry. Martha, one final question. Optimistic or concern about what lies ahead on the wellbeing front?

MARTHA:            

Optimistic. I'm optimistic. I think that we're waking up as a profession. And silver lining of coronavirus I think is helping that. And I'll give you a little story maybe that would highlight this. When I was a young lawyer, nobody talked about this stuff. And I think that's probably pretty common. It was definitely not unique to my organization. And if anything, if somebody struggled, the answer was, oh, they can't cut it. Right? I don't hear that anymore. I am very optimistic about that. People are talking about it. They are talking about not just the preventative proactive stuff, but they're talking about their own struggles. And so that is making me super optimistic.

look what's happening nationally with the organization that you two have been so instrumental in putting forward. We have research that we're learning more, so I'm optimistic.

CHRIS:                

Well, excellent. Well, Martha, we so appreciate you coming on the podcast. Your presence and the Utah State Bar's commitment to wellbeing is in fact one of those small wins that adds up to kind of where we're trying to get to in this long marathon. But it certainly is exciting to know that we're in good hands as our leader, as you lead in Utah. Right? And I think again, we need to be thinking about ways that we can firmly have people at the grassroots level around the country who are just focused and excited about this particular issue because the bigger our army gets, I think the more success we ultimately will have.

MARTHA:           

Agreed. Agreed.

CHRIS:

Yeah. All right, Bree. Any final closing comments?

BREE:            

That's it. Thank you, Martha, so much for being with us today. Exciting stuff.

MARTHA:           

Well, thank you for having me. I love what you all are doing nationally. Keep it coming.

CHRIS:          

When I heard your kind of notions of research and education and resources, it made me really think about a lot of those early discussions at the national task force level, so it's nice to know that we're aligned I think in understanding what the drivers are to this movement and ultimately where we're going.

MARTHA:          

Right, right. Agreed.

CHRIS:            

Good stuff. Thanks. Thanks, Martha, and we'll be back in a couple weeks. And until then, be well. Thanks for joining us.

MARTHA:       

Thank you.

 

Path To Well-Being In Law Podcast: Episode 7 - Heidi Alexander

Heidi experienced her first migraine and drank a lot while in law school. She also had her first panic attack the morning before she sat for the bar. Sound familiar? This week on the Path to Well-Being in Law podcast, Bree and Chris continue their mission to highlight people doing important work in the space of lawyer well-being by welcoming Heidi Alexander. As the first Director of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s Standing Advisory Committee on Professionalism, and Director of Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers Practice Management Program, Heidi can make a better case than anyone for why management of a successful practice is directly tied to the wellbeing of the lawyers running that practice.

Transcript:

CHRIS NEWBOLD:                

Hello and welcome to episode seven of the National Taskforce on Lawyer Well-Being podcast series, The Path to Well-Being in Law. I'm your co-host Chris Newbold, Executive Vice President of ALPS Malpractice Insurance. And our goal here is simple, to introduce you to cool people doing awesome work in the space of lawyer well-being, and in the process, build and nurture a national network of well-being advocates intent on creating a culture shift within the legal profession. I'm joined today by my friend and my fellow co-chair of the National Task Force, Bree Buchanan, Bree-

BREE BUCHANAN:              

Yeah, hello, everyone.

CHRIS:                

And today, we continue our march around the states who are leading the charge, I think in well-being, initiatives, commitment, and success. And as we all know, movements generally are driven by those at the grassroots level, living the day to day trying new ideas. In other words, serving as laboratories of new ideas. And in any movement, we need a few leaders to jump out front and that's exactly what we have seen out of our friends in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Across the country we've seen a swelling of task forces, workgroups, roundtables, and there are lessons to be learned from what's going on in states like Massachusetts and in their roadmap. And we're so excited today to welcome Heidi Alexander to the podcast. Heidi is Massachusetts' first director of Supreme Judicial Court, standing committee on Lawyer Well-Being. And Bree would you be so kind to introduce Heidi to our listeners?

BREE:               

Absolutely. And this is such a wonderful bio here Heidi. I just love it and would love to have been you. Heidi was formerly the deputy director of lawyers concern for lawyers in Massachusetts, and lead the Massachusetts Law Office Management Assistance Program. She is the author of Evernote as a Law Practice Tool. Past co-chair of ABA TECHSHOW, and founder of the ABA's Women of Legal Technology Initiative. She's a native Minnesotan, former collegiate ice hockey goaltender for the Amherst College Women's Ice Hockey Team, love it. CrossFit coach and power lifter, and most important of all, the mother of three young girls. So Heidi, thanks so much for being here with us today. And listen[crosstalk 00:02:34]

HEIDI S. ALEXANDER:             

Thanks for having me.

BREE:                    

Yeah, yeah. One of the things that we always ask our guests is just a little bit about what drives your passion and really wanting to hear from everyone what has brought you into the well-being movement? What experience in your life is the driver behind your passion for this one?

HEIDI:     

Yeah, thank you well, again, thank you again for having me on here. And I love it when someone calls me cool, because my kids certainly don't think so. And my wife certainly doesn't think. So I'm in a cool zone here. I appreciate it. I'm happy to talk about what brought me to this movement. I pursued somewhat of an alternative legal career path. I was that that kid who went to law school because I wanted to change the world. Super ambitious, driven. Didn't really think much about my own well-being other than exercise. I was a competitive athlete in college. But other than that, I wasn't really that aware. So I went to law school, a little bit older, because I worked and I started off as a clerk for a justice on the New Jersey Supreme Court, which, of course was a fantastic experience.

And then moved back to Boston and worked as a litigation associate doing plaintiffs side employment loss, a lot of discrimination, lots of civil rights work. So it's kind of where I thought I should be, but I hated litigation. It was not for me, and I left. And I actually got to a point where I thought, hey, maybe I'll even start an organic farm. I was a little bit lost. Because I had just been so focused on, this is what I want to do. This is where I want to be and all of a sudden when it just wasn't working out, that was tough. So I ended up by... I actually wrote a business plan to start a farm and then apprenticed on a farm and said, oh, this isn't for me either. But all that time, I got really involved in the bar associations and ended up pursuing an interest of mine.

Which was more along the lines of the management of the practice, and really focused on marketing and technology. And I started to consult with some firms. And so that's actually what led me to Lawyers Concern for Lawyers in Massachusetts. Because Lawyers Concerns for Lawyers actually has a program, which is a Law Office Management Assistance Program. So it's actually part of our state's lawyer assistance program where their practice advisors that consult with primarily solo and small firms on the business of law. And one of the things I realized when I was in that position, was that the two services, the clinical services, the focus on well-being, and the management of the practice, were intertwined.

There's such a connection, right? Between the personal and the professional. And so I got much more interested in the well-being work, and then I shifted to this position that I'm currently in working for the court really focused on well-being. But in addition to the commitment that I have, that I've always had to working, or doing public service work, I do have some life experiences that have drawn me here to. And so for those listening, that some of this may ring true for you, when I was in law school, I actually got my first migraine with an aura. And it's a pretty scary experience.

You see a bright light, and it's almost like you think you're having a stroke. And so that was pretty scary. I drank a lot in law school to deal with stress. I had my first panic attack before I sat for the Massachusetts and New York Bars. And then had a lot of anxiety when I was in practice. And so it wasn't really until then, did I really start to focus on my own well-being and kind of what that meant. So I do feel like I come from this, from a lot of different angles and perspectives.

BREE:               

Absolutely. I really identified a lot with what some of the things that you were saying. Yeah, yeah. And I remember having a lot of the same difficulties early in law school, and you just sort of persist, and then do the things that you think you're supposed to do, and you're told to do and it doesn't fit, and then you move on to finding something else. And so it sounds like you've got a really great balance and full life right now. That's wonderful.

Heidi S. Alexan...:            

I do. I do. Yeah.

CHRIS:             

Let's talk about your state. So the Supreme Judicial Court launches this standing committee on lawyer well-being and I'm just curious on how does that happen? Right? Who were the players? How did things start to form? Obviously, you're a result of that work. So give us the background on how the well-being committee launched their Massachusetts?

Heidi S. Alexan...:            

Yeah. So this was really a collaborative effort, I think, by many of the leaders here and the pioneers in Massachusetts, including leaders in our court, leaders from our state's lawyer systems program, folks in law firms, public agencies, bar associations, and other organizations. But I think it was really our late Chief Justice, Ralph Gantz, who was responsible for making this a reality. The chief justice who actually just passed away very suddenly, almost maybe a few weeks ago now, he was really dedicated to this work. And he was a huge advocate and proponent of the SJC steering committee. And so the steering committee was the first committee that formed and then transition to a permanent standing committee. And again, I mean, the Chief Justice, he was a leader in so many ways. This wasn't his only focus. So his death is a huge loss for the entire community here.

CHRIS:             

Do you know what drove his personal passion for this issue?

HEIDI:            

Yeah, that's actually an interesting question. And I actually don't think I could answer that question. I mean, he was the sort of guy that just was a really compassionate person, a really thoughtful person, someone who was always looking out for others, potentially to the detriment of himself. I mean, he was someone who was so driven. And I just can't imagine the stress that he had been under, especially starting in March with the pandemic. SO I think he comes at it from a number of different ways. Because he was also very, very, very much committed to racial injustices as well. Which I'll definitely would like to talk about later. There's such a tie to well-being there. So, yeah, I think he was just a fantastic person all around.

CHRIS:               

Yeah, I think I've shared with you, Heidi, that one of in my five years working on this, his quote, that I think he shared is one of my favorites in the well-being space. And it basically says, the health of our legal system depends on the health of the legal profession, and the health of the profession depends on the health of our lawyers. I just think that, that really encapsulates just what we're trying to do here and how it's all intertwined in terms of the well-being and functioning of the legal system, and how dependent it is on us to be thinking about those participants within the system and their particular health to drive the success of the system.

HEIDI:           

Yeah, I mean, he really was someone who is very wise and very good with his words.

CHRIS:                

Yeah. So what have been some of the obviously, you kind of had a interim committee now you have a standing committee. So what have been some of the outcomes of the process and where do we now find ourselves today?

HEIDI:             

Sure, sure. So we had this steering committee, which formed in 2018, and it met from 2018 to 2019, which was led by retired SJC Justice Margot Botsford, who also is another just tremendous leader and inspiration for this work. And so under her lead, they convened a number of subcommittees over the course of the year. And each of those subcommittees represented a different sector. And each wrote a report. And so upon review of the reports, a series of recommendations resulted. And so that steering committee then compiled its formal recommendations, and the reports from each of the subcommittees and into this 150 page report, which was then released in July of 2019. And so they didn't really want to stop there because the thought was, well, we have this great report, right? With all these recommendations. Now, what do we do?

And so, in the report, one of the recommendations was to create a permanent standing committee. And so that happened in January of 2020. And a bunch of new members were added there. So they weren't necessarily the people who had worked on the steering committee report, they were new folks. And then in order to help guide implementation of the recommendations, that's when I was then hired as the one full time director of the committee in March about a day before the pandemic. So, but with my roots really in the lawyer assistance world, it made for a really easy transition. So that's sort of where we got to, and then I'm happy to later on tell you all the wonderful things we are working on.

CHRIS:                

Yeah.

BREE:               

Yeah. And so Heidi, I'm just wondering, there was just this really clear and tight regression of the work there in Massachusetts. How did that happen? I mean, I'm thinking about for this podcast, hoping that people can take away the success stories of some of our guests and think about how they can implement in the state. And so what do you see as the key components to getting you to this point? To getting that permanent steering committee? Did you see that to come together to make that [crosstalk 00:14:38] secret sauce?

HEIDI:              

Well, I mean, I do think that it was essential to have the Chief Justice and the court behind these efforts. And also in particular now, so we have justice Margot Botsford, who's the retired justice. She led this steering committee, and now is one of the co-chairs of the standing committee. And so she's very well known. She has fantastic ideas. So she's kind of a major player here. And so I think that that's really helpful. But I also think we have a number of different leaders that we are connected to who have really bought in and are passionate. And so I think it's really helpful to have people who represent all these different legal sectors. In particular, our committee, so our committee is comprised of people at public agencies.

We have the number two person at the attorney general's office. We have a dean of, or the dean I should say, of Boston University Law School. We've got a medical advisor, we have someone from Greater Boston Legal Services. And then we have advisors on our committee, who are regulators and also the executive director of our State's Lawyer Assistance Program. So I think it's definitely helpful to have the buy in of those leaders. And then each of those people then sort of have their own, what we call kitchen cabinets. And so we have our tentacles everywhere. So I think one of the important pieces, and it's something that we work on is extending our reach, creating this awareness. And the more we can do that, kind of bring on those people and continue to extend the reach, I think that's really helpful to get that buy in.

BREE:               

Wonderful. Absolutely. And I'm just curious, real quick. One of the key players in some of the states or the state bar associations and did... Do you have them at the table in Massachusetts?

HEIDI:          

Yeah, absolutely. So we are a state, we do not have a mandatory bar. So we have, actually, I think we now have 3, I guess 33 bar associations by my last count. And one of them is the Massachusetts Bar Association, which is a huge Bar Association. Represents people from all there all over Massachusetts, and also the Boston Bar Association, which it typically represents a lot of the larger firms. But our other co-chair. So we have Margot Botsford. But we also have Denise Murphy, who is our other co-chair, who is the current president of the Massachusetts Bar Association.

BREE:               

Wow.[crosstalk 00:18:01]

HEIDI:            

So yeah. And her whole focus this year, with the Bar Association is well-being. So our work is so intertwined. And I really think that, for us, the bar associations are extremely important to our efforts, because they help us extend that reach. And there's a lot of work we can do with them, and help them and support them. And so we've actually started, we had our first bar leader meeting about a week ago, and we're going to have those on a regular basis. And we're talking about potentially figuring out some sort of mechanism to make sure they get our updates, and talk about ways we can collaborate. So we really want to make sure that we're supporting them, and we are working very, very closely with them.

CHRIS:                

And Heidi, does that extend to the totality of bar associations in your state? The specialty bars? County bars? Obviously, your state bars is a large and effective one. I'm just wondering about the scope of that kind of organizing effort.

HEIDI:            

Yes, absolutely. We think that's really important. Particularly, we've been doing a lot of work with our affinity bars, which are the bars that represent our diverse attorneys in Massachusetts. So we are very well connected to them. And then we have a lot of county bars that represent a lot of our lawyers across Massachusetts in different geographical areas, many of them solo and small firms. And a lot of the county bars don't have staff and they're volunteers. So they're volunteers who are doing all the work. So the more support that we can provide to them, I think that the more they can do. So we're talking about doing bench bar conferences, and mentorship programs, and loan assistance programs, lots of different ways in which we can work with them.

CHRIS:             

Excellent. Let's take us in to our first our break. And I do want to remind listeners that one of the things that we'll do in conjunction with Heidi's podcast is also post their steering committee report, obviously, 150 pages with the various sector subcommittee reports. And one of our goals in the podcast is to share this information through others who either may be along on a similar journey, or starting their journey, right? And so there should be information that will come along with the podcast for quick reference to their report there. So let's take a break.

ADVERTISEMENT:                          

Your law firm is worth protecting. And so is your time. Alex has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates and find coverage, all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com.

BREE:               

All right. Welcome back, everybody. And we have Heidi Alexander, who is the Director of the Massachusetts Well-Being Committee. And I'm sure that I did not get that name exactly right. But tell us what you guys are working on now. What are some of the really big items?

Heidi S. Alexan...:            

Yeah, sure. I'm happy to. And don't worry about the title. That's not actually not very important. I mean I think this is where things really become exciting, in my mind, because we have this 150 page report with many, many recommendations to implement. And a lot of the recommendations would really lead to a change in the legal culture. I mean, we have recommendations in there from our large firms subcommittee, that suggests a cap on billable hours.

BREE:               

Wow, none of these? Yeah?

HEIDI:            

I mean, none of these recommendations are easy, right? They're there not easy. And then you add the pandemic, and you add long standing inequalities that we have to address. And it becomes very complicated. And so when I first moved into this position, what we had to do was really take a step back and kind of reprioritize and figure out where could we realistically make progress? And be most effective? And these are the categories that I would say we are prioritizing. One is that of changing and influencing culture. And that is going to be something we will continue to kind of chip away at through these recommendations.Number two is increasing awareness and reducing stigma, which I know lots of people right across the nation are trying to do. Number three, increasing diversity, equity and inclusion, which we know is extremely important for well-being, particularly as a diverse attorney and feeling a sense of belonging in the profession.

And also the ability to adequately represent clients. And we have a big problem here in Massachusetts, where attorneys don't necessarily look like the people they represent, and the judges making the decision don't look like the people, the litigants, right? And that causes a lot, a lot of problems. And I'm happy to definitely talk more about that. But the fourth is, in terms of the big picture, is improving life and career satisfaction and reducing burnout. And then the fifth is increasing civility. And we know that, we've seen sort of across the nation, there's decline in instability. And so we think that that is extremely important in terms of increasing well-being. So those are the big picture items, which are being held over our head. Yeah.

CHRIS:                

And those pillars, do you then... Have you developed working groups underneath that? what's your strategy in terms of an execution strategy?

HEIDI:            

Yeah. So we have, like I talked about, these kitchen cabinets. Each person on our committee has a kitchen cabinet. And sometimes we use that kitchen cabinet as sort of an advisory group. Sometimes they're working on something specific. So for example, we have a law school subcommittee. And the law school subcommittee is comprised of faculty, and administrators, and law students from each one of our law schools here in Massachusetts. And what they are working on specifically right now is a toolkit for Massachusetts law schools, a well-being toolkit. And this will be for law students, faculty, and administrators. And some of the issues they're going to address will be, how do you access mental health services? What sort of programs can you provide? How should faculty be attuned to well-being issues?

And how can they integrate that into every single one of their courses? How do you address cultural competency? So they're doing a lot. And I think part of what I think is going to be so great about that is, if we can do it the right way, if we can take that toolkit and disseminate it to all these law schools and actually have them implement this, I think it's going to go a long way in terms of a long way in terms of making some real cultural changes in the law schools. Because we do have a lot of folks representing, again, representing all these different law schools.

BREE:              

That's amazing. And I just want to say Heidi how do you get that? we want to be able to post it on the task force's website and try to [crosstalk 00:27:27]

HEIDI:            

Of course yeah.

BREE:               

[crosstalk 00:27:30] wonderful. And that's just one, I'm sure of many projects that you're working on. Are there any others that you wanted to highlight?

HEIDI:             

And I want to say too, that they are using the national task force law school toolkit. Using aspects of that. So that has also been very helpful to them. Yeah, we have a lot of different projects that fit into the big picture categories. And I'll mention some of them that I think folks might be interested in. Our report talks a lot about the importance of mentorship, and that the impact on well-being. And so we've actually launched a bunch of mentorship programs. We just finished a pilot out in the western part of the state. And it was an interesting sort of unique mentorship model where we actually use software, a software program to connect mentors to mentees. And it was almost like a dating app, where the mentees got to sort of look at the bios of their potential mentors, and they got to select they, could say I'm interested in this person, I'm interested in this person.

And they got to meet with multiple mentors. So they kind of got a variety of perspectives. And what we learned from them is that it wasn't a lot of substantive conversation. It was actually about like, how do you manage practice, how do you manage the caseload? How do you deal with adversaries? It was more issues related to well-being really than the substance of practice. So that's one of them. We also just launched a pilot loan Assistance Program, because we know that student loans create a huge amount of stress for attorneys. And so we created this program to work with an organization to provide education, coaching and resources. And so we actually have over 200 attorneys signed up for this pilot, which [crosstalk 00:29:57]

BREE:            

Wow how amazing.

HEIDI:            

And so we'll see. We will survey them after they finish it and see, did this have an impact on their stress. And we're also looking at how to create more accessible and affordable health care and benefits. So those are some of them. In terms of diversity, equity and inclusion, like I said, that's a big focus for us. A couple things that we're doing is we're actually changing some rules on SJC rule, to add a requirement to our bar registration process to collect demographic data, demographic data on our attorneys.

We've never done this before. We don't know the makeup of the Massachusetts bar, we have no idea what it looks like. And so this is actually going to be required so that we can have a better understanding of the demographics of our bar and where are we falling short? Right? And then we can do things like what we recently did was held town halls with our affinity bars, again, who represent the diverse attorneys in Massachusetts and hear from them, and hear about their lived experiences, which by the way, were extremely, extremely distressing.

BREE:             

I'm sure. Must have been really powerful.

HEIDI:             

Yeah, yeah. There were sort of time and again, I mean, we heard over and over about the experiences, particularly in the courts, the treatment of diverse attorneys, people of color who would walk in and be confused with the defendant. Assumed that this person was the defendant, they'd have their bar card scrutinized as they walked through the door. And you can imagine what that does right? To someone's well-being? Their confidence, right? When that's happening to them right before they have to get up and argue in court, it takes a toll. So that's going to be a big part of our work, we're likely actually going to be hiring a consultant who's going to help us put together a strategic plan focused on increasing the diversity of our profession and helping us to better support our diverse attorneys.

BREE:              

And I wanted to... Follow up. One question on that. What I've heard also implicit in all of this, you guys are doing so much. I hear money. I hear funding behind that. So where do you guys get your funding to be able to pay your salary? And hire consultants do all of these things? Which I think for a lot of task forces would be just sort of really dreams.

HEIDI:             

Yeah, yeah. Yeah. I mean, I do wish that everyone was in the same situation as we are for sure. I think we are very, very fortunate. So mainly everything is funded through our bar assessments. So the fees that attorneys pay to be licensed here. We have a lot of attorneys in our state. So we have probably somewhere around 70,000 X active attorneys in our state, and they all pay. So basically, essentially, they are paying for this. So that is where it's coming to and the fact that we have the support of the SJC, again is essential because they're the ones who make the rules and can say, who gets what.

BREE:                

Yeah, just a follow... More follow up on that. In Virginia, they have the legislature imposed a specific dedicated assessment on basically membership dues that can transform the lawyers assistance program there. So do you guys is this just a specific line item on people's bar dues? Or is it allocated?

HEIDI:           

Yeah.

BREE:              

Okay.

HEIDI:             

Yup. It's a specific line item. So we actually don't have to go to the legislature. And the only reason we I think we'd have to legislators to increase the amount of funding but there are enough funds that we collect right now to actually make this possible. So we haven't had to increase bar dues.

BREE:              

Okay. Sorry to get in the weeds there, but that's when[crosstalk 00:34:48]

HEIDI:             

It's important.[crosstalk 00:34:50]

CHRIS:                

Yeah, no, it's a really important question because it certainly feels like Bree as we've teasing out and themes that we're seeing across states that are being extraordinarily successful in working on this issue. If there's not fuel to ignite the discussion and some resources available, I mean, we certainly can see instances where having a Heidi on the ground. We can see how one person can make a real significant difference in the both the leadership, and the orchestration of the activities. Right? And so certainly I know, other states are probably listening in on this, and maybe again, as Heidi, you said, maybe not in as fortunate of a position. And so that becomes I think, a major thing for us to be able to guide folks on, which is why having some dedicated resources to this can make such a huge difference.

HEIDI:          

Well I also think, and this is something that we've been trying to do as well, is to utilize, for example, some of the resources from the large firms, right? We have a bunch of large firms here. There, many of them have really fantastic, well-being programs that they're running. But are there ways in which we can help harness those resources, and maybe use them, for folks who don't have those resources? One of the things we've put together as we launched this local lawyer well-being network. And it started, was in our recommendations as a priority for the law firms to actually have this network of people who could talk about best practices, and share resources. But there was more interest.

So we kind of opened it up to everyone. And we have people who are now involved who are sole solo practitioners, or small firms, who are in academia, who are in public agencies. And what we're trying to figure out is, is there some way that we could use the resources of the large firms almost in like this sort of pro bono charitable effort? Right? To help other people. Could maybe this the public agencies or the solo folks utilize some of the well-being resources that these firms have created? And so that's just something that we're... it's just sort of percolating at this moment, but maybe applicable to other folks and kind of thinking about how to access resources.

CHRIS:                

Yeah. Heidi, can I ask on the... It sounds like you had these kitchen cabinets, right? That really were formed around sectors that ultimately guided the recommendations within the steering committee report. Sounds like a couple of those sectors, were law schools and law firms. Can you share with us the other sectors that took shape in your state? Because again, a lot of states that do have task forces are kind of thinking about how they structure their work. And it sounds like you have progressed well, based upon the strategy that you've employed.

HEIDI:             

Yeah, so you're you're quizzing me now. Let's see if I can get them all. Yeah, so initially, for our steering committee, so we had public agencies, which would include district attorneys, they would include our committee for public counsel services, which are really our public defenders. We had our legal services. We had solo and small firms as a group, we had large firms as a group. We had in-house counsel. We also had, let's see, we already said what we said law school. What am I missing here? We also had individual bar associations. I talked about the Massachusetts Bar Association and the Boston Bar Association.

We actually had each of them wrote their own reports, too. So they were players. And I do think that one particular voice or voices that were missing from the steering committee, subcommittees were our affinity bars. So we did not have a report from our women's bar association, or our mass black lawyers, or our South Asian attorneys. And I think that would have been really helpful. So if people are thinking about that, that's a perspective I would definitely add. I'm probably missing a group but I just can't think of it right now.

CHRIS:             

No, worries. A couple more questions as we close out the podcast. I'm curious on as we think about well-being, I think one of the things that's oftentimes hard for us to kind of put our hands around is how we measure success. Right? And I'm just curious as you're clearly working on five pillars, you're going to be moving forward multiple initiatives. I'm curious Heidi, on your perspective of, how do you know when we've crossed certain thresholds toward either improvement? Or are there waystations out there that you can visualize, that give you the confidence that we are making a difference?

HEIDI:            

That is a fantastic question. And it is something that we think about all the time. And I think about it, particularly in my household, because actually, my wife is a physician and researcher, and her focus is on implementation science and evaluation. So we talk about this all the time. What is the most effective way to evaluate? And so what we're doing right now is we're hoping to embark on this sort of bigger study of lawyer well-being in Massachusetts to somewhat create a baseline. But I think a lot of these efforts they're going to have to continue, they're going to have to adapt and change. And we're probably never going to get to the point of where we say, oh, we're done, everyone's great, everyone's fantastic, right? They're going to be different issues that arise.

And so I think in terms of our individual programs that we have, and our pilot programs that we're running, we're going to evaluate those specific programs and see how they impact the well-being. Like, when I talked about this Loan Assistance Program. We will do a survey at the end of that, and we and we will try to measure whether the program had any impact, right? On the stress. And so if we can show that in the short term, and then maybe then take that to sort of a broader scale, and then again, evaluate that later on. It may be looking at these things, in sort of little pieces, but also keeping track of keeping our pulse on changes, sort of over the course of a number of years.

Like are we seeing any differences in other changes in terms of substance use? And addiction? What are the different issues that are arising? So, I think we sort of use that, I mean, it's evaluation in some ways, but in other ways, it's also to figure out where we have to focus our efforts, right? Collect the data, and then make these data driven decisions about what programs we're going to have, and then just keep moving along and keep adapting to the changes. So that's sort of a long, non answer to your question. Because I don't think that there's one... I don't know exactly what the right way is to do that, but those are some of the ideas we have.

CHRIS:               

Good, good. Well, let me ask you to just as a final question. Obviously, a lot of our listeners are at different points of the journey. Lessons learned. What are some of the things that you've learned the hard way? Some of the any advice or recommendations that you would make to others out there as they think about igniting change and culture shifts in their respective states?

HEIDI:            

Yeah, I mean, like I said, said before, I think it's really helpful to have the buy in of as many people and definitely influential people in your state as possible. I do think that initially, when I started working on this, I was sort of a deer in headlights thinking about, how do we tackle this major culture shift that we would like to happen? And what I learned was having these big picture goals were good. And I think they help us focus our efforts. But we have to really work on the concrete and tangible actions, where we can also demonstrate milestones like we've done this program, it's done X, Y, and Z. It's helped people in this way, right? It's impossible to tackle every issue right away. And so a lot of what we've done is prioritize our efforts. And we have looked at attorneys who are really struggling, especially during this time.

So a lot of the solo and small, firm attorneys. While we know that the large law firms need a massive culture change, and there's a lot of work to be done. Like I said before, there's a lot of great well being efforts that are already happening there. And so sometimes you have to step back and say, okay, let them do their thing, let them do their work, where we're really needed is over here. And I think there's a lot of things that we can do, I guess for the larger firms, like create these networks, and that sort of thing. But I don't really feel like there's a one size fits all model for them. So it's a little bit more difficult. But I do think kind of focusing in, you're not going to be able to tackle it all at once. It's a  incremental process.

CHRIS:                

Yeah, there's no doubt that big goals ultimately need to be broken down into small steps. And obviously, the creation of your role is a small success in our bigger picture story of well-being across the country. Heidi, again, I want to thank you for your time, your expertise. Interesting route to getting to where you are today, but as we all know, you are now a mover and shaker in our well-being movement. I would consider you a thought leader, we need folks who are thinking about this on the day to day and let's be honest, we need more Heidi Alexander's out there in the field, advancing this at the state level. So I thank you fo your time, your commitment, I'm sure that if others have questions of you, that you'd be willing to feel those questions. And we'll include Heidi's contact information associated with the podcast and on the National Task Force website, as well. Bree, any parting remarks?

BREE:               

Just Heidi, I'm so impressed with all that you're doing, and the energy, and the broad perspective that you're bringing to this and just really in being able to persist and get things done. It's so impressive. And thank you for all that you're doing.

HEIDI:           

Yeah-[crosstalk 00:48:01]

BREE:             

Yeah thanks again.

HEIDI:           

Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. I really appreciate this. And I've been an avid listener of the podcast so you've had some just phenomenal guests on here. I feel like I'm not not worthy of this, but I do appreciate and I so appreciate all your work. So thank you.

CHRIS:     

[inaudible 00:48:20] And to our listeners we'll be back in a couple of weeks. We'll have on the podcast, Martha Knudson, who's spearheading well being efforts in the state of Utah, right? So we've went through from Virginia, to Massachusetts, will pick up with Utah. And again, some really interesting things happening at the state level that we're excited to share with our listeners. But for now.

Path To Well-Being In Law Podcast: Episode 6 - Tim Carroll & Margaret Ogden

Chris Newbold:                Hello and welcome to episode six of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being Podcast Series, “The Path to Well-Being in Law.” I'm your cohost Chris Newbold of ALPS Malpractice Insurance. And our goal here is simple, to introduce you to cool people doing awesome work in the space of lawyer well-being, and in the process build and nurture a national network of well-being advocates intent on creating a culture shift within the legal profession.

                                         I'm joined today by my friend and fellow co-chair of the National Task Force Bree Buchanan. Bree, welcome.

Bree Buchanan:              Absolutely. Welcome everybody. Glad you're here joining us today.

Chris Newbold:                Good. And today we're going to start a move down into the states, and I think our first five or six speakers have really been driven more by some of the national outlook and some of the research that's been done into the lawyer well-being space. And as we know, movements generally are driven by those at the grassroots level who live it day-to-day, who are trying new ideas. In other words, serving as laboratories of democracy or laboratories of new ideas. And in any movement, you need a few leaders, a few examples to jump out in front. And that's exactly what we've seen out of our friends in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

                                           Across the country we've seen a swelling of task forces, work groups, round tables coming out of state bars and state supreme courts, and there are some lessons to be learned from the Virginia experience and their roadmap. And there are no two better guests than our duo today, Margaret Ogden who's the wellness coordinator for the Virginia Supreme Court and Tim Carroll who's executive director of the Virginia Judges and Lawyers' Assistance Program.

                                           Bree, would you be so kind as to introduce our guests?

Bree Buchanan:              Absolutely. Great. Just so excited. Margaret and Tim, thank you for joining us today. What's going on in Virginia really is a shining light for the rest of the states across the country. So we're delighted to have you as the first group of state national task force people on our show.

                                           So Margaret Ogden, as Chris said, she's the wellness coordinator in the Office of the Executive Secretary, the Supreme Court of Virginia, which is one of the new positions that's being created by the Lawyer Well-Being Movement. And we have a few other states that are doing that as well. A lawyer by training, Margaret began her career in the Roanoke City Commonwealth Attorney's Office prosecuting criminal cases and then went on to defend criminal cases throughout the Roanoke and New River Valleys.

                                           Prior to joining her job where she currently is now, I think this is so interesting, Margaret, you served as the staff attorney for the Pennsylvania Interbranch Commission for Gender, Racial, and Ethnic Fairness. What an interesting position.

                                           And then Tim has probably one of the most unusual backgrounds I have seen for a Lawyers' Assistance Program director, and it's been brilliant. I met Tim five, six years ago, and immediately identified him as somebody who has a special kind of knowledge that he brings to the Lawyer Assistance Program that has really enabled them to just take off with the program they have in Virginia.

                                           So he's the executive director of the JLAP there. He grew up in Virginia, and then joined the US Air Force after high school. And after 28 years of service and assignments around the world, he retired at Anchorage, Alaska where he became the chief executive officer of a fisheries related business. Fish and lawyers, I don't know. I'm sure you've made a connection there at some point.

                                           In 2014, he returned to Virginia and assumed his current role in 2015. Mr. Carroll has an undergraduate degree in history from the University of Alaska and a masters degree in business administration from Virginia Commonwealth University.

                                           So Margaret and Tim, welcome. We are so glad you're here. Chris and I always start off our program asking our guests a question about what brought you into this space? Because we really have seen the people that do so much of the work have a passion for it. And so we're really curious about what drives that passion.

                                           So Margaret, what brought you to the Well-Being Movement? What experience in your life is a driver behind your passion for this work?

Margaret Ogden:            That is a wonderful question, and thank you so much, Bree, for having us just as a preliminary matter. And thank you for that introduction. As you touched on, my last position was a policy position working for the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. And I got very interested in how court policy shapes not just the practice of law but access to justice, a court user experience, and really the lived promise of equal justice under law and how court policy, which might seem on its face kind of neutral and bland, can have a huge impact on that.

                                           So the Pennsylvania Interbranch Commission is kind of cool because they appoint from all three branches of state government to look at racial, ethnic, and other marginalized people who may have bias against them in our court system and how policy can be used to combat that. It's a great organization, and it works out of a Supreme Court report from Pennsylvania from 2005.

                                           And so when here, the Virginia Supreme Court had put out a report on wellness in our legal profession, I just think it's a fascinating institutional response to seeing how the regulation of our profession, how court and bar policy impacts those people who are actively involved in it. And the wellness of lawyers is so important.

                                           I don't mean to only talk about policy. I have what I call a recreational interest in mental health and well-being. I was first diagnosed with anxiety when I was in law school, and working with cognitive behavioral therapy, medication, diet, exercise, creative outlets, I've managed to kind of handle that to varying quality within my law school and early professional career. So I love to talk about this with my friends. This is something that I've been very open with and I think young people... I still consider myself young people. I'm still a young lawyer by the Virginia State Bar's definition of that.

                                           So I think that we're seeing a culture shift that is just happening with age in terms of talking about mental health and substance use. I'm also the granddaughter of two alcoholics, so I'm very lucky that I have... I don't mean to say I'm lucky that I have this that runs in my family because certainly these are major issues that face our profession. But I'm lucky that I was raised with an awareness of them. So that when I started to experience these issues within my own life, I could seek expert help because they're really not things that you can deal with on your own, especially if you're in a profession of public trust, like the law. And so that's why selfishly I'm very interested in this.

                                           And being a Virginia lawyer, seeing our courts write about this with the level of product that came out of these court reports, the level of thought, research, really data-driven best practices that have been generated, for me it's the perfect intersection of policy wonk and anxiety brain.

Bree Buchanan:              That's great. That's great, Margaret. Thank you for sharing that about your life. We really appreciate adding to the story.

                                           So Tim, what brings you to the Well-Being Movement and to the LAP, the Lawyers' Assistance Program world? What drives your passion to this work? Because I know you have a passion for it.

Tim Carroll:                      Well, first off, Bree, I want to thank you and Chris for inviting us to join in this. And I can't tell you what a joy it is to work with Margaret as we carry this mission forward. We really do have a great team here in Virginia, and I'm very proud of the team and the great work that's happening here.

                                           As you said, my path to a lawyer assistance program was a little bit unorthodox if you will. When I came back to Virginia, I was basically retired and I wasn't looking for a job anywhere. And this opportunity crossed my path, and I saw the middle name. So Virginia, the program used to be called Lawyers Helping Lawyers. And somebody put this in front of me, and I thought, "Lawyers Helping Lawyers, what do I know about that? What do I know about the law? What do I know about lawyers?" And as we talked, I got really focused on the middle name of that organization, and that was helping. And I'm at a place in my life where I want to help others, and this is certainly a place to do that.

                                           What really drove me towards the wellness, basically harkens back to my Air Force career. When I first joined the Air Force and I won't date myself anymore to say it was in the post-Vietnam era. The Air Force was really in a state of flux from post-Vietnam. And what I saw around me were a lot of people who were drinking, a lot of people who were smoking. I'd go to the chow hall and see the really, quite honestly, not the most healthy food choices that were available. And a good number of my friends who were still involved in drug use while in active duty. I saw a lot of my friends who were falling victim to those vices, and really I lost a few friends as a result of those things.

                                           Over the course of my career, the Air Force really transformed itself and really moved more into a well-being and a wellness posture with smoking cessation, deglamorizing alcohol, really taking a hard stand on the drug use, and really transforming the chow halls to basically have a wider variety of healthy choices than unhealthy choices. We saw fitness centers having a newfound focus on the equipment and the programs that were being offered. And I saw a institution, the United States Air Force go from that post-Vietnam era to a wellness era, and that really effected the readiness of the Force, which we needed, as you know for the conflicts that we had in the '90s and beyond. So I saw a massive worldwide institution like the United States Air Force that could make that change in culture and transforming itself.

                                           So when I joined the Lawyers Helping Lawyers organization, I saw us as a larger reactive organization. We would kind of play Bop-It. Someone would come to us for help, and we would help them. But we weren't really doing a tremendous amount of outreach and really trying to change why people were coming to us because we were so small. When I joined, I started part-time, had a full-time counselor. And with a staff of 1.5, all's we could do was be reactive. And I saw the proactive side was one that we'd have to embrace the well-being. And I was thrilled when I heard that the ABA was undertaking the National Task Force on Well-Being because I really saw that as an opportunity to transform the culture of the legal profession.

                                           And to say that I'm passionate about it would be an understatement. I've lost friends to suicide. I've lost friends to poor eating habits. I've lost friends who were drinking and ultimately cost them their lives. For a profession as critical as the law, something as critical as what we have right here, it wasn't a large leap for me to get passionate about helping our lawyers, our judges, our law students, the entire legal profession in any way that I can.

                                           So I'm honored to be here. I'm just a little piece of the puzzle, but that's really how I got here.

Chris Newbold:                Yeah, great, Tim. But an important piece of the puzzle. Tim and I have had conversations. My father was career Air Force. So again, I think there are some examples out there for shifts in cultures that need to be studied and evaluated as we think about our path forward in the legal profession.

                                           But let's turn our attention to Virginia, and I am a firm believer that leadership really starts at the top. And we've been really I think blessed in Virginia with folks who have seen the need for this issue to come to the forefront. Bree and I, as original kind of members of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, it was your Chief Justice Don Lemons who really brought the judicial powerhouse I think to the discussion. And I know the reason that we have Margaret in the positions that we do is because some folks I think in Virginia saw a need and then started to develop a plan, bring together the right parties.

                                           So Margaret, maybe if you could kind of walk us through how did the Virginia Supreme Court ultimately find its way into launching the Well-Being Committee, and how did that ultimately came some revenue opportunities that created the infrastructure necessary to flow down to the things of the world and other programs in the state? So I'd just love for our listeners to hear about the journey of how Virginia got to where it is today.

Margaret Ogdan:            Yeah, of course. And I'm kind of late to the party in this journey because I started in my position on October 25th of 2019, and I will keep that date in my mind forever because five months later our whole profession changed. But we need to back track it up because I am the culmination of many people's efforts, far smarter minds than me, and far larger levers of power needed to be pulled before we even get there. So what you have, as you mentioned, our Chief Justice Donald Lemons sitting on the National Task Force seeing these numbers coming out of these national studies. And I can't thank you all enough for highlighting not just the statistical data but this call to action that goes down to the states. We have some very preliminary data. We want more data, and we also recognize that this might look different in different states. This might look different in different practice areas. Let us empower states to go out and investigate how their state is regulating the profession and what can be done to shift the culture within these laboratories of democracy.

                                           So that call was heated in Virginia, and Justice William Mims headed up the Virginia State Supreme Court Committee for Lawyer Well-Being. And that committee drew not just from the judiciary, although all levels are represented there. In fact, a court of appeals, which is our intermediate court of limited jurisdiction. We have the circuit courts, which are our higher level trial courts, and then the general district courts, which traffic, misdemeanors, preliminary hearings. We're recognizing that all of those court actors are facing different occupational risk and seeing different pieces of really lawyer unwellness.

                                           So all of those folks we have the law schools. There are eight in Virginia, and all eight of the deans participated in the first law school summit that came out of this report. So it was a ground swell effort amongst academia. And then you also have the regulators, the state bar, ethics council, the disciplinary board coming to bring their expertise to the table and talk about the way the rules of professional conduct and our ethical obligations are playing out with lawyer empowerment.

                                           And then finally, you have the private sector attorneys. This incredible organization of folks from bar organization, from employers, representing small firms, large firms, that are all kind of doing their own wellness thing before this even started. They're doing this at a volunteer level. They're taking this on on their own because they've seen these problems. The statistics didn't really come as a shock to people.

                                           I think if anything, just anecdotally, we're waiting for the other shoe to drop for people to get more comfortable talking about these problems, and the numbers will probably go up as we destigmatize more of these conversations. But that means that more people will get help, and Virginia did a great job of bringing all these stakeholders together to put out a report that focuses on real tangible recommendations. Things that can be done that signals to the profession that this is a priority and that it's not a burden that you need to add to your already busy life to take care of yourself. That this is a foundation upon which your professionalism and your ethics are based. So much to the point that it's now been added as a comment to Rule 1.1 in our Rules of Professional Conduct that governs competency, that lawyers need to have the physical, emotional, and mental competency to practice law.

                                           To see all of these different stakeholders really grasp onto this, and say, "Yes, we think this is important. Yes, we can make changes to our rules and our policies. We're going to hold up the mirror of self reflection. We don't like what we see, and rather than go to despair, we will be called to action." Because here's the other thing, it then required going in front of the General Assembly to get a state bar's due assessment to every active member of the Virginia State Bar. It's $30 a year. It started to be assessed in July 2019, and just because of the way our state government is structured, that required an act of the General Assembly.

                                           To me, I love all branches of state government equally. But if someone says, "Margaret, you have to go to the General Assembly and get us money," that's the worst hill to try to climb. But if anything, that shows you how much belief there was in Lawyers Helping Lawyers because that is where the bulk of that funding was dedicated to go. It wasn't just, "Oh, we're going to assess a fund, and who knows what will happen." No. There was a really roadmap in this report that said, "Lawyers Helping Lawyers has been doing this forward since 1984. We believe in them because they're using evidence-based best practices. They have volunteers throughout the Commonwealth who have gone through these issues that have turned their careers around, and all they need is the money to expand." If they build it, they will come. To the point where you convince the General Assembly to do that, I think really shows a strong momentum.

                                           And I'm also biased in favor of this because that also funded my position. So if we have Lawyers Helping Lawyers existing as a separate nonprofit, it's not part of the court system. And that's important because confidentiality is prime with these issues. We want people to be comfortable calling up Tim and they know they don't get me. But also it's important that the court bring the weight of its institutional gravitas to say, "Hey, go seek help. Let's destigmatize help seeking behavior. Seek it proactively."

                                           So I'm excited to be living in the court and talking about institutional policies, talking education outreach. We've been putting out a bunch of CLEs. Our virtual judicial conferences now have a wellness component. I say virtual. They were virtual this year. Hopefully that will not continue into the future. But more of this kind of generalized health and wellness from an institutional level is what this ground swell of specific recommendations worked up to build.

Tim Carroll:                      Margaret, remind me when the report... I'm pretty certain that you were the first state to produce a comprehensive report on well-being, right?

Margaret Ogdan:            One of the early ones. I don't want to step on any toes. I know Utah and Vermont put out early ones too.

Bree Buchanan:              You guys were first.

Margaret Ogden:            Yeah.

Bree Buchanan:              Take it. Take it. It's yours.

Tim Carroll:                      Remind me of the date there because a lot of our listeners will be tuning in from other state task forces, and I want them to kind of understand. What is so unique I think about what Virginia has done is there's a lot of reports that come out of study and saying, "We need to do this. We need to do that." Really what everyone in Virginia should be so proud of is the fact that you took words and you translated it into action. And oftentimes it doesn't happen with task forces and so forth. Sometimes it's you write, author a report, and you maybe check off some low hanging fruit. But you guys have really systemically changed the playing field of this particular issue as it relates to Virginia.

                                           So the report comes out in 2018. You got to think that the most substantive impacts of the reports were... And you already mentioned it. Rule change to the rules of professional conduct, that includes well-being, and a comment to the duty of competence, right?

Margaret Ogden:            Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Tim Carroll:                      You basically set in play, and we know generally, and Bree and Tim can speak to this firsthand, that lawyer assistance programs around the country are generally underfunded. ALPS is a malpractice carrier we give a good chunk of money to, what was formally Virginia Lawyers Helping Lawyers. But across the country, there's just not enough fuel in the tank for Lawyers' Assistance Programs to have enough impact and really take on not just the safety net but also the big picture realm of well-being. So explain for our audience then, report comes out in 2018. Justice Mims, who is really an unsung hero in all of this, but even Justice Mims, the Virginia State Bar and its leadership, and Lynn Heath produced an occupational risk report that's really critical as well. Kind of talk us through when did the money discussion start? When does it pass the General Assembly? And what ultimately does it do to transform the revenue side that enables us now to do so much more?

Margaret Ogden:            I think you're exactly right. I mentioned Justice Mims briefly as the head of this committee, but I want to sing about this hero because I really do think that not only is he just an excellent human being, he's someone with an incredibly nuanced understanding of our Virginia state government. He is one of the few people in the history of our Commonwealth who's held highest positions at the top of each of our branches of government. He served in our state house. He was the Attorney General. So this man understands what it takes to create a culture shift within state government. And I don't know when exactly it goes to the General Assembly. I am still back in Pennsylvania in 2018. But in enough time to get the first bar dues funding assessed in July of 2019 on our annual state bar assessment. And part of this is also very good timing with the Client Protection Fund. That had been doing very well, and so those dues were lowered, which I think makes it more palatable to slightly increase and establish this fund entirely.

                                           And then finally, there's this other piece that I want to touch on too is the Virginia Law Foundation and Virginia CLEs contributions because this all works much better when well-being is recognized as a key part of lawyer education, and in Virginia, we have mandatory continuing legal education. And that CLE board was very quick to change their... Well, amend an opinion, Opinion 19, to make it more clear that well-being programming should be approved for CLE credit. And the Virginia Law Foundation, Virginia CLE is one of our largest state providers. They signed on to say, "Hey, we're going to provide a well-being library that we're going to replenish every year online, and we're going to offer two of these free to every lawyer, judge, and law school student in the Commonwealth every year."

                                           To me, that shows not just the funding coming from attorneys and going through the General Assembly, but also stakeholders saying, "We're going to be sure that attorneys see the value for their funds hopefully so that it is an easier sell to everyone who is in the bar to take this on collectively." Look, you're getting something out of this even if you yourself are not going to seek the services of Lawyers Helping Lawyers.

Bree Buchanan:              So let's bring Tim in on this, and Tim, I was listening to Margaret's earlier answer about what all the work and support for the Lawyers' Assistance Program there in Virginia and with my ears of a former LAP director, and it must be so wonderful to work as an ally with somebody who so gets what an LAP is about.

                                           So Tim, what I wanted to ask you is talk about this process of what happened in Virginia from the Lawyers' Assistance Program perspective. How did this come about and how did you all fit into this process?

Tim Carroll:                      Yeah. So after the ABA Hazelden Betty Ford, after that survey came out, that was really the call to action. I know the ABA responded to that with the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being. But we didn't sit on our haunches here in Virginia. We said, "What can we do about that?" And we took the numbers out of that survey and overlaid it on Virginia. With our population, we could assume that if the ABA Hazelden study was accurate, that we have upwards of 12,000 attorneys in Virginia who are operating from some level of impairment. And when you can use that as a talking point, you really get people's attention.

                                           I'll just insert real quick, thanks to ALPS back in 2014, the College of William and Mary Law School did a survey of Virginia attorneys. And while it wasn't peer reviewed and it wasn't published, I've seen it. And I can tell you that the numbers track very closely in Virginia to what the national report said.

Bree Buchanan:              Wow.

Tim Carroll:                      So I can speak with confidence so that we have upwards of 12,000 who for one reason or another are operating from some level of impairment. And we looked at what we were doing, what was the LAP doing? And we had on average about 100 new clients a year with our staff of 1.5 and one counselor. That doesn't even begin to scratch the surface. So of course we went with our hat in hand and asked for more money so we could get some more staff. Dollars are tight. You can't expect everybody to just open up their coffers. So we built a business plan based on best practices that we saw around the country with other LAPs, based on what we saw the needs of Virginia being. We didn't put a dollar figure on it until after we had built the plan, and then we said, "What would something like this cost?" Because we wanted to be a best practice lawyer assistance program.

                                           We took that to the state bar. We took that to the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association. We took it to the Law Foundation. We pretty much paraded that all over anybody who would listen, and everybody said, "Yeah, that looks really good. That's really nice, but there's not a pathway for funding for that." So when Chief Justice Lemons came back from the National Task Force and he challenged or tasked Justice Mims to head up the committee in Virginia, that committee was... I hope you'll be able to provide a link to the report. It's a profession at risk. It'll outline who all was on that, but take my word for it, it was the key stakeholders in the legal profession around the Commonwealth of Virginia. Some real movers and shakers.

                                           The very first briefing that that committee got, after Chief Justice Lemons tasked them, was our business plan. That was the first thing they heard. And gave us the opportunity to pitch the need, to pitch the studies that had been done, and what we proposed to do about it. So that committee really took off with the challenge from the chief to study the National Task Force report and look at ways to implement that in Virginia. And they were armed with our business plan sitting on the side.

                                           So it was very fortuitous timing for us, but if you also look at the composition of that committee, there are several former and active board members from the Lawyers' Assistance Program who served on that committee as well. So they knew what they were talking about. They knew the issues at hand and were very obviously, very well-versed in the legal profession of Virginia to be able to make the recommendations that they did.

                                           So to say that we were on the sidelines would be wrong. To say that we were in there with our sleeves rolled up would be correct, and that was only because Chief Justice Lemons and Justice Mims invited us to play an active role in that committee. I didn't serve on the committee, but I was an advisor to each one of the subgroups of that committee. They could reach out. We could give them our two cents. We could help guide them through their discussions. And we weren't doing that with a parochial view towards the Lawyers' Assistance Program. We did it with a parochial view towards what's best for the legal profession in Virginia.

Chris Newbold:                Yeah. Well, this is a good probably break point here because I think it kind of sets the tone for revenue source in hand, action plan in hand, and kind of where things come with Margaret coming onboard. Let's take a quick break, and we'll come back and hear the rest of the Virginia story.

Advertisement:               Your law firm is worth protecting and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and buy coverage, all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com.

Chris Newbold:                All right. Welcome back. And we are talking about Virginia and some of the trailblazing work that Virginia has done on lawyer well-being. Margaret, let's shift the conversation back to you. So the assessments made on Virginia lawyers and that generally, roughly creates about $1 million in revenue annually. I'd be curious as the first wellness coordinator for the Commonwealth, what do you work on? How do you think about your day? And ultimately, what's the game plan? What do you hope to achieve as you think about the allocation of those resources relative to making a difference?

Margaret Ogden:            Right. It's smart to think about it in terms of allocation of funds. We have the Lawyers' Assistance Program, formerly Lawyers Helping Lawyers, getting the bulk of that funding allocation every year to expand their staffing. And this doesn't just allow them to provide direct services. It also allows them to really beef up these education and outreach efforts, and that's where my position comes in. Because we recognize that even though impairment is a very large problem in our profession, statistically the majority of lawyers will not themselves become impaired over the course of their career. But we can all do a little better. Even if we are not at the level of relying on substances to get through our day to the detriment of our clients, because of the unique occupational stressors of our profession, we are at greater risk for things like burnout, and that means we need to kind of take on more protective habits on our daily basis to ensure that we're meeting these higher standards.

                                           And I think that's where my position comes in is looking at education and outreach on more general health and well-being. I love the Six Areas of Well-Being from the National Task Force report. That's a really great way for me to talk about it to attorneys because I think past workplace well-being efforts kind of have all focused on step challenges or weight loss, really physical fitness, and that can be isolating for a lot of people, particularly attorneys and particularly with an aging population. So I want to be sure that we're talking about wellness holistically, and we're talking about it on an institutional level.

                                           I think of Tim and Jim and Barbara and Angeline and Janet, the staff over at the Virginian Judges Lawyers' Assistance Program, five people now, as really having the individuals covered. And I think of my role as the institutions and the stakeholders. Making sure that the associate deans of all of the law schools are talking to each other every month about trends in well-being among their students and what programs are working. This is my favorite monthly conference call, and I just sent out the agenda before this. So I'm very excited about talking. We talk every month, me and the associate deans of the law schools about what they're seeing.

                                           In terms of coordinating judicial response, so my position very smartly I think was housed in the Office of the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court. In Pennsylvania, our version of that was called the Administrative Office of the Courts. Think of it as the administrative arm. So HR lives there, court IT. And thinking that wellness is so pervasive that it needs to be part of our administrative function I think is very forward looking.

Bree Buchanan:              Absolutely brilliant.

Margaret Ogdan:            Yeah. Specifically I'm within our educational services department, and that's the group that puts on our yearly judicial conferences for all of our judges and then a bunch of other groups that the court has some education responsibilities for, like clerks, magistrates, other court personnel. And this is really exciting because having wellness on the judicial conference agenda blows my mind. When we were going to initially be in-person this year, I had an entire Wednesday afternoon of wellness activities. Justice Mims was going to be leading a jogging group. This was really fun to plan activities for the judges because they don't have necessarily the same strict CLE requirements that lawyers do, but showing them that wellness can be something they can incorporate into their conferences, that they take it on almost like a perk. And that it's led by their colleagues, not only does that help us just in terms of budgeting, we're not bringing in really expensive outside experts. But I think things are more exciting when you see your buddies doing them.

                                           So we were able to transition that virtually, have a booklet made, and still do a couple Zoom sessions. And it's having the funding and the staffing in place before the pandemic I think was super key because it's much easier to adapt when you already have a person who's working in that space.

                                           So law students, judges, and then of course lawyers, they make up the bulk of my outreach efforts, and the court is never going to be entirely taking over continuing education for lawyers. Thank goodness. No, I would never be able to do that on my own. But working with the folks who are doing that. So the Conference of Local and Specialty Bar Associations, presenting to them, and enabling and empowering our local and affiliation bars to incorporate wellness education into their programs. Working with CLE providers to... Especially when we do virtual programming, take into account some well-being. Not back-to-back-to-back in front of a screen, acknowledge Zoom fatigue, build in spaces for people to walk around and get moving.

                                           So every day is a little different, which is fun because I am serving a few different audiences, and we are talking about organizational and institutional response to support healthy habits.

Bree Buchanan:              Margaret, I love how you're able to come in because you've got that position there, and you're thinking about this obviously every day, and are able to put so much energy in it. And the conference, I looked at the agenda, I read the booklet. It was really impressive and that you have... This is so key, you have this very visible support from the top of the legal profession in the Commonwealth, and that's so key. You guys are so blessed to have that.

                                           Tim, I wanted to ask you, what can you share with others, anybody who's working on this, and especially the Lawyer's Assistance Programs, if they want to start some sort of statewide, multi-stakeholder committee, commission, task force, what advice would you give to them?

Tim Carroll:                      Yeah, that's a great question. I've actually talked with some of the other directors who have called and asked, "How did you do that?" And I really had to think about, but I didn't have to think very far because it was such a upfront activity that we were involved in. I guess the key to the LAPs is really to accept that for people to trust you, they have to know you. They're not just going to pick up a phone and call 1(800)LAP. They could call 1(800)ADDICTION CENTER. They could call wherever they want, but they have to know us if they're going to trust us. They have to trust that we are competent in what we do. They have to trust that we will hold their confidentiality. And they have to trust that we can help. So that's really the cornerstone of the LAP.

                                           We built our business plan from that cornerstone. How do we get out, and how do we get known enough to be trusted? The first step is to have a plan. No one is going to throw money at the LAP if the LAP doesn't demonstrate what they're going to do with it. So the very first step is to build a plan, build a business plan, build a plan. The second step is to engage the stakeholders at every level. At the top, the middle, the grassroots, wherever it is, engage all of the stakeholders so that they buy into that plan. And then of course, have a champion. Our champion was Chief Justice Lemons. I'm going to say our co-champion was Justice Mims. Having those two at the very top of the profession in Virginia looking out for the LAP and looking for how could they make the biggest difference to the entire legal profession and seeing that we were ready to do it, that was really the key to our success.

                                           So just basically to summarize it. If you want to do what Virginia do, build a plan, engage the stakeholders, and... Excuse me. Build a plan, engage the stakeholders, and make sure you have a champion somewhere, preferably at the top.

Chris Newbold:                Can you spend just a minute on your program has really been transformed through the additional funding. So I want to give our listeners some insight into when you have a... I don't even know how much more revenue you had from before, but obviously you had a plan. Where are you at in your plan, and how has this fuel from Margaret's office and the State's Supreme Court done to transform your program?

Tim Carroll:                      Yeah. If we're going to hire people, we have to have money. We have volunteers. Let me get that out there first. The foundation of our program is volunteers. We have not been successful since 1984 up to 2019 without our volunteers. You can't do it with a staff of one; you can't do it with a staff of 1.5. So the way we've transformed what we do includes the volunteers. That piece is constant. It has never changed. What we've done though, volunteers have full-time jobs most often. As any nonprofit has found, getting the time from a volunteer. They're willing to do it, but sometimes they just don't have the time.

                                           So what we did was established a... If you're familiar with the geography of Virginia, there's Northern Virginia, which is sometimes referred to as another country. There's Southwest Virginia that really is another country. And if you're going to work in Southwest Virginia, you've got to understand the culture, you've got to understand the geography, you've got to understand what it means to be a lawyer or a judge in Southwest Virginia. When we say Southwest, and if you want to pull out a map and look, that's not Roanoke. Get that clear. It's farther out.

                                           So we hired a licensed professional counselor with the moneys that we were given. That I said when I came onboard, the very first dollar that I would spend would be on somebody in Southwest Virginia. So we got Angeline out...

Chris Newbold:                Oh, looks like we might have lost Tim. Margaret, you aware of kind of the three areas around Virginia [crosstalk 00:46:14]-

Margaret Ogden:            Oh yeah. Definitely. And this is actually kind of a little fun story on my first week of work, I went to far Southwest Virginia. And I say far Southwest because I started my practice in Roanoke, and I made the mistake of saying Roanoke was Southwest Virginia. And the folks out in Grundy, at Appalachian School of Law quickly corrected me because that's another three hours past Roanoke. Virginia is enormous, and Angeline is very cool. She's out there in Rural Retreat. She's from that area. So she's been working very closely with Appalachian, the law school there and also just with serving the population of attorneys there. Because of the nature of the geography, the population is really under resourced area when it comes to mental health and substance use. So I think just having a presence there of someone who is from there and understands that area has been immensely helpful for cultivating that relationship, not just with the law school but with the bar and with the courts there as well.

Chris Newbold:                So sounds like the strategy that Tim's organization is employing is more licensed professionals closer to the ground with broader geographic focus on-

Margaret Ogden:            Exactly. And having folks who are there who are building those connections with these stakeholders who are already in place. So we have our eight law schools around the Commonwealth. They're great and not just for their education but for their alumni networks and for their educational programming that they send out with their law students.

                                           The other piece is bar associations locally and then building relationships with treatment providers locally too. Making sure that mental health professionals are comfortable treating lawyers so that there's this really strong referral network. A lot of people have started calling JLAP not to be in a longterm, monitored, formal relationship. I get to see these numbers in the aggregate every month as part of our reporting. I never see any individual clients of JLAP. This is the great thing about them remaining a separate, independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit. But they are very transparent in their aggregate numbers, so we can see that people call them all the time to just ask, "Hey, I need a therapist in my area who will work with me as an attorney," or, "I need a marriage counselor," or, "Do you have the number for rehab place for my kid?" It doesn't need to always been an intense relationship. JLAP is there for whatever struggle a legal professional is having where they are, and they're developing those local relationships so that they can give people resources in those locations.

Chris Newbold:                Excellent. Again, Virginia is such a cool story, right? And it looks like Tim is joining us back for hopefully the final question here. Tim, we successfully passed the baton onto Margaret. We're still rolling. She did great. Let me just ask you one final question, which is you guys are now a year, year and a half, two years into your plan and starting to probably really see results. And I'm sure there have been stumbling blocks and some things that have really surprised you. Just would be curious on lessons learned either the hard way or lessons that you think that are worthwhile for our listeners to hear in terms of things that have been really successful.

Tim Carroll:                      Well, I'll piggyback. Don't let your power fail and take your internet with it. Sorry, my apologize for that. I think the lessons that we've learned are to get all of the stakeholders engaged. Really Margaret has been an amazing, amazing addition to our team. From day one, Margaret came down and talked to us about what she viewed her role was, about how we could work together. We do have that clear line of separation in terms of the client load, but we do have an incredible collaboration in terms of outreach, in terms of getting the word out, in terms of being present and support around the Commonwealth. I guess I didn't have a vote in Margaret being in that position, but whoever did hit the gold mine. So if there is a lesson to be learned, make sure that you hire the right person to be your wellness coordinator at the very top.

                                           Make sure that you've got constant communication with your stakeholders. The various bar associations, the top level bar associations, the local bar associations continually engage with them to make sure that you're carrying the same message and that you're supporting the needs of their constituency is. I think that those are the most critical things to the success that we have.

                                           Of course, our amazing team that I hope Margaret was able to talk about. We just have an amazing group of people. It's a joy to work with and top to bottom, all of the bar associations, the court, state bar, this is just a perfect world here in Virginia.

Chris Newbold:                Feels a little bit like a symphony with Margaret as the conductor and when every piece comes together, you can really make some pretty sweet music.

Tim Carroll:                      Absolutely, absolutely.

Chris Newbold:                Yeah. Well, again, thank you both so much for joining us on the podcast. I'm sure there are listeners who might be interested in contacting you. With your permission, I think we'd like to include your contact information when we post the podcast so the people can contact you directly and hear firsthand the stories. And we certainly will be keeping our eyes on your successes as we continue to move forward because again, we need states like yours to be leaders up front and to be able to kind of demonstrate the type of change that can occur. As somebody who watches Virginia lawyers quite closely, me on the malpractice side, I know that there's a lot of pride in the legal profession in Virginia. And I think that that probably also speaks to why this has become an issue that folks have been about to rally around. There's just a high quality of lawyering that goes on in Virginia, and I think the focus on well-being is a natural compliment.

Margaret Ogden:            Oh yeah. Lawyers from Virginia started our country. I'm always proud to be a Virginia lawyer, and I'm also always proud to talk to lawyers from other states and Commonwealths about what we're doing. And also, we'll talk about failures too. The important part of this conversation is honesty and vulnerability. So please share our information, and we will Zoom into courtrooms around our fair country.

Bree Buchanan:              Thank you, Margaret.

Tim Carroll:                      I would say just unlike my last two jobs, we do not have trade secrets. We are willing to share anything that we have with anyone at anytime. So yes, spread our contact information out. We're at the other end of the phone or the other end of the email. We can help anybody. We're here to be a partner.

Chris Newbold:                Excellent. Well, again, thank you both for joining us today. We'll be back with the podcast in a couple weeks. Until then, be well.

 

Path To Well-Being In Law Podcast: Episode 5 - Judge David Shaheed

Chris Newbold:               

Hello and welcome to episode five of our podcast series, The Path to Well-Being in Law, an initiative of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being. I'm your co-host, Chris Newbold of ALPS Malpractice Insurance and our goal here is simple. To introduce you to cool people doing awesome work in the space of lawyer well-being and in the process, build and nurture a national network of well-being advocates content on creating a culture shift within the legal profession. I'm joined by my incredible tag team partner, Bree Buchanan. Bree, welcome.

Bree Buchanan:             

Thanks. How are you?

Chris Newbold:               

Good. Today, we're going to turn to a critical element of the well-being picture and that's judicial well-being. So often when we think about well-being, we think about it through the lens of practicing lawyers under the guise of lawyer well-being. But today we're going to look at the judge side of the equation and we have a recognized leader in our space and a fellow member of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, Judge David Shaheed of Indiana. Bree, would you be so kind to introduce our guest?

Bree Buchanan:             

Absolutely, I'd be delighted and I'm truly honored. Judge Shaheed is such a wonderful person that I've gotten to know over the past six or seven years, and he's a delight to work with. So, let me introduce everybody to him. Judge Shaheed is a judge in the Marion Superior Court, Civil 1. He came into that position in August of 2007. Prior to that, Judge Shaheed preceded over the Drug Treatment Diversion Court and Re-entry Court. He served on the Court Alcohol and Drug Programs Advisory Committee and was former chair of the Problem-Solving Courts Committee for the Judicial Conference of Indiana. In addition to serving on the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program in Indiana, he's a former member of the ABA's Commission on Lawyer's Assistance Programs and former co-chair of the Judicial Assistance Initiative for CoLAP. Judge Shaheed, welcome, we're so glad you're with us.

Judge  David S.:              

Thank you very much. It's an honor to be here.

Chris Newbold:               

Yeah. Judge Shaheed, I think one of things we love to do with our guests is just an introductory question which is what brought you into the well-being movement? Were there experiences in your life or other drivers that led you to have a passion for this kind of work?

Judge  David S.:              

Yes. Well, I think, for most people, at least in my community, there's always been somebody in the broader community not in my immediate family that's struggled with issues of depression, sometimes with substance use problems. So, I knew first hand how difficult that could make life for a person. The human dimension to the story. And so when I became a judge and was assigned to a criminal court and then I also had the opportunity to work with a drug treatment diversion court and then later was able to start a re-entry court of ex-offenders. It was a way to take life's personal experiences and build on those personal experiences to hopefully change the lives of people that I came in contact with in the courts.

Bree Buchanan:             

Terrific. Judge Shaheed, we heard in our last couple episodes from the author of the lawyer research study, Patrick Krill and then we heard from the author of the law student research study, David Jaffe. Now, we're rounding out the third leg of the three legged stool and hearing from you about the critical research that's been done in a sphere around judicial stress and resilience and you've been at the center of that national research project. So, could you tell us a little bit about that?

Judge  David S.:              

Yes. Well, that research associated with the National Task Force as most people may remember had a number of recommendations and one of those recommendations is that there be a survey of judges, especially with respect to stress, the effects of stress and also with respect to resiliency. There had been a survey with prospective law students. There had also been a survey done with respect to lawyers. It was one of the key recommendations especially with the judiciary, that there be a survey of judges dealing [inaudible 00:04:54] and also resiliency.

Bree Buchanan:             

So, what was the purpose of the research? What did you all set out to find?

Judge  David S.:              

Well, the purpose of the research was to actually get involved with judges and try to determine the sources of stress, the effects of that stress and then also to have a positive part, not just talk about the things that were going wrong and the things that were difficult, but also to get feedback from judges as to techniques or tools that they were using to work to try to deal with that stress. We know that when people are stressed out, when people are suffering from difficulties related to their work, sometimes there are unhealthy habits that take hold. And so since wellness is an important [topic 00:05:58] across all professions and the legal profession is also a part of that, the resiliency part with respect to what judges are doing in a positive way to deal with wellness and to deal with stress in a positive way.

Bree Buchanan:           

And there was a coalition of groups. Who all was involved in getting that project together because it was a big one?

Judge  David S.:              

Yes. It was a big project and probably the principal researcher, the person that I listen to the most, the expert was Professor Swenson. He is with the St. Scholastica College in Minnesota and also another minister of contact was Joan Bibelhausen, who is the Executive Director of the Lawyers Concern for Lawyers program in Minnesota. Yourself as representative of CoLAP during that period of time, and then also Katheryn Yetter, who is with the National Judicial College. There're perhaps premier organization associated with the education of judges. They put on many programs for judges throughout the year. And they had the role associated with having the judges that participate in their programs to respond to the survey so that we had good results. There are over 18,000 judges across the country, and we were fortunate to have over a 1000 judges in fact, 1034 judges participate in our survey.

Bree Buchanan:             

Wow. That is great.

Chris Newbold:               

Wow. Yeah, that's a great response.

Judge  David S.:              

Yes, very good.

Chris Newbold:               

Very good. Yeah. I'm curious what some of your key findings were and from your perspective, were there anything surprised you in the findings?

Judge  David S.:              

Well, the resiliency activities and interests, those were probably something that I hadn't really suspected when we initially thought about the survey, it's obvious you wanted to quantify as best as possible the sources of stress. So the ranking of the sources of stress [inaudible 00:08:47] and then also the effects of stress, there were about 34 effects of stress that were listed. But then there were also about 13 activities or interest including meditation, walking, exercises that judge were relying upon to effectively deal with stress in a positive way.

Bree Buchanan:             

And judge, I've read the research and I helped out on that some, and the thing that struck me was it seemed that judges overall compared to lawyers generally were fairing a little bit better than lawyers. But was there anything in the research that caused alarm?

Judge  David S.:              

Yes. Two things. It was not [inaudible 00:09:46] percentage, but 2.2%, and the figures sticks out in my mind because you have to remember there were over a 100 participants in the survey, but of that number 2.2% had [inaudible 00:10:03] aside. In other words, the stresses of the job were so significant that they had actually considered suicide. So to me, that was a big concern. A then also we all know about the availability of alcohol in our society. And so about 9.5% of the judges, especially in 2019 identified problematic drinking as one of the effects of stress.

                                          

And actually the 9.5 is a little higher than what is found in the general community of people over the age of 25, because it's around 6%. It's a little higher for lawyers, but the 9.5 is still problematic when you consider the stresses of the job and that some of our colleagues in the judiciary are using alcohol to cope with the stresses of their work.

Bree Buchanan:             

Right. And that is concerning. Absolutely. I remember another thing that was found out of the research was that there was data gathered of what judges were doing to improve their resiliency and what they wanted to know more about. And we looked at that gap there and where there was a big gap between what they were doing and what they wanted to do. We're thinking about honing in on that. Can you talk about a couple of those practices or things that judges wanted to do more?

Judge  David S.:              

Yeah. Well, one of the troubling and I'll just mention two, for a new judge because becoming a judge in the US especially a trial judge, I'll just speak of that in most states involves an election of some type. And so it's not like in Europe where they have a track or where you are a solicitor or whether you are on the ban, but in the US, the judge typically comes from the lawyer ranks. And so there's no real training to become a judge. So that's a concern especially for new judges, because they feel ill-equipped for the task of being a judge. They don't really feel that there is the proper support to help them be successful, and judges work in a silo. And so [inaudible 00:12:53] in a practice group law office, there's always a senior associate or partner that you may be able to go to. So you're on your own with respect to that.

But another aspect that we have found to be helpful is the judicial round tables. There's an excellent report out of Texas about the success of the round tables. They started for the most part in New York because they've had a lot of success with round tables, but the round tables are just an opportunity for judges to get together and talk about the work that they do, not so much in terms of cases and case law and statutes and procedures, but mainly about the work itself and how you cope with that work, how you deal with that work. So that's an important part of the discussion as well.

Bree Buchanan:             

Absolutely. And just one more thing. When will the study be published? When can we expect to see that?

Judge  David S.:              

Yeah. The study is going to be published in the ABA Professional Lawyer, and we're in the process now of ABA review, I think for many who are aware and familiar with the American Bar Association, it's quite a bureaucratic institution. And so we're in the process of, they're completing their review but we're hoping to have it published in The Professional Lawyer of the ABA by the end of the year.

Chris Newbold:               

Got you. And one of the things I think is interesting particularly for any of our non-lawyer listeners is just how all the different types of judges that are out there. I mean, when you really think about the breadth of the judiciary, I mean, you've got municipal judges and justice [crosstalk 00:15:01]. You got district court judges, you got appeals judges, you got specialty court judges. And so I'm just curious on your perspective of whether there are... My sense is that there are certain types of positions on the bench that are more prone to the stress and the interaction with clients.

Obviously, the higher you go up on the appellate side, probably the less interaction you have with real people. And so I'm just curious on whether the findings of the report or your personal experience tend to steer toward your judicial well-being being more of a challenge in certain parts of the judiciary.

Judge  David S.:              

One of the concerns, and it's talked about in the literature, and it's also found in the research is secondary trauma, or post-traumatic stress disorder and we tend to associate that with combat situations and our service people who are in military situations, but trauma can be experienced in a variety of ways. We know that there is trauma that the children experience. If they're in a household where there is domestic violence, that's a trauma. If they see violence in the family, that's trauma. So that kind of drama and trauma that is seen in the family situation, sometimes bubbles into the courts in cases of abuse or neglect. And there are judges that have to look at the probable cause, they have to look at reports with respect to how children are being mistreated and abused and cumulatively, seeing that kind of information on a daily basis, a daily diet of abuse and neglect takes a toll on the individual.

Also, we're familiar with criminal courts where there are absolutely horrific events that take place. They cause the loss of life or the injury to people or the assault of individuals. And again, judges have to hear that information, sometimes have to see a horrific scenes that are part of the evidence associated with the death of a person. And so that's just part of the job. And so a stale, a daily diet of that kind of information eventually takes its toll on a human being. Takes a toll on a person. So one or two things happen, a person sometimes becomes numb to what they're seeing, so they become somewhat detached. In other words, the daily diet of that kind of information just numbs and individuals. So they see it, but then they block it out.

And that's not good because then they become almost robotic in terms of doing the technical parts of the job. But to those who are a part of that court system with that kind of judge, they notice that there's something missing and that's not a good thing. So one of the other parts or one of the other aspects that is causes problems for the judiciary is burnout, because after so long, a daily diet or that kind of information causes one to just burn out. And so they start pulling away from the job and jobs satisfaction goes down and many of them are just looking for an exit or a way to get out of that kind of a court.

I can recall recently elections in my county where I heard stories about one judge who was really suffering from burnout in a criminal court, basically just started continuing cases because he knew that he was going to be leaving the court at the end of the year. So there became about a six month backlog of cases that got continued. And so for those individuals who were trying to have their cases resolved, they basically suffered because the judge was burned out. So those are just a couple of ways that it manifests itself when judges are overwhelmed by the ugly side or the ugly aspects of their job.

Chris Newbold:               

Yeah. And it seems like such an interesting challenge both on the front end, because you're elevated out of the lawyer ranks. You're elevated to the bench and there's got to be a shock to the system at that point of just, "What am I doing?" You're trying to figure this out. There's all these new emotions that are coming your way. We know there are schools that try to help judges adapt to that, but there's really emotions there. And then as you said on back end of their career you suffer the burnout side of things where this means you figure it out, you start to then go down and put down the road of just, "This is just being tough." And it's such an interesting as you think about it from a... I'm at an age right now and soon approaching 50 that a lot of my friends are elevating to the bench. And a lot of times you elevate to the bench and you go under an island a little bit. Right? And-

Judge  David S.:              

Right. Yeah. And that's another aspect you've really touched on is the isolation because we're collegial people. One of the things that has been pointed out by the pandemic is that in many places in the world, people have become familiar with the idea of quarantine. And we have learned most of us, at least that that's not really a comfortable idea to just isolate yourself. And we've been told as much as possible, we should isolate ourselves. And my age group pretty much the mantra. For anybody over 60 isolate yourself, don't be in contact. And so it's a little unnatural because we like to be in community, we like to be able to interact with people.

So one of the downsides of becoming a judge is the isolation, because the collegial aspect of life when you're in a practice group or when you're with a law firm, or when you're with any kind of legal work in an organization, you can ask for advice, you can just kind of bounce ideas off people, sometimes about cases that you have, but when you become a judge and you have your own caseload that you're responsible for, it's not like you can go to another judge and say, "Hey, look, I've had this case, what do you think I should do?" Because for the most part, they have their own case load and so you don't want to seem weak and not up to the job. So you basically go to your office or on the bench, you try to figure it out as best you can, but it is an isolating proposition.

And so that takes a toll as well. And it's not like you can go home and share the details of your troublesome caseload with your family. So it's a rather lonely job. And then when you have to make monumental decisions, life-changing decisions about people, typically those are made by yourself. It's not like you take a committee vote, you have to make the decision and then you have to live with the decision, both with respect to appeal but also with respect to the emotional toll that it takes on yourself. And then thinking about the consequences of your decision on the lives of other people. So it's a weight that doesn't go away, and it's a weight that is unlike a lot of other professions, especially in the legal profession.

Chris Newbold:               

It certainly feels like a heavyweight of a job from an emotional perspective, a lot of weight on those shoulders-

Judge  David S.:              

Yes it is.

Chris Newbold:               

There’s obviously glory in the role, but real world, real family ramifications in both the decisions and the contemplation. Let's take a quick break here and hear from our friends at ALPS. And I'd like to come back on the conversation and talk about why the judicial system should to be paying close attention, not just to the judiciary totality of the profession more generally.

Bree Buchanan:             

Welcome back everybody. We're here with Judge David Shaheed, who is a member of the National Task Force and a member of the Judiciary. And he's talking to us about wellbeing among the judiciary in the United States. And Judge Shaheed, I think particularly with the task force report, we're really starting this well-being movement across the country. And a piece of that is for the judiciary. Could you talk a little bit about why the judicial system should be paying attention to wellbeing? What happens when wellbeing is not really addressed?

Judge  David S.:              

Well, the role of the courts in our life in America is one of the most important roles that there are. I mean, just the number of TV shows that focus on judges in terms of reality shows and then also drama that involve the courts. There's always been a fascination with the courts. And the rule of law in a very serious sense, is probably one of the hallmarks or most significant aspects of our democracy. And so most people don't spend their lives in course. We have professionals of course, lawyers and judges and so forth, but the average person may not ever get to a court, but if they come to a court that is going to be an experience that they seldom forget. And so the interaction that they have with the judge is going to mark them and influence what they think about the courts and the rule of law in America.

So we want everybody to be at their best. When we go to a doctor's appointment, we want the doctor to be at their best and any kind of interaction that we have, we want the person that we're interacting with at their best. And since judges are making life-changing decisions, the wellness of those judges is an essential concern for all of us. And we know that if judges are well, their decisions reflect that. A part of the study has shown that with research that depending upon the time of day that judges make decisions, they're more positive in the early parts of the session and they trail off toward the end.

But we want to have judges at their best during that entire process because that forms what the average citizen thinks about our courts, and about our judiciary, and about this principle of justice of being fair to everyone that comes before the courts. And so the rule of law and the administration of justice through the courts is one of the hallmarks of our democracy and that's the reason why it should be of concern that we have judges who are well and healthy on the bench.

Bree Buchanan:             

Wow. That's a great answer. I've never heard it put so clearly in such dramatic terms.  That's great. And now of course, we're in the midst of a pandemic. We're hitting the sixth month of this. And you're still presiding over cases in court. What is it like right now in the judicial system to try and carry on justice during a pandemic?

Judge  David S.:              

Yes. Well, since late February, early March everybody's life all over the world has changed and the courts and judges are not immune to that. For a period of time, basically from March, maybe until mid-May, there were basically only emergency court hearings and definitely not hearings where people were coming to court. In many cities, in many communities, the courts have been for the most part closed, and they're gradually starting to open up. And so just like we're on a Zoom call for this podcast, the courts have been using Zoom primarily at least in Indiana as the primary mechanism to have non-emergency hearings. So that has been a tremendous change because two quick points about this for judges.

The second source of stress for judges is heavy dockets. So when you consider that for two and a half months or most, there were no court activities at all. There's a backlog that has developed in the criminal courts and civil courts all throughout the court system. And so I can tell you right now, the judges are stressing of how are they going to get that backlog work down. So that's one concern for judges and that adds to stress. The other part is that judges like routine, all of us like routine. And so within a short period of time, all of us as judges have had to become familiar with the technology of operating a court for the most part electronically.

In most states there is e-Filing, which helps somewhat but for the most part judges have had to adapt and the staffs have had to adapt to the technology associated with conducting a hearing remotely. Where the judge is in one place, maybe in one location in one state, and then the parties may be in other states at least in other locations and still the business of the court has to get done. So this adjustment causes additional stress because we know how to do things the way we did them in 2019, but the reality is the way we operated as judges in 2019 is not the same way we're operating as judges toward the end of 2020. So those kinds of adjustments are additional stressors as they say, but that's the reality of the work that we're doing.

Chris Newbold:               

Yeah. Change, change, change, change, right?

Judge  David S.:              

Yes, absolutely.

Chris Newbold:               

I mean, backlogs and new technologies and new ways of operating a courtroom. I am curious Judge Shaheed, as you think about the courtroom, I think your answer was so eloquent I think on the role of the judge, you also preside over the totality of the courtroom and that includes the attorneys that are before you ultimately are officers of the court. I'm curious on your perspective with respect to them and what you generally see in the courtroom. When you see hints of attorneys who are before you who might be struggling in terms of [inaudible 00:33:40] situation, we've even seen essences of alcoholism in courts and strange behavior. I'm just curious on your perspective on the interplay between your role on the bench and then those officers of the court and what role you have in terms of both identifying challenges and then being part of the solution.

Judge  David S.:              

Well, I can remember over the Drug Court in Marion County, an incident where a lawyer who showed up for a hearing had cocaine drop out of his pocket before he was able to get into the court room. So that part was easy because he ended up getting arrested right there in court before the court session started. But sometimes you see impairments. A judge wants to have a fair trial in particular, if you're over a criminal court you have to be concerned about the defendant having a fair trial because from two respects, you want to have a fair trial because you don't want to have an appeal based upon the lawyer representing the defendant not being affected, but also from the standpoint of fundamental fairness. You want to make sure that as much as possible there's an equal playing field and both sides or both parties are being properly represented.

So it does create a problem and an immediate problem with respect to how you get through that hearing, but then there's other ethical problem for you as to what you do when you witness signs of impairment. Fortunately, in all states there are lawyers assistance programs. And so those lawyers' assistance programs are a vital asset to the legal community, because if you see a sign of impairment or something that doesn't look exactly right, and many times lawyers you've seen them over not only months, but over years. And so you can call the Lawyers Assistance Program, mention what you have observed and then the Lawyers Assistance Program can reach out to that lawyer or sometimes a judge and to volunteers, I've done it myself just check on the person and say that you're just there to see or to ask them if everything was okay.

And again that's when the real benefits of Lawyers Assistance Programs so that judges or any other professional can alert the Lawyers Assistance Program in their state that there may be an impairment or there may be some other issue that is interfering with that legal professionals' performance of their professional duties.

Chris Newbold:               

We should note that Judge Shaheed is an active leader in the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. And thank you for your contributions there, because I think your perspective is particularly important. Now, let's maybe wrap it up with one final question Judge Shaheed, which is overall, are you optimistic are you pessimistic about judge resiliency and then the ability to cope with the stressors of the bench obviously with the pandemic going on right now? What have you seen, what do you think we are now and where do you think we're going?

Judge  David S.:              

Well, let me give a formal plug for the article that's going to come out this year, Stress and Resiliency in the US Judiciary. That represents, I think a milestone or a high watermark with respect to information that will guide in particular those judges who are presiding judges over their courts or those judges who are administrators for the judges in their district or circuit so that they have concrete information from which they can tailor programs to assist the judges. Without the data, it's hard to have a justification to have a wellness program for the benefit of judges in district, for example.

But with this report coming out, once it becomes public, then those presiding judges, those chief judges of those districts can say, "Now I have information that can guide me to start around table for judges on a monthly or quarterly basis or to have programs on wellness." So it gives judges and the judiciary the tools and information necessary to help promote and support the wellness of judges across the country.

Bree Buchanan:             

Wonderful. So well said.

Chris Newbold:               

It is. When that report obviously is published, we'll make sure to include that on our website @lawyerwellbeing.net because I think that that is... Again, a really important part of the equation that we talked about lawyer wellbeing, but it really is more of a holistic look at wellbeing in the law more generally and we certainly thank you for your contributions, your leadership, your perspective. It certainly feels like awareness is a big part of the game right now for more judges and with awareness brings vulnerability support amongst each other, and those all seem to put us more in a sense of we're trending in the right direction than the wrong direction.

Judge  David S.:              

Yes, yes. Well, trending is very important. We've learned with social media and depending in the right direction with respect to wellness for lawyers, the legal profession, and also judges.

Chris Newbold:               

Yeah. Well said, and again, thank you Judge Shaheed.

Judge  David S.:              

Yeah, absolutely.

Bree Buchanan:             

Thanks so much.

Chris Newbold:               

This was a great conversation again, I think sometimes we don't step back and take a look at the role of judges and just... Again, what tough jobs those are, what important jobs they are for again, of the underpinnings of a well-functioning democracy, but they don't come without emotional and stress and real problems that affect real people. And so we appreciate your perspective and bringing it on the podcast today.

Judge  David S.:              

Well, thank you so much for launching this podcast. I know it's going to be a big help to the legal profession. And so it's not a small step, it's a significant step and we just need to have the need to support it as best we can and years from now, people will look back on this moment and say they can remember when Chris and Bree started this. So you'll be in the hall of fame on national wellness.

Chris Newbold:               

That's right.  Well, again, thank you so much-

Judge  David S.:              

Sure, absolutely.

Chris Newbold:               

in a couple of weeks where we start to look at... I always think of states as laboratories of democracy and one of the states that has been really doing some incredible work is the Commonwealth of Virginia. And we're going to have a couple of the leaders of Virginia come in and talk about some of the great work that's happening there on wellbeing. And so stay tuned for that. Thanks, Judge Shaheed.

Judge  David S.:              

All right. Thank you. Thanks to both of you.

Chris Newbold:               

All right. Take care.

Bree Buchanan:             

Thank you. Good bye.

Judge  David S.:              

All right.

Path To Well-Being In Law Podcast: Episode 4 - David Jaffe

In this episode of the new podcast, Path to Well-Being in Law, co-hosts Chris Newbold and Bree Buchanan enjoy lively conversations with lawyer well-being pioneer David Jaffe.  David gives essential insight into how the well-being movement took hold in the legal profession and discuss ways in which its culture may finally be shifting. He also discusses the research study he co-authored regarding law students and how that data has informed significant shifts in how law schools are addressing the well-being of their students.

Transcript:

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

Welcome to Episode Four of The Path to Lawyer Well-Being in Law, a podcast series, a production of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being with technical support coming from our friends at ALPS. Our goal is simple, to introduce you to cool people doing awesome work in the space of lawyer well-being, and to shine the light on the many great things happening around the country. I'm joined today by my fantastic co-host, Bree Buchanan.

BREE BUCHANAN:

Hi everybody, thanks Chris. Good to be here with you today.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

Yeah, and today we're going to dive into an area of lawyer well-being that I think is both fascinating, because it's kind of where a lot of the cultural elements of lawyer well-being originate. We're going to talk about law schools and the work that's being done in law schools. We are very excited to have with us a real visionary in terms of thinking about law school culture as it relates to lawyer well-being. Bree, I'm going to have you introduce our guest, David Jaffe.

BREE BUCHANAN:

Sure, and thank you, and I appreciate the opportunity to do that because David Jaffe is one of the favorite people that I know, and so I'm delighted to have him here. David's day job, he's the Associate Dean of Student Affairs at the American University Washington College of Law in D.C., and I know David from the many years that he spent on the ABA's Commission on Lawyers Assistance Programs and has been a leader with that group around issues related to law students and looking at reform for law schools across the country around how they address students who are struggling with mental health issues or substance use problems, and just general well-being. He was awarded CoLAP's Meritorious Service Award a few years ago. Near and dear to our hearts is that David was the author, the lead author, the author, on the law school section of the National Task Force Report. So he's been in this space with us from the very, very beginning.

So David, welcome. I'm so glad you're here with us today.

DAVID JAFFE:

Thank you, thank you Bree and Chris, thank you so much for having me today.

BREE BUCHANAN:

Yeah. And you know one of the questions that we ask everybody that's on the podcast, because I think it's helpful to just have the human side of this is, David, what brought you to the lawyer well-being movement? It's so clear that you have a driving passion for this work. What drives it?

DAVID JAFFE:

It's a great question actually, something I've been thinking about a lot. I think I bring it back to two elements from my own, my personal childhood and background, one of them which I've not shared a lot. When I was 15 years old I actually came across one of my siblings who was attempting to commit suicide, or at least thought he was at a very young age. He was 16 months younger than me, and had taken a mixture of pills in an effort to join, not through suicide but a cry for help to join one of my other siblings in a private rehab school in another state. I happened to be the one at home who found him, found him in enough time. He was taken care of and ultimately did end up at this school, and he's now okay, thank you. But I think it's really something that at that age had to have stuck with me.

There's also a history of depression in my family. It goes very deep to my grandmother, with whom I was very close, and my father and a couple of other relatives. So it's something that I've been sensitive in my personal life, and then through extrapolation. I look at these 100s of law students who we take in at our law school and across the country every year, and just wonder with all the myriad issues that they have facing them even prior to school, and then exacerbated by everything that they have in transitioning to law school, what they must be going through. And I think that's just been a lot of what's driven my desire to be available to reach out when possible and try to be some resource of assistance.

BREE BUCHANAN:

And they're so lucky to have you, David, to have somebody in that role who really gets it and is really compassionate and feels for what they're going through, and it's evident in hearing you talk and the work that you do.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

Yeah. David, remind me how many years you've been involved in higher education and in particular the law school setting.

DAVID JAFFE:

Sure. So I graduated from the Washington College of Law, where I'm presently employed, in 1993. I spent a total of three years in different positions with the school, four actually, and in 1997 I interviewed successfully for the Dean of Students job. I was the second Dean of Students that the law school had, was relatively young to have the title of Dean although it's never been something that I've made a lot of in my title, but more importantly it was giving me the opportunity to work with students more on the, just on a one-on-one level. So I think I had a LinkedIn reminder today that 27 years of service with the law school.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

That's definitely got to have provided you the context and the perspective to see obviously a lot of different changes in the law school setting over that duration of period of time.

DAVID JAFFE:

Absolutely. Absolutely. I think we, I'm sure we'll talk more about this, but I think that we've seen an evolution of sorts, and unfortunately and fortunately in the same breath, around mental health and well-being. I think it's one that's really only taken hold probably the last five, maybe no more than seven years. But again, to the good, I think law schools generally are trending in the right direction in that regard.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

That's exciting to hear. Let's go back a little bit and let's talk about the Suffering in Silence study. Obviously that was a precursor to the Path to Lawyer Well-Being report, and lay the evidence based challenges that I think we're both seeing in the profession in one respect but in the law schools specifically in that particular study. I'd just be curious on why did you do the study, and how did it come about?

DAVID JAFFE:

Sure. I got lucky to a large degree. I had been thinking a lot about the fact that we did not have a lot of data around the issues that those of us who've worked on the front lines with students perceived to be the case, around well-being, mental health, substance use, help seeking behaviors, things of that nature. I don't remember who it was but somebody put me in touch with a fellow traveler, Jerry Organ, who's a law professor at St. Thomas and somebody who does a lot of work around data for the American Bar Association. Jerry and I were introduced via email from a third party, and funny enough I think we spent about two years, maybe longer, working together towards building the survey and the idea without ever having met each other in person. I think it was some conference subsequent that we finally had a chance to meet and exchange hugs and catch up.

Jerry was interested in the same thing I was. We believe anecdotally that there's significant issues around law student well-being. We don't have the data. The only survey that had been out at that time was in AALS, Association of American Law School survey dating back to 1993, so it's actually the time that I had graduated law school. That survey was limited to some degree. It hadn't really addressed prescription drugs. It hadn't looked at help seeking behaviors as well. So we wanted to have information. For me the discussion was always the important part, but data's important, particularly for individuals who may not believe that the issues are actually ripe or actually out there, and so we wanted to have the backing and then be able to use that as a foundation to say, "Okay, now what do we do?"

So the survey came about in 2014. We surveyed 15 law schools, 3500 students, had just over 3,000 responses, and the numbers by and large confirmed a lot of what those who were working already with students noticed to be the case, that there was more drinking than anybody would, if not have anticipated, anybody wanted to see in law students. Use of prescription drugs without a prescription in more significant numbers than anybody would have hoped for. Positive screening for depression, around anxiety, particularly around anxiety fairly significant numbers. I think we screened 37% positive for anxiety.

Then again in the same breath that although a significant number of the students who responded to the survey, over 80%, indicated that they would seek a health professional if they felt they had an issue around alcohol or drug use or mental health, only 4% had indicated actually having seen somebody and those [inaudible], the numbers just don't match up. It wouldn't make sense if you were acknowledging in one breath the significant numbers that students were drinking and binge drinking and using drugs and everything else yet not getting help for it.

And that had just turned us quickly to some of the other numbers, which were around the help seeking behavior, that between, depending on whether you were looking at substance use or mental health, between 40 to 50% of the respondents said that they felt that they were more likely to get admitted to the bar if they kept their problem hidden. So [inaudible] when you take all these numbers together that they're acknowledging in one breath that they probably needed help based upon their use in different areas, but that they weren't getting the help and the presumption is that they weren't getting the help because they were afraid they were either going to have a job implication or that their character and fitness were going to impede them and they were not going to be admitted to the jurisdiction that they sought to get admitted to after three or four years of hard study and tuition payments and everything else.

BREE BUCHANAN:

Absolutely, and you know I shared in that first episode about, I started having emerging mental health issues in my first year of law school, and I can remember, I mean no way would I have ever gone to anybody and asked for help.

DAVID JAFFE:

Yeah. Right.

BREE BUCHANAN:

I really felt like I had to completely put out this image of being on top of everything and couldn't show any chink in the armor, so to speak. I got the opportunity to go back to that same law school and teach a clinical program 20 years later and I'll tell you, it's the same attitudes. Not much had changed at that time, but hopefully some things are changing now. [crosstalk]

DAVID JAFFE:

It's hard, Bree. It's really, you think about these individuals and regardless of the law school where you're working or assisting students, these students were skimmed from the top of undergrads or even if they were out for a few years, the top colleges from across the country. They all want to be competitive, oftentimes with themselves, sometimes with the sacrifice of classmates, which is another challenge. But they also, as a general rule, those students tend to be type A. They feel they've got everything under control and they can handle everything, and this whole notion of, a stigma of needing to have things under control really, really gets in the way of these students seeking help.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

David, the study came out in 2016, right? So we're four years removed from the study. Do you have a sense of how things have shifted with law students since the study was done? Do you have a general feeling for if we're doing better, are we worse, are we about the same? What do your instincts tell you?

DAVID JAFFE:

It's a great question. I'll start with a tease. Jerry and I are fortunate to have received a grant opportunity, and we're going to be updating that survey. We're surveying again next spring, in 2021, and so we're going to have yet another opportunity to really see the hard numbers and see if we've made some significant changes or potentially slid back since that survey and that time. What I would suggest, and although I'm very proud of the survey and a lot of the results from it, I don't want to give all of the credit to that. I think that Jerry and I should also mention Kate Bender from the Dave Nee Foundation who co-wrote the article with us after the survey came out, or the results of the survey came out.

I think that the law schools have been trending, maybe in part from results of the survey but just in part from being more aware of the importance of the issues, have been trending towards being more proactive than we have been. I had used the number five, seven years prior to this conversation, and what I mean by that is that we were at a time where, orientation for example, we would be told by senior administrators informally or formally that the last thing we should be talking about are issues around mental health and stress and anxiety. We're welcoming an entering class, and then boom they're going to get hit right between the eyes with this notion that it's going to be a really, really different experience, and next thing you know we're scaring them away to another school, as if we were the only law school that had an issue around these challenges.

That conversation has given way towards issues or conversations around well-being, around meditation and mindfulness and yoga and other outlets and seeking help when needed, as really being front and center orientations at I would say a good many law schools around the country. So we're not only not afraid of it anymore, but rather than being in this kind of reactive posture where we wait for a student to come and either be referred by a faculty member or just realize that they're desperately sinking and really come to somebody for help at the last minute, we're doing more proactive outreach. We're saying from the beginning in the orientation, in the materials, through reminders of mindfulness meditation sessions or yoga sessions or whatever else it is, that we understand that students are going through these issues and we want to try to head them off, and then of course also be there should despite our best efforts some of the issues continue to make the work and the challenges difficult for our students.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

I'm curious how you, to the extent possible, how do you measure success of what you've been doing relative to how you want to create an evolving culture in the law school that obviously prepares them for maybe greater vulnerability and greater willingness to let faculty know when they're in those challenging spots, or perhaps fostering a more collaborative and maybe less of a competitive environment?

DAVID JAFFE:

It's a great question. I think it's one thing that we, I would say for myself in our student affairs office, we probably struggle with a little bit. Metrics seem to be coming more and more important for schools, the ability to report outcomes of what they're doing in various ways. One way one can do it is to, how many students are dropping in your office, how many students are you meeting with one on one? In theory around well-being you could mark it by the number of students who are coming to a meditation session. But it's tricky, because you can argue two sides. If fewer students are coming to your office for help, then you could suggest that or imply that the work that you've done in orientation are causing students to, in a good way, to maybe seek help maybe with family or private counseling or things like that or maybe doing meditation on their own, and they're actually taking better care of themselves.

On the other hand, if numbers are increasing of students coming in to you, you could also argue that you've gotten word out about it, that you are a positive resource without judgment, without question, and so the students have found the credibility in your office and the comfort level and they're coming to you maybe at a time that they would be afraid, you know the Dean of Students has a job to report me to a character and fitness and to the bar, and so if I go and get help I might just be putting my death sentence out there for admission to the bar later on. So the short answer, I don't have an ideal one, Chris. I think, I simply feel that if one keeps beating the drum of the context and the conversation around this just being important and doing what you need to for yourself when you can, and seeking help when you feel like this is getting out of control, you've just got to trust that the students are responding to you and are getting help when they need, either with you or again through other individuals.

BREE BUCHANAN:

David, I know during your tenure as a leader of the law school committee of CoLAP, there was a study published by Jordana Confino that really looked at what was going on with law schools across the country and adopting well-being initiatives, and this was written within the last couple of years. Can you share some of the most promising practices or things that impressed you that are going on right now across the country that we might entice some of the law schools to adopt?

DAVID JAFFE:

Sure. Jordana's article was terrific, and as you said it did kind of follow a survey that several individuals had worked on in just trying to get a sense of ... Some of it was following our survey, but again some of it was just a general sense of we know you as law schools are doing better work or looking to increase your efforts in regard to what is working, what is not working. I would say if I wanted to tease out one, and forgive me, I don't recall if the numbers were as solid on this as I'd like to see them, but I actually think our faculty, faculty across the board, law faculty across the board that is, have the perhaps best opportunity to have a positive input and a positive effect on our students around these issues.

What I mean by that is that despite those of us as Dean of Students who like to kind of wear this badge of honor of being on the front line with law students, we're technically not. We do get to see the law students at orientation, at least for those Deans of Students who run orientation. In my case I'm one of them. But once school gets started the students are really, they're beholden to their classes and their faculty and vice versa. One of the parts of the article that had come out was, again, I think it was, there were definitely examples of faculty leading the way but I think it was more of a suggestion that we do a deeper dive in that regard.

Our faculty are held in such esteem by their students, particularly the entering students who are kind of seeing them for the first time and learning from them in these various subject areas. The opportunity for the faculty to, what's the phrase, to step away from the sage on the stage and just kind of be an assistant on the side. Not to stop doing what they're doing in teaching, but to take a minute in class, every now and then, even starting classes, with a very brief breathing exercise, but also taking a break every couple of weeks and acknowledging, "I know that you're hitting a peak point of the semester right now, that you're doing your legal writing class and that you're taking a midterm and this and that." Checking with the students. "Are you doing okay?" Reminding them that they've accomplished so much just by getting to law school, and reminding them that they have very much the right to be where they are and that they're going to graduate and not going to be- [inaudible]

BREE BUCHANAN:

Oh dear.

DAVID JAFFE:

Having a dog bark in support of that, I will take 100% of the time. [inaudible] So I think that's one of the big areas. I know that Jordana's survey had also pointed out that a lot of the wellness programming again are areas, depending on your school and what's working best for you, was definitely another area where we were seeing wellness committees that invited students in to discuss what was going to work best and then giving way to these meditation sessions or yoga sessions or running clubs or just giving an opportunity for students to gather together to talk, and ideally to kind of give way to more open conversation about how they could be supporting each other.

BREE BUCHANAN:

One of the things that's really golden is if you have a faculty member who will actually share his or her experience, maybe with depression or anxiety over the course of their career.

DAVID JAFFE:

100%.

BREE BUCHANAN:

That does so much to bring down the stigma that's around this and just makes it okay for people to start talking about it. When you can talk about it, then you can ask for help for it, and that's so critical.

DAVID JAFFE:

That's right. And we all have it, and that's the thing. And I try to share with students and say, occasionally I'll share the stories that I shared here in the podcast and go into a little more depth, but I'll also say, these things don't change. Some of our students are older and married, but you graduate from law school, you get married, you're dealing with raising a family, with a spouse or a significant other, buying a house, jobs and things like that. The stressors continue, so it's may be peaking to a degree in law school for students but they don't go away, and so the real question is, what do we do about getting help while we can, while we're in a support network where others can be helping us so that we can come out the other side and be as healthy as we can.

BREE BUCHANAN:

So David, you've been really central to some policy initiatives that have the potential to make real change in this area, and I want you to have the chance to talk about this. One of them is around the character and fitness questions that states ask law students and has such a chilling effect on law students' willingness to ask for help. Tell us about what your work is in that area.

DAVID JAFFE:

Sure. I [inaudible] an incredible component to the issue, and chilling effect is exactly the right phrase, Bree. There's again a much deeper dive. For those who are interested I would just encourage them to either reach out to any of us or to look up, Louisiana, I think they probably list it as Consent Decree in 2014, but basically there was a determination back in 2014 that a number, well that the State of Louisiana in that case was using their questions on their character and fitness portion of the bar application that were invasive and violative of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the ADA, that they were asking questions that could not or should not be asked. And so a decision was made to force through the decree to soften those questions, but if the determination was that they were being made only in that state because the suit was there and not federal and not across the board.

Some other states indeed who were already well addressing mental health questions or not having them at all. A couple of other states saw the handwriting on the wall and decided to make some changes. But there are still a decent number of states, four or five or six that would be described as extremely invasive, and then maybe scaling down to another 10 or 12, maybe even 15 or so. And these are states that are just asking questions that most typically is kind of the, did you ever? I mean they're asking questions about a student's health and background that really don't have a place in the current reflection of the character or the fitness of that applicant to study law. There may be issues that occurred that were well dealt with a number of years ago, and yet the question is opening it up again and causing a student to potentially disgorge information of a very personal nature, and also potentially re traumatize when these students have been through significant issues.

I've worked with some others. I've worked with Janet Stearns, who's my counterpart and friend at Miami's Law School. We have written an article recently about it, and even on the heels of that, we think, and some other things that were going on. We've seen a couple of states even in this calendar year who have rethought their questions, New York somewhat famously, and although they had cited to our article but to their credit they had been at work at it for a while. But they actually chose to modify their questions significantly after about a year, maybe a year and a half of a working group. And we still hope, because that's still fairly current and New York is such a significant bar, that we may see, and we've indeed heard from a couple of states since that decision came down, from a couple of states and their working groups that have been asking, "What information do you have, what can you provide us, because there's some of us who would like to see some of those changes implemented in our states as well."

And the argument just simply, maybe I should have started with this, is if the students were more and more savvy about looking ahead about what their future may be and what they have to do, they're looking on line. They see what the questions are. And if we're able to respond, or if their jurisdiction is able to respond, to say, "We're not going to ask questions around mental health," or the question we're [inaudible] asking is have you, if it's an issue that is maybe within the last two or three years, have you been receiving treatment for it, and if you have then we're going to be okay with that. Well that's going to allow those students, to go back to the bulk of our conversation this far, to actually get the help they need while in law school so that they can sail through with flying colors on that application and go on to lead healthy, not only professional lives as lawyers but personal lives as well.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

Great. I think that's a great time for us to take our break, and we'll talk about some more of these policy initiatives that are currently being pushed by CoLAP.

DAVID JAFFE:

Sounds great.

Your law firm is worth protecting, and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and bind coverage, all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.ALPSnet.com.

BREE BUCHANAN:

All right, welcome back everybody. We have David Jaffe with us today and we're talking about some really exciting policy initiatives that David has been at the forefront of, and these are things that can be game changers, really, around well-being for law students. What I wanted to, I can't miss out on asking you about, David, is your efforts to convince the ABA's law school accreditation committee to make some changes for what law schools are required to do around this. Can you talk a little bit about what your, I guess, I don't want to say lobbying but that's what it basically comes down to, efforts in this area?

DAVID JAFFE:

Sure, advocacy, definitely. Thanks, that's a great question. So one of the areas that we, and again a number of individuals who are interested in this would like to see more of an emphasis on, is some kind of formalized or required training around substance use and mental health awareness while in law school. Every law school is part of this. So the ABA accredits law schools, it's either every seven years or might be every 10 years now. You have to go through a process of self-evaluation and then sharing that information, and there are a lot of steps and questions around standards that have to be complied with.

One of the ongoing requirements towards the completion of the degree is that students take a course in legal ethics or professional responsibility, it's more often called, and while recognizing that a number of those courses will fold in because of the nature of the topic, professional responsibility, a session may be an hour or something like that around substance use, mental health education and awareness. Oftentimes a lawyer assistance program director is brought in, maybe a volunteer to tell his or her story, and they're very engaging conversations when they're held.

So it's there informally, but informally is a relevant term. No professor is required to write that into their professional responsibility textbook or case book and no faculty member is required to teach it as part of their overall assessment in that class. Since that's the most obvious class we've focused on that in a proposal to the ABA where we suggest it or at least suggest it generally, that substance use, mental health, at a minimum, two hours during a student's three or four years of education, is devoted towards that topic with the suggestion that a professional responsibility course would be the most logical place, that the ABA could be free to simply say that the requirement is there.

In theory you could do it as part of orientation, you could do it prior to that although I think it would be a little bit too early, I think we'd want students to transition and get settled in and then appreciate some of the nuances and some of the things that might be affecting them before they hear this information. But we really feel that trying to build atop this informal approach and those faculty and those who do write these course books to fold it in, that we have a formal adoption so that schools are really compelled to work in an area that quite frankly they ought to be doing regardless.

BREE BUCHANAN:

Terrific. That's just a brilliant approach.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

Yeah. David, you've also been very involved in the law school mental health day for law schools. I think last year it was in October, which I think is not coincidence, that you plan that in the first six to eight weeks of the semester, and I'd be curious on your thoughts around that particular mental health day and what the plans look like for 2020.

DAVID JAFFE:

Sure, thanks for that. So prior to, it might have been two years ago, mental health day was being held in the third week in March, and it was a somewhat artificial date and time that had been selected. A group of us had gotten together and said, "You know, it's way too late in the day to be having these conversations, right? You're at the end of the academic year. Why not push something up?" And so there was a determination and some advocacy to move it. It was actually a fairly easy lift, in credit to the ABA law student division, which is oftentimes very helpful in publicizing events that are going on around it. So we moved it to October 10th, which coincides with Global Mental Health Day as well. We've occasionally had to ... Well, we've only done it a couple years but we try to avoid a Saturday or sometimes even a Friday where law students are starting to check out for the weekend.

What we tried to do is bring some [inaudible] leaders. The last couple of years we've done some national broadcasting and invited schools to, through a webinar, to attend live, to ask questions live, and have them anchored at a school. We're looking to finalize the plans for this coming October, but I would say the part that I'm most excited about and I do hope it comes together, because it's probably a long time in coming, is that I believe the law student division is going to play an even increasingly prominent role in the event or quite frankly series of events. We may do a couple of presentations over a few days this year, and we hope that one of them will be led by the law student division and students themselves, because they really, there's never a better moment or an opportunity than a student working peer to peer with other students around these issues.

We like to stay the law students are getting younger each year. Obviously it's a joke as we age each year and still dedicate ourselves to doing this work, but when they stop and they see that they're, listen to their law students and the issues that their law students are facing and going through, it's then when they can really say, that's me, and it's really nice to hear, for some of them for the first time, I'm not the only one going through this.

That's another area we probably should touch on at least lightly as well. We have students who believe, particularly when they're transitioning into school and feeling the crush of the Socratic method and the new language and the reading and everything else, that they're the only one who's going through whatever it is that they're going through. I've seen so many times when I've finally had an opportunity to counsel one of these students, when I will look them in the eye and say, "You know, you're not the only one this week, or sometimes the only one today, who's come to my office from these issues," and you almost can see the burden kind of lighten from their shoulders, that they're like, "Oh my god, I'm so happy to hear that because I really thought I was the only one who was afraid to be called on or the only one who wasn't getting what was going on in class and everything else."

So coming back to mental health day, our hope is that there'll be at least one session that could be led by some of the student leaders and [inaudible] leaders, and really speak directly to students about some of these issues and inspire them to get help if that's an issue or to become leaders in their own right at their other schools across the country, and just kind of tentacle this out so that we're building on these wellness programs wherever and whenever we can.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

David, one of the things that I think is interesting as we look into the future a little bit is, I'm concerned that there's just, a lot of folks who go into law school, go through law school and then ultimately, there's a failure in expectations of what practicing law is like relative to what their expectations were before they came into law school. It's an expectations gap that I think ultimately, you get through law school, you've got all this student debt. You maybe take a job that you didn't anticipate taking, and then you kind of move yourself through a profession in which maybe you don't love what you're doing, and if you can't find professional satisfaction some of these other coping mechanisms then kind of creep in. I'd be curious on your thoughts on what law schools can do to maybe better establish what practicing law is actually like, and when to do that in the law school setting, and whether you believe that there is some notion of an expectations gap.

DAVID JAFFE:

That's a very thoughtful question, Chris. Let me take a stab at that. I'm going to back up a little bit. I don't disagree with anything that you said but I'm going to take maybe a step back prior to law school. I've had some really helpful conversations with the counselor who's assigned to our law students through the university's counseling center, and although we have an absolute agreement that she cannot share any specific information about law students with me, we do have an ongoing agreement that if there are any kind of threads or issues in the aggregate that are worth sharing, maybe there's a faculty member who seems to be affecting a group of students or something going on at the school, that she absolutely can share it, and time and again when we've sat down what she has said to me, Chris, is that by and large the issues that the students are bringing forward in law school are not law school related.

They're issues that, these kind of deep seated issues that law students have not addressed prior to coming to law school. Family issues, maybe unresolved. Personal issues. There may be issues around self-confidence and imposter syndrome and things like that, but also any issues around relationships, and maybe some diagnoses of depression and things like that as well. But things that students have not come to grips with, and then they get to law school and it's this jarring transition to start with, and then at the back end, and it's really, you know three years is a, even four years for evening students, it's a blink of an eye at the end of the day, and the student who has not sought the opportunity to work through some of these issues, which are now of course being exacerbated by the tuition and the potential prospects for employment and looking for those jobs and looking for summer opportunities and dealing with the debt and making new friends and transitioning, all these things are coming to a head.

And so the student who's not dealing with it at all is simply, they're not sailing through typically. They're struggling. But then all these issues are presenting themselves again in the work force, inclusive potentially of this kind of gap which is, I haven't been able to focus on myself, let alone on what I ought to be learning while I'm in law school to make myself a better lawyer, and to have an appreciation for what it is that I want to do.

I think the other part to your question in terms of the gap, and it all relates to well-being at the end. But I think the better job a law school is doing, not only around counseling students individually, collectively, but also providing some kind of experiential, solid experiential education or opportunities, variety of opportunities for education prior to the student getting out, is only going to serve the student well. And by that I simply mean whether it's a clinical program where a student's able to work as attorney student, attorneys for a year under the supervision of one of our faculty or even attorneys who are in practice, or even externships or internships where the students are going out into the field and working under the tutelage of a lawyer or a judge or a set of lawyers, and really gaining a sense, one, that it may be a subject area that they thought they were interested in and it ultimately turns them off, but they still have an opportunity to pivot and move in another direction; two, to gain some of those professional skills.

Because where a lot of these students, they're coming right out of undergrad and really they may not have ever worked at all and if they did, they're more of the kind of run of the mill retail positions and whatnot, but not something that really immerses you in the day to day, the exchange, the thoughtful thinking, the analysis, the professionalism that needs to be brought. And if you're not having those experiences in school then Chris, I absolutely agree, you find yourself in the profession potentially in a position that was not something that you thought you wanted to do or knew anything about, and you're unhappy. And there's [inaudible] to do that. We only get a limited period of time to enjoy what we're doing in living, and if we're not making positive selections about it we're bringing ourselves down, we're bringing down our colleagues, those around us, and again, this is the time around family formation, relationships and all, and those aren't going to work well either if you're not grounded in what it is you expect of yourself and what's making you happy on a daily basis.

BREE BUCHANAN:

Absolutely. And David I can really tell that you, like we said at the very beginning, I think, visionary. You think about all of these issues so deeply. So let me just ask in our last question, where do you stand today looking forward and for our students? Are you optimistic or pessimistic? Do you think things are going to get better for students, and what do you base that on if that's the case or otherwise?

DAVID JAFFE:

Short answer, long answer. As this podcast is being recorded, we're living in the middle of this pandemic, or if somebody's optimistic maybe a third of the way out, who knows. There are a number of us who are extremely concerned as we head into an academic year of where our students are going to be mental health wise. Social isolation is just the number one attack or deterrent towards well-being, and so while we're trying to make all this progress at law schools all of a sudden we're in this remote environment where we're staring at screens and looking desperately for other opportunities to engage, and this is going to be with us for a while. For most of us, at least the fall semester, we don't know about the year ahead.

So short term we're going to have to be looking at those issues. I'll also mention here that we're dealing with some professional licensure issues about the ability or the inability to counsel across state lines, and so if we have students at a school who are not at a school physically but are now living in another state and taking classes remotely, we in many instances cannot provide them the counseling and the counseling services that we would normally be able to do when they were in person, so that is a significant challenge. There is some legislation out there that I'm tracking and others are following that we hope will continue to relax some of the provisions that were initially relaxed in some states in the immediate aftermath of COVID in March.

Long term though, and again I hope it's a long term, a short long term or a short, short term where this kind of challenges go we start to have, I think we're trending towards the good. I think what we're finding, and we should give some credits to the law students as well. We're finding law students who are coming to law school, I want to say a little more self-aware. Maybe not, not self-aware and immediately well as a result of self-aware, but self-aware and comfortable enough that there are issues that they need to acknowledge to get better. I feel like there have been more open ended conversations. We've been running orientation for about five weeks now for this year's entering class and we've seen some really healthy conversations. We've received a lot of props in emails after some of our address your stress and mental health sessions during orientation, that students are really opened up and really appreciated them.

So I think the generation of students may be more willing on the one hand to be more open about these issues, and in turn probably more insistent that law schools are looking to address these issues. I know in my school our students formed a mental health alliance and they were pushing us around a number of issues. Are we providing enough counseling sessions? Are the referrals appropriate if we run out of our sessions? Can we make the intake a little bit easier? On and on.

And so I think the respectful, kind of gentle pounding on the table for, almost coming back to us and saying, "Hey, if Dean of Students, you're telling us that we need to be taking better care of ourselves, then we're going to turn around and say here are the things that you as law schools need to be doing to support it." And I think this is all going to coalesce in, I don't know how many years. I want to say three years, maybe five years as we're having this conversation, that I don't think we're going to turn ourselves entirely out of jobs around mental health but I think that our students are going to be taking even more and more of a look at themselves and making these requests of law schools, and I think we're going to be heading in the right direction. So I'm pretty optimistic, looking ahead.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

David, do you find that that's generational in nature or societal in nature, or what do you think are some of the drivers that are kind of positioning us for that optimism?

DAVID JAFFE:

You know, I used to say, when I was growing up and probably a couple of generations around then, if a principal or the teacher called you in as parents and said, "We think there's a behavioral issue or something that's going on with your child," you would look at that adult and say, "How dare you accuse my child of that," and look to sue the school or take them out or go somewhere else. The pendulum then I think swung for a period of time where, and I don't mean to blame parents here but I think the notion was, if my child through medication can be achieving and overachieving, as the pendulum kind of swung to the other way. Whatever you can to do help my child, that's great. I'll do it, let's go for it.

And I don't know exactly where that pendulum is right now, but I think it's some settling in the middle of a combination where students are students, when they're younger, prior to being law students, are being perhaps better diagnosed, again perhaps a little bit more self-aware. Maybe the parents now are a little bit more aware of knowing what to look for and what to avoid. So I think we're growing up a little bit healthier as families in that regard, and so I would say it's a little bit generational and maybe also a little bit societal. I mean there's just, wherever you turn there's just a push around well-being and wellness. And sometimes it's a push back against some of the challenges that we're facing around [inaudible] news and society and things like that, and so folks are looking for better answers. It can be really sobering and depressing if you're just constantly looking at negative breaking news and natural disasters and the epidemic we're living in and things of that nature.

So sometimes the best response is simply to say, "I'm not going to be that person. I'm waking up every morning and eating my Wheaties and getting my exercise in and taking care of myself, and then through my own well-being I'm looking for others to do the same." And in some, you know it is that kind of village analogy. It's going to take all of us. But I think we're, even going back to the faculty, I think as we see, not to criticize older faculty but as we see faculty who are coming through law schools where they saw some of this well-being support, they're looking to mimic that because they realize that they were served well and they want to make sure that they're paying that forward with their students as they're receiving them in their classes and their experiential learning and everything else. So I think it's a combination, Chris, of a lot of those things, and again I think if we continue to sound the importance of this and continue to work in various areas, it should only continue to improve.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

All right. I think that's going to be fascinating to watch over the next decade, how your graduates also come into the practice of law with better expectations as to the work life balance, and how that will play into talent acquisition by law firms and what law students ultimately are looking for out of their professional, the professional part of their journey and how that balances with their personal side. Because I think the days of Saturday Sunday working and all that, you know again, some firms are going to require it, but I think it's going to be very interesting that I think folks are coming into law school with better sense of what they want, and it'll be interesting to see kind of a clash of generations of partners and hires and how that ultimately evolves into the law firm culture within the profession generally. [crosstalk]

BREE BUCHANAN:

It's like a podcast episode.

DAVID JAFFE:

I think it's an excellent observation, and I would just respond to that briefly to say that I know that I have met with students, when they've asked, you know maybe students in recovery, students who are feeling a little more confident about themselves and they say, "What can I do to contribute?" And I say, "Well, this is going to be a really big ask, but your next interview, your set of interviews, you ought to ask about what that law firm is doing around well-being," because the more often they hear that the more they realize that that is going to have to be the next leverage point. And if you start to fall behind as a law firm you're going to have quality associates who are not interested in working there because they're not seeing it.

Now it's putting a lot on the law students of course to ask, but if you're [inaudible] the right law students who are getting six, eight, 10, 15, 20 call backs for interviews, they're going to have the pick of the litter. So why not ask that question and force the hand of the firms. And you're absolutely right, Chris, the law firms are going to have to ... Some of them are doing it, to be fair, but their going to have to make some critical decisions around these issues in the coming years.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

Well, David, our time's coming to a close. I want to obviously thank you for being a visionary in the law school space. Bree and I do a lot of work working with our state task forces around the country, and invariably one of the subgroups that they create within their task force is law schools, right, because I think everyone appreciates that the law school is the headwater of, the training ground for the next generation of lawyers to come into our profession, and there's critically important work issues suggested.

There's a lot of issues before they even come into law school, but in terms of their introduction into the law space and the legal culture, it starts in law school, right? And there's just so many important things happening there that sets the tone for their journey into the profession, that we can't thank you enough for the work and the leadership that you've done within the law student culture. I know that there's a lot of uphill battles still to face, but I think that we all share in your optimism that there's real positive things happening in that space that I think bodes well for the culture shift that we're trying to engineer within the profession generally.

DAVID JAFFE:

I really, I appreciate this opportunity, and the two of you have been incredible thought leaders in the legal profession and the work with the task force and everything to come, so I thank you both in turn and again for granting me an opportunity just to have this conversation. Thanks so much.

BREE BUCHANAN:

Thank you, David.

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

Awesome. Yeah, thank you, and we'll be back in two weeks. Our next guest will be Judge David Shaheed out of Indiana. Judge Shaheed is a real thought leader in terms of bringing the nexus between well-being and the judicial sector of the legal profession, serving in a number of different capacity and leadership roles. I'm really looking forward to that podcast, because the judge element of well-being in law I think is a critical part that's oftentimes overlooked. So we'll be excited to get into the weeds with Judge Shaheed in a couple of weeks. So thank you for joining us for Episode Four. Thank you, David, and we'll be back in a couple weeks.

David Jaffe is Associate Dean of Student Affairs at American University, Washington College of Law. He is co-author of the 2016 national law student study, Suffering in Silence, and a number of other publications on law student well-being. He serves on the ABA Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs (CoLAP) as co-chair of the Law School Assistance Committee, and in 2015, he received the CoLAP Meritorious Service Award in recognition of his commitment to improving the lives of law students.

 

Path To Well-Being In Law: Episode 3 - Patrick Krill

In episode three of the new podcast, Path to Well-Being in Law, co-hosts Chris Newbold and Bree Buchanan check in with lawyer well-being pioneer Patrick Krill.  Recognized globally as a leading authority on addiction, mental health, and well-being in the legal profession, Patrick is an attorney and a licensed, board-certified alcohol and drug counselor.  He serves as a trusted advisor to large law firms and corporate legal departments throughout North America and Europe, educating them about and helping them navigate addiction, mental health, and well-being issues on a daily basis.

 

Patrick's groundbreaking work in the area of attorney behavioral health includes: initiating and serving as lead author of the first and only national study on the prevalence of attorney addiction and mental health problems, a joint undertaking of the American Bar Association Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs and the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation; creating the framework for the ABA Well-Being Pledge, an innovative campaign to improve the health and well-being of lawyers that was launched in September, 2018; partnering with American Lawyer Media to conduct the first-ever survey of AmLaw 200 firm leaders regarding their beliefs and attitudes related to addiction and mental health problems in the legal industry.

 

Transcript:

CHRIS NEWBOLD:                     

Welcome to the Path to Lawyer Well-Being Podcast, where we talk to cool people doing awesome work in the lawyer well-being space. My name is Chris Newbold and I'm joined by my cohost, Bree Buchanan.

BREE BUCHANAN:                     

Hi, everybody.

CHRIS:                    

We are again, super excited about the opportunity to have one of the pioneers in the lawyer well-being space join us today as our guest, Patrick Krill. Patrick is somebody who really has been influential in his work on the science side to the lay the foundation for what has become a vibrant movement and a discussion in the legal profession about the current state of lawyer well-being. So let me kick it to Brie to introduce Patrick and get us going on our question.

BREE:

Thanks, Chris. Yeah, I think we really are so honored to have Patrick here today. I have a little disclosure. Patrick and I work together, he's my boss with Krill Strategies, but everything I say, none of this I'm saying to just flatter you, Patrick. All of it is absolutely true.

PATRICK KRILL:                

Oh, great.

BREE:

Absolutely, but some of the words that come to my mind. Chris has already tapped on it, pioneer. A pioneer in the research around substance abuse and mental health issues in the legal profession because it was Patrick's fabulous research that was published in 2016 that really kicked all of this off. We're going to talk about that research a little bit and also talk about what he's been doing since then, in regards to updating and expanding upon that research.

He's also what I think of as a true thought leader and sometimes I tease him of being our guru around these issues in the legal profession because he spends all of his time reading, researching, talking to others. Really is, truly is a thought leader on this. He's authored over 70 articles, including [inaudible 00:02:13], CNN, been in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and on NPR. So we really are very lucky to have Patrick today.

So Patrick, thanks for being here.

PATRICK:

Thank you, Bree, and thank you, Chris. It's a pleasure to be with you both.

BREE:

So I'm going to start off with a question that we're really trying to ask everybody that comes on the podcast, for us to get an idea a little bit about the person themselves. So what brought you to the lawyer well-being movement? So what in your life really drives your passion for this work?

PATRICK:

Yeah, so it's a great question and I think to really answer that meaningfully, I have to go back to before my work in the lawyer well-being space, and to really talk a little bit about my career trajectory generally.

I was an attorney, I was someone who went to law school, and then as I was getting ready to wrap up law school, made the decision to go for a further degree to get an LOM in international law. I approached the legal profession with a lot of enthusiasm and with a lot of plans about the type of law that I wanted to practice. Then what I was met with was a reality that was very discordant with what I had expected. I'm a first generation lawyer in my family, I didn't have a lot of experience with or exposure to what being a lawyer actually meant. So I had all these preconceptions.

Then I got into the field and while it was fine, it was pretty clear to me right off the bat that once I got out of the academic, once I got out of the classroom setting and stopped studying about law and had to do the work, it really wasn't a good fit for me. I didn't particularly enjoy it. The idea of billing my time in six minute increments really was, I just couldn't do it. It was [crosstalk 00:04:11] water, in terms of my personality, but none the less, I did practice law for a number of years and I worked in a number of different roles. Started coming to the realization that this wasn't longterm sustainable for me. It didn't get my out of bed in the morning. Right?

BREE:

Right.

PATRICK:           

A question we always ask people is, what gets you out of bed in the morning? It wasn't being an attorney, despite my best intentions, really. I'm fascinated by the law and I still think about and read about the law all the time, but the mechanics of practicing law weren't for me.

I also had my own experience overcoming addiction really early out of the gate. In the first couple of years of the legal profession, my practice I should say. So I had exposure to and experience with what it takes to overcome a behavioral health problem. That experience and that exposure to that world introduced me to this idea of counseling. So I knew what a mental health counselor was, I knew what an addiction counselor was.

So when it came time for me to reevaluate and think, do I want to do this longterm? I knew that there was a field that seemed a little bit more interesting to me, it seemed a little bit more aligned with my personality and intrinsically who I am. So I went back to school to become an addiction counselor. That ultimately translated into my work with lawyers specifically. I became the director a treatment program for lawyers, judges, and law students at the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation. So it's a long rambling answer but I think you have to understand the bigger picture view-

BREE:

Absolutely, yeah.

PATRICK:

... how I even got into the mental health space, let alone the lawyer specific mental health space.

BREE:

Right, well thanks for sharing that. I mean there typically is a personal story that brings us to this work. I think that what you just said, Patrick, about really not having the best vocational fit once you get into it and start seeing what it's like day to day. I hear that as a common refrain from lawyers who are really struggling. So yeah, thanks.

Listen, I want to get you to share a little bit about the lawyer study that was done, now four years ago, that you did. I think you started while you were still director of the legal professionals program at Hazelden. That has proved to be the basis for really, the lawyer well-being movement. So I'm wondering, what do you think is the most important information that came out of that study now that you can look back over the past four years?

PATRICK:

It's hard to say. I have a hard time identifying one thing or even two things as being the most important takeaways from that study. I think the most important result, excuse me, result of that study has been its overall impact to the extent to which it raised awareness about the nature and the scope of the challenges we face. It provided much needed data to back what a lot of us who were working in the lawyer mental health space in a clinical or other capacity knew. We knew lawyers were unwell and were struggling disproportionately to other populations, but we didn't really have good data to back up our argument. So this study provided that and it really opened the door to a much needed and overdue conversation around mental health and well-being in the legal profession. So I think it was really more the impact than any one precise piece of the study.

I will say, one of the things that surprised me the most was that it was younger lawyers who were the most depressed and struggling with or exhibiting the most signs of problem drinking. The drinking piece you can get, right?

BREE:

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

PATRICK:

Think about [crosstalk 00:08:11], people drink excessively, and it doesn't have as much of an impact on them. But we were surprised about the mental health piece as well. Simply because that wasn't the profile who was showing up in treatment programs or going to the Lawyers Assistance Program or who was getting disbarred because of their mental health or substance use problem. So we went into that research with a preconceived notion of who the most at-risk population was.

CHRIS:                  

Patrick, how much of that was, do you think, driven by the expectations gap between... it's the same type of expectations gap that you had, which was, this is what I thought the law was going to be like, this is what the law was actually like. How that's affecting, I think, the most recent generation of graduates coming out of law school.

PATRICK:

Yeah, it's such a great point, Chris. I think that's a profound problem. I think you have a lot of people coming out of law school and finding themselves adrift in a profession that doesn't potentially resonate with them. That it is more overwhelming than they had anticipated, assuming they're able to get a job. Right?

CHRIS:                  

Yeah.

PATRICK:          

Get a job that meets their needs and provides some opportunity, but then they get into it and they say, "Wow, this is not what I signed up for," or, and this is, I think, I'm putting the spotlight a little bit on the law school experience. It's not what they were prepared for. So there are these mismatched expectations and what that can result in, I think you're right. I mean, I think what you're getting at is, does that play into the high levels of distress among young lawyers? How could it not? I mean, how could it not? If I had done a survey 20 years ago when I was coming into the professional, I would've been scoring off the chart on all of those assessments.

CHRIS:

Yeah, I mean you can see a scenario where you go down a path you feel like you're too far down that path, that it's probably more rare for someone to make a pivot like you did to say, "This isn't for me, I'm going to go and pursue my studies in an area that then interconnects the behavioral health side with the law side." We know how much student debt and other factors play into the-

PATRICK:                

No doubt.

CHRIS:

[crosstalk 00:10:28] of... how do I get out of this? Then that spirals into a set of conditions that just generally move toward more unhealthy-ness for that particular community.

PATRICK:

Yup, I agree. I'm sure Bree has some thoughts about that as well with her background in vocational discernment. How do we bridge that gap? How do we make some progress there, because we need to. I don't know if it's modifying law school curricula or just more truth in advertising around what the legal profession is. I don't know.

BREE:

It makes me think about Larry Krieger's research, what makes lawyers happy. The idea of even thinking about, it's the extrinsic things, the power, the prestige, et cetera, that draws us to the practice of law but what we know now that what makes us happy are more internal factors of meaning. That's just not made known to people who are contemplating going to law school or people that are there. It's something you have to trip over and fall down to figure out. Yeah, yeah.

CHRIS:

Patrick, I think it's fair to say that the lawyer well-being movement likely doesn't get ignited without the study itself because we are ultimately an evidentiary based profession. We needed the data, I think, to ultimately launch the discussion. Talk to us about that notion of how important that was to kick start the national discussion. Obviously, followed by the report subsequent to that, but how important was to lay the foundation.

PATRICK:           

I think it was incredibly important. I think you're right, we wouldn't be where we are with this movement had we not had that predicate of the data, and had that not been something that caught the profession's attention.

In addition to the data and the value of that itself, it was also a multi jurisdictional study. So we had 16, 17, 18 different bar associations from around the country participating in this survey. Participating in this research, recognizing the value. So you saw some seeds of the interest being planted there where you had all these [inaudible 00:12:52] stakeholders, but you also had... this goes back to my overarching strategy when I was conceptualizing this study, you had the ABA and Hazelden Betty Ford, two large stakeholders with a lot of credibility in their respective spheres, coming together to conduct this research. I think that was an important piece of the puzzle. This wasn't something that could just be ignored. You have all these bar associations from around the country participating, you have the ABA, you have Hazelden Betty Ford, putting their names behind this project. I think that allowed it to get the attention that it did, and to really open the door for this conversation.

Something I'd be really interested in hearing both of your perspectives on is looking back on it. I have a sense that in a way we were almost pushing on an open door. What I mean by that is, there was an appetite to have this discussion. People knew that there was a problem but it was under the surface and there wasn't an easy way to bring this up or there weren't a lot of pathways into this conversation, but then once you got that ball rolling, people were basically acknowledging, yeah, we've got issues here. Finally, can we talk about this? At least that's my perspective looking back over the last five years.

BREE:

Yeah, and I think that societally outside of law, more and more people were talking about these issues. So law, a conservative industry, comes up last, but then you have younger people who are coming in and onboarding into the legal profession and there's just not the stigma around these issues about depression, anxiety, or even a substance abuse problem, that there used to be. So you're starting to get a shift, and I think once we got that data, it opened up the door which as you're saying was already open.

Then the other thing that I found going around the country talking, inevitably, people who have been practicing law even for just a little bit, know someone who has taken his or her own life. Once that has crossed your path, it really shapes you. It's not something that you forget about. We always want to know, well, what could've been done differently? So I think that this is a manifestation of that too.

PATRICK:

Yeah, and at the risk of... I don't want to dominate the conversation but I do want to say something to both of you, share something with you that hasn't really received a lot of discussion because it wasn't published. With that study where we had 15,000 responses, there was the opportunity for people to submit comments at the end. There was basically like, do you have comments? We compiled all of those and I have binder of them sitting on my bookshelf. We weren't able to publish them, the format didn't lend itself to that but we had thousands and thousands of comments, overwhelmingly they reflected a theme of, this is a huge problem in the profession. We're glad you're conducting this research. Maybe that's where I began to develop this notion that people want to have this conversation, people recognize that people around them are not well. That people around them are struggling, and they feel like they're in a profession that's tone deaf to it. But overwhelmingly, that's what the comments reflected. People saying this is a big deal.

BREE:

Wow.

PATRICK:

This is a needed endeavor.

BREE:

Yeah, so I know that that research was so important but there were other questions that you wanted to ask. So could you tell us a little bit about the most current research you're involved in?

PATRICK:

Yeah, I'm actually really excited about this. Along with a colleague at the University of Minnesota Medical School, I designed a new survey that we administered to lawyers in California and the DC bar. So we partnered with the California Lawyers Association and the DC Bar to conduct new research, bi-coastal research. I had a couple of aims for this project. One, we did want it to be a random sample, so it would meet that gold standard for research. The 2016 study, while I feel very certain that those numbers were represented of what was happening in the profession, it wasn't a truly random sample. So it didn't meet that gold standard for data. So I did want to have a random sample, but I also wanted to explore the why. Not just prevalence, not how many lawyers are meeting criteria for depression or a substance abuse disorder, but why. To ask questions that could get at lawyer motivation, lawyer personality. Then look at those responses in relationship to their mental health.

So we were originally supposed to launch that research project right around the time, and I mean what a year we're all in. So right around the time when the pandemic was hitting. The survey was supposed to go out, I think, the same week that California announced stay at home orders. So obviously the California Lawyers Association said, "We need to pause," and we agreed with that. What that gave us the opportunity to do was to revamp the survey and to modify some questions to actually measure the impact of COVID-19 and quarantines and all of that on lawyer mental health. It was ultimately disseminated, we finished data collection about a month ago and we're analyzing the data, getting ready to write up the manuscript.

Basically what I can tell you, I can't talk about the data in any precise way at this point prior to publication, but what I can tell you is that the problems are real, there was nothing anomalous about that 2016 study. In some respects, they appear to be getting worse. Also, the impact of COVID-19 has been material. It's been real, I mean, people are feeling this as it relates to their mental health and their substance use. Beyond that though, we're going to have some really interesting insights to share about the why piece. Why are lawyers so likely to experience depression, for example.

So I'm really excited about it, really grateful to the DC Bar and California Lawyers Association. They helped us get a big data set, we had really robust participation and a random sample. So it'll be useful, useful data for the profession.

BREE:

Do you have a sense of when it might be published?

PATRICK:

Yeah, well that's that million dollar question. Our goal is to have it submitted to a journal by the end of September. Then it's that sort of, out of your hands. It's journal's own publication schedule. Best case scenario it'll be published in December, but that could easily go into January of next year, February. I mean, just given all of the delays that everything seems to be experiencing and all the uncertainty, but we're moving pretty expeditiously. We're moving about as quickly as you can with a study of this size and nature.

CHRIS:

Patrick, how much do you think that the research side of well-being is important to the discussion, because we really don't have a lot of good... I mean we have research, we have some groundbreaking studies. We had yours, we had the law student one, we have your followup here, but it still seems like there's a lack of emphasis on the research side as we think about the well-being movement. I'd just love for your insights into, what's the next generation of research as you think on the horizon?

PATRICK:

Yeah, I think personally, research is a very important piece of the puzzle. That's not just because I'm involved in it, it's because you have to understand the dimensions of the challenges that you're trying to address. You can't just be spit balling about what's going on.

We're also a profession that's trained weigh and evaluate evidence. Lawyers are prone to scrutinize things and want to know, is that backed by data? Is that science driven? So I think if you want to persuade people that there needs to be a change you have to back up your argument, in addition to people like us being able to understand the nature of the challenges. So I think it's vitally important.

In terms of next generation or ongoing, I think further exploration of what causes the problems, which is probably going to be further exploration of the lawyer personality, beyond really important work like Krieger and Sheldon's work and other research that exists. We need to understand that a little bit better. I think we also really need to get at the disconnect that we started by talking about. That expectation gap or the mismatched expectations between what people think they're getting with a career in the law, and what they end up getting because that's got to be a big piece of the equation as to why many people find themselves, to put is charitably, less than satisfied.

CHRIS:

Yeah, and if we have a profession of folks who are less than satisfied, that doesn't bode well to the profession generally.

PATRICK:

No, right, exactly.

CHRIS:

Let's pivot real quickly before we take a break. I'd love to hear your perspective. Each one of us comes at this from a different angle, the well-being. Bree obviously originating from the lawyer assistance programming side. I spend a lot of time thinking about small firms and solo practitioners and preventing malpractice claims. A lot of your focus professionally has been on big law. More than anybody else, you probably have your finger on the pulse of how big law is adapting to the new emphasis on well-being. I'd just love to hear your perspectives one what you're seeing out there. Do you think big law is paying attention, because oftentimes I think big law, if they embrace it it has a trickle down effect to the totality of the profession. So I'd love to hear your perspective on big law and the interconnectedness to well-being.

PATRICK:

Yeah, so it's an important area of discussion. I think you're right that often, big law does have the ability to set the pace. They're almost like the pace card for the profession, who have an outsize influence on the profession despite the fact that they employ a minority of practicing lawyers.

I would say if you compare where we were four years ago, big law has made a lot of progress. It started with this overdue recognition and acknowledgement that this is a real problem. We have an issue that we need to get our arms around. Five years ago, there was profound and widespread institutional denial of the scope of the problem. Maybe if it wasn't denied, it was simply a lack of awareness. You can characterize it however you want, but the reality is that these issues were not being dealt with in a deliberate way. They weren't even really being acknowledge, despite the fact that it tends to be a pressure cooker environment. It tends to be one of the most intense professional environments out there.

Now what you have is widespread acknowledgement that these problems are real. Widespread acknowledgement that their competitors are taking steps to try and [inaudible 00:24:32] the problems or at least mitigate the problems. So there's momentum, there's real momentum that has developed.

All of that said, there's a fundamental tension between the business model of big law, which again, tends to be really high expectations, a pressure cooker environment, a lot of billable requirements and other demands. There's a tension between that model and being able to take care of yourself the way that you might want to, and having any sense of balance in your life. So I think to try and resolve that tension is going to continue to necessitate incremental efforts that are sustained over time. It's not going to be an overnight fix. It's going to take a long time.

That said, many firms are making a good faith effort. They're trying, they're trying to bridge that gap incrementally where they can. One of the problems with incremental progress, especially in an environment where so many people are not satisfied, is that it takes patience. So you have some people in those environments or some people, external to big law, commenting on big law saying, "This is all window dressing. All of these changes that they're making don't really get at the heart of the matter." But the reality is you have to start somewhere and you have to start taking steps. As long as those steps, like I said, are sustained and they continue to move in the right direction over time. I think the model can be adjusted to the point where people experience greater levels of personal well-being. To some degree, that's already happening.

BREE:

Yeah, and now that all three of us are being coauthors of a task force report, we can remember all the thought that went into how we make a good argument to the legal profession for this culture change. There was the financial, it's good for business. It relates to our ethical obligations. Then the humanitarian, it's the right thing to do. Which of those three do you think are motivating the firms and the people in the firms that you're dealing with? Are those [arguments 00:27:01] resonating?

PATRICK:

Honestly, maybe I just have the good fortune of working with some really amazing firms, but my experience has been, all three resonate. I mean, you tend to have really good people leading these organizations. It's not like they're unfeeling individuals but they have to operate within the bounds of their business model. All three points resonate.

The one that is probably driving the progress the most is the financial but it's not necessarily financial the way I think that we were contemplating it in the task force where good mental health translates into less expenditure and better performance and all of that. It's financial in the sense of wanting to present a firm culture that attracts and retains the best lawyers. So it's almost a hybrid rationale, it's certain that if you boil that down, firms want to attract and retain the best talent so that they ultimately perform better financially. But it's not the precise calculation of how many specific dollars they're going to save by having fewer depressed lawyers. If that makes sense?

BREE:

Yeah, you bet.

PATRICK:

Does that make sense the way I'm explaining that?

BREE:

Yeah, and one thing that I hear that really resonates when I speak is the issue around the recruitment and retention. That's a big deal, and getting back to talking about those younger lawyers that we were talking about at the very beginning. They expect that they're going to work for somebody who has an interest in them personally, that cares about them as a human being. That's just what's out there and what they're dealing with, with the new folks. So yeah.

CHRIS:

Yeah, certainly feels like the talent acquisition side where these firms are competing for the best and brightest talent coming out of the law schools, that many of those students are coming in with a different mindset from a work life balance. That has the potential to be a real game changer, it probably has you more optimistic thinking ahead to the future, in terms of the generational change that will ultimately evolve in big law.

PATRICK:      

Yeah, absolutely. I do think that the younger generation of attorneys, assuming that their priorities aren't co-opted by the machines, if you will. Assuming that they maintain that level of desire to have a different work life experience. As long as they continue to prioritize well-being, then yes, I think that they can be a driver of real transformational change and sustained change in the profession. As long as they don't get co-opted or swept away by the current that exists. I don't see any evidence that they will, I'm just offering that as one potential caveat. Does the prevailing system ultimately prevail?

CHRIS:

Yeah, yeah. Well hey, let's take a quick break. Patrick, this has been a fascinating conversation. I love the again, your thought leadership in this space. Your experience, your ability to see the macro trends, I think is really critical as we think about the well-being movement on the horizon. Let's take a quick break and we'll come back.

—

Your law firm is worth protecting and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and buy coverage, all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard, our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com.

—

BREE:

So, Patrick, continuing along the line of what is happening in big law around this whole lawyer well-being movement. There is a pledge, it's the well-being pledge for legal employers. That is being conducted by the American Bar Association, specifically, the Commission on Lawyers Assistance Programs, but you really were the instigator of that. So can you talk a little bit about why you thought that was so important and how that project's going right now?

PATRICK: 

Yeah, so I'd be happy to. I'm really, really gratified with how the pledge has turned out, especially given how it began. What I mean by that is, I first proposed the idea of a pledge campaign to ask legal lawyers to publicly state a commitment to various principles around well-being, back in, I want to say 2015 prior to the study. At the time I proposed that and had this idea, the profession was in a different place. This conversation wasn't really happening or resonating in the profession. So that idea gained no traction.

So when I had the opportunity to present it again in 2018 under the [inaudible 00:32:24] of the ABA, Working Group to Advance Lawyer Well-Being, the group liked it and we ran with it and we launched it in September of 2018. Starting with 12 law firm, and those were basically firms that I or others in the working group had a relationship with. We approached them and said, "Would you like to put your name behind this campaign and help us generate momentum and interest to hopefully change the culture of the profession?" So we started with 12, I would say very courageous law firms. We're now up to close to 200 organizations.

BREE:

That's right.

PATRICK: 

[crosstalk 00:33:00] pledge, which is really, really remarkable. We still have a lot of room to grow and a lot of stakeholders that we want to get on board, but it has already in my view, amounted to a vehicle for cultural change. That was the idea from the beginning. We need a vehicle for cultural change, something that provides concrete, tangible guidance about steps that organizations can take to reduce the impact and prevalence of mental health and substance abuse problems. I really couldn't be more pleased by how well it's going.

I'll say it's simply signing a pledge and saying we're going to do X, Y, and Z, in it of itself is meaningless unless the organization follows through. It's not hard to imagine why some organizations may want to sign on just for PR reasons or peer pressure, whatever. But we just finished evaluating, we circulated commitment forms, recommitment forms, after organizations had been signatories for a year. We're just finishing evaluating all of those responses and the overwhelming majority of signatories are really taking meaningful steps. I mean-

BREE:

That's great news.

PATRICK: 

[crosstalk 00:34:16] they're trying to live up to that commitment that they made.

BREE:

Yeah, wonderful. Can you talk just for a minute, because my thought is maybe some people who are listening who may be interested in getting involved in that pledge. So it's for legal employers, it's not just big law. Right?

PATRICK: 

Yes, exactly. So we are-

BREE:

Bar associations?

PATRICK: 

We have an overwhelming number of big law firms who have signed on but Bar associations, law school, corporate legal departments, sector legal employers. A large public defender's office, a state attorney's office, the Department of Justice. If anyone from the DOJ is listening, we want you to take the pledge. There are lots of other stakeholders that it would be great to get on board because this is about changing the culture of the profession, not the culture of big law firms.

BREE:

Right, right. So also, Chris, what do you think about the pledge as being someone who works in day to day in risk management for law firms? Do you see it as a helpful tool?

CHRIS:

Yeah, I think again, what we're trying to do is get the discussion going amongst partners in any size of a firm or in any type of a legal employer environment. So the more that those conversations are being had, I think that the more that you're seeing people see... I know from our perspective, we believe that happier, healthier lawyers ultimately lead to fewer claims. So the pledge, I think, has been really a catalyst for... What I would love to see is again, 200 signatories to become 1,000 signatories, to become 2,000 signatories because I think we continue to want to be able to see this filtered down if big law is the pace setter, how do we continue to see small law, solo practitioners, and others come into it? Then also, a geographic representation.

I know one of my aspirations is to have pledge signers in every state in the country. So it is really a catalyst for the national discussion, the national movement, and people saying, "I'm in." We need people to say, "I'm in," because I think that that is going to be critical to the success of our ultimate goal, which is the culture shift.

PATRICK: 

I think that's right. When we get to that point of having a really wide base of buy in and a wide base of participation, in for example, the pledge. I mean that's when you start to see this idea of well-being really associated with the idea of being a lawyer. It becomes part of the notion of what a career in the legal profession involves. Part of that role, ideally one day be a focus on taking care of yourself.

CHRIS:

Yeah, let's shift here quickly. I know again, we'd be remiss to not talk for a few minutes with you, Patrick, about the impacts of the pandemic. You referenced it a little bit in some of your current research. Just hear your thoughts on the effect of the pandemic on lawyers, to the legal community, substance abuse, mental health. We're seeing it amongst our [inaudible 00:37:35]. It's a tough time out there.

BREE:

Yeah.

PATRICK: 

Yeah, it's an extraordinarily tough time, I think for anyone in society. Different people have been experiencing the events of 2020 differently. That's one thing that I think is important to recognize, that although we tend to say we're all in this together. That's true, but also really not true. We're in the same storm but we're not all on the same boat. That's really evident in some work environments, where you might have some people who this has amounted to a significant inconvenience for them. Maybe they're riding it out from their beach house or whatever. Then you have other people who are in a 700 square foot apartment and they've been traumatized by what's been going on over the course of the last four to five months. So that experience has not been universal.

All of that said, I'm hearing on a daily basis at this point from people, from organization, from firms who are saying, "Our people are struggling." I've had four or five emails, today's a Wednesday, I've had four or five emails sent Monday on that point saying, "Can we talk? We need to talk to you about what's going on. Some of the trends we're seeing." So it's real and it's important to recognize, going back to the data that we were all discussing earlier, the legal profession was starting off on shakier ground, as it relates to our mental health and substance abuse risk. We already had higher levels of those problems. Now the pandemic has come along, and not only the pandemic. The stay at home orders, the economic uncertainty, the racial tension that's been [inaudible 00:39:25] the country. I mean, there's a lot happening in 2020 that has really pushed some people to the brink or in some cases unfortunately, over the brink.

BREE:

What are you telling these folks when they call? To the extent that you can share that. What is some general advice?

PATRICK:            

Well, almost always these conversations involve letting them know that what they're experiencing internally in their organization is not anomalous. So helping them understand the dimensions of what's happening throughout the country and around the world. Normalizing that experience, but also I think it's really important for organizations to be mindful of how they're communicating with their people around this and how they're trying to make accommodations and adjustments to culture and expectations where possible. If I were to call them several months ago, I think back in March, about this phenomenon essentially known as emotional dissonance, which is the disparity between how we feel inside and how we feel we have to present in order to conform with workplace expectations or other expectations of us. Right now for many people, that level of emotional dissonance is quite high because they are a mess inside and they're really struggling to hold it together or they're completely burnt out and they're completely frazzled, but they're a lawyer. There's a very real set expectation for how they present themselves and how they comport themselves.

So I think it's important for organizations and employers to recognize that and to try to move the needle a little bit and show some flexibility around those expectations because the higher that level of emotional dissonance, the greater the risk of burn out, unwanted turnover, all sorts of problematic outcomes.

CHRIS:

Patrick, let's spend our last couple minutes talking about just your motivation. You are somebody again, first generation lawyer. In many respects, you're both nudging and blowing us, opening up new doors in a national discussion. I've called you at times the fire alarm puller, which means that you're shining the light on some of the problems of our profession, which I know that it's motivated by a desire to drive it in the right direction and to return it to a level of professional satisfaction that we can all be proud of and excited about.

I'm just curious on, what's it like to be in your role, to be talking to lawyers about the challenges and also I know that you are amongst, in our community, one of the primary solution drivers. You're always thinking about, how do we move it forward? So as we think about this culture shift, I'd just love your perspective on both raising the alarm on one side, but yet putting the fire out and looking for a bluer sky, a better horizon in the future.

PATRICK:          

Yeah, well they're both, I think, equally important. I think the fire alarm has been raised at this point. That's a great question, Chris. Thank you, I should say, for asking that because I think it really gets it to equally important things. We needed to raise awareness, we needed to get this conversation going. I think on an ongoing basis we will need to keep that level of buy-in, and that level of awareness raised. So that's one of the reasons why I'm conducting new research. We can't rely on research from 2016 in perpetuity. We need current data to continually drive the conversation. But beyond that, it's only so much utility if you raise awareness, and then don't have any next steps outlined. Talk about, how do we get to a better place? It's a problem and it's a solution. Now we've identified the problem and we all have to be focused on developing good solutions.

I love problem solving, not in the math sense, I'm terrible at math but just in a conceptual sense. It's always what I've enjoyed is trying to figure out problems and solutions. So that piece does really motivate me and I enjoy that. I like wrestling with concepts and theories and testing different propositions and figuring out what might work. So that's a really important piece.

I've got to say, I appreciate you saying that I'm driving some efforts here, but this is a team effort. Both of you and all of our other wonderful colleagues on the national task force and other people around the profession who are contributing to this cause, we're all rowing in the same direction and contributing where we can to turn the ship. I don't know how many different lame metaphors I've used but it's certainly not just me. We really are doing this together. But I'm grateful, I experience a lot of gratitude for the opportunities that I've had in my life to allow me to be doing this work. Most days it's good to get out of bed and it's good to get up and do what I have to do that day.

CHRIS:

If the goal is the culture shift, I am curious on what your greatest fear is as we look ahead.

PATRICK:  [inaudible 00:45:05] you stumped me, because I don't know what this says about my personality but I don't spend a lot of time thinking about that. I don't know that I have one.

BREE:                   

I know that with the task force when we first started our greatest fear is that nobody would pay attention or we'd write this report and it would sit on a bookshelf.

CHRIS:

Yeah.

BREE:

So that's not happening.

CHRIS:

That's not happening. My greatest fear is always, I've been around the legal profession for 20 years now and you see issues rise to the level of national discussion, and oftentimes then peter out. I think we collectively, I think we're both trying to build the infrastructure and the sustainability of the movement and the architecture of the movement so that it continues to be front and center, a front burner issue. I feel like we've done a pretty good job thus far but boy, once we let our guard down we could lose the momentum and we can lose momentum.

PATRICK: 

Well, I couldn't agree more fully. I have no intention of letting that happen for my part. That would be fully antithetical to who I am at my core. So I'm going to keep pushing this as long and as hard as I can. Knowing that there are so many other people invested in this process, I think will probably overcome some of the what may have been long odds at the beginning, about whether you can really achieve a cultural change in the legal profession. I think we're getting there and we will ultimately get there.

BREE:

Patrick, you truly are making the profession a better one. So, thank you.

PATRICK: 

Well, that's kind, Bree. Thank you.

CHRIS:

Yeah, it's been awesome. Again, we talk about awesome people doing great things. You are definitely in that camp and Patrick, we thank you so much for being on the podcast and being one of our first guests.

PATRICK:                 

That was great. Really good to chat with you both. I hope this podcast is just a tremendous success, as I'm sure it will be.

CHRIS:

Awesome. Well, everyone, be well out there. We'll be coming back with a podcast in a couple weeks. Thank you.

BREE:

Thanks, bye, everybody.

Anne Brafford

Bree and Chris welcome lawyer well-being pioneer Anne Brafford to the podcast, best known for her roles as author of Positive Professionals, co-chair of the ABA Law Practice Division’s Attorney Well-Being Committee, editor-in-chief and co-author of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being’s report The Path to Lawyer Well-Being: Practical Recommendations for Positive Change, author of the ABA’s widely distributed Well-Being Toolkit for Lawyers and Legal Employers and founder and principal organizer of Lawyer Well-Being Week, an annual event occurring every May.

 

Transcript: 

CHRIS NEWBOLD:

Welcome to the Path to Lawyer Well-Being, a podcast series sponsored by the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, where we talk to cool people doing awesome work in the lawyer well-being space. I'm here with my cohost, Bree Buchanan.

BREE BUCHANAN:

Hey, Chris.

CHRIS:

And we're here with really one of the pioneers in our well-being space. It is always, I think, an honor to be the first guest of any podcast series and we are obviously thrilled to have Anne Brafford here with us. Bree, do you want to go ahead and kind of do a quick introduction of Anne, a dear friend of ours and again, somebody who's been doing incredible work on behalf of our profession.

BREE:

Absolutely. I'm delighted to introduce Anne Brafford, Anne, who is somebody I admire and who I genuinely like and I know that whenever I'm going to have a conversation with Anne, I will do it with a smile on my face. So, that goes for this podcast today too. Anne, thanks so much for being here today.

BREE:

So, Anne, just a little bit about her background, she started out in big law and spent some time there and then made a pivot over the course of her career and ended up going to the University of Pennsylvania and pursuing a master's in applied positive psychology and I can't wait to hear Anne talk a little bit about what is this positive psychology business.

BREE:

She has been a very prolific writer. She has published a book entitled, Positive Professionals. She's also been very involved in the lawyer well-being movement and has been a pivotal person. She's somebody when I think about the work that the National Task Force has done. But for her, we would not be where we are truly. She stepped into the position of editor in chief for the National Task Force Report and took seven or eight writing groups, very disparate styles and pulled it all together and added all the research and really made the report in many ways the incredibly preeminent document on lawyer well-being. And so, we owe so much to her.

BREE:

She's gone on to produce the ABA's Well-Being Toolkit, which is an open source document that has been downloaded and used by thousands. So, I don't want to just take all the fun away, Anne. So, I want to give people an opportunity to hear from you.

BREE:

One question we're asking everybody that's our guest, tell us what brought you to the lawyer well-being space. When I look at your bio, I see that pivot from big law over to pursuing that master's. Tell us a little bit about that, if you would.

ANNE BRAFFORD:

Yeah, good question. And thanks so much for having me as the first guest on the new podcast. And Bree, I always love speaking with you. And it leaves a smile on my face as well. So, this should be fun.

ANNE:

So, how I got into well-being, it's a long story that I'll try to make short. But it started as far back as I wanted to be a lawyer since I was 11 years old. That's when I first started saying I wanted to be a lawyer. And unlike so many of us, my childhood dreams came true. I actually kept the dream up, went to law school, which was pretty odd because I was the first kid in my family to even go to college, let alone law school.

ANNE:

So, when I got my law degree, it was really just one of the happiest and most proudest days of my life. And then I got a judicial clerkship and then I got this great job at Morgan Lewis Equity Partner. It was like, on the outside, everything looked really successful, and it was. I was very proud of my accomplishments.

ANNE:

But as I began getting a little bit older, I started questioning whether this was all that there was. Was I kind of living up to my 11-year-old dreams of what it was to be a lawyer, which is sort of impossible to do. But I kept asking whether is this all that I'm going to do in my one short life.

ANNE:

And so, really, it began to be a deterioration of meaningfulness for me. I became a lawyer because I wanted to make the world a better place. And I was an employment lawyer. As an employment litigator on behalf of defendants and I never felt bad about what I did. I thought I was protecting a law that really meant a lot to me, but wasn't enough.

ANNE:

And eventually, I couldn't answer yes anymore. And so, I ended up applying to get a master's of applied positive psychology from Penn while I was still practicing law thinking I was going to fix myself or fix my culture. I was going to fix something, so I could stay because I wasn't leaving.

ANNE:

But as I got more into it, I just started feeling a pull that I could either stay in law and kind of do this other well-being stuff part time or I could leave and really potentially make a bigger contribution to the legal profession by helping to make it a place where people have a whole kind of variety of backgrounds and interests can stay and be happy and thrive.

ANNE:

And so, I made a really hard decision of leaving law in 2014. And I kind of liken it to it was like tearing my arm off. I mean, it was a really hard decision.

BREE:

I'm sure.

ANNE:

Yeah. And then I resigned from my partnership position in the firm and then almost immediately started my PhD program in organizational psychology, which I'm still in the middle of. And so now, I focus entirely on the legal profession. But the individual organizationally, institutionally have really helping to use science, apply science to help make the profession, help it live up to its potential to be a place where lawyers can really feel like they're doing something good for society and also thrive themselves. And so, I didn't really leave the law. I'm contributing to the law in a different way now.

BREE:

I love that you've verbed thriving. That's great, thriving.

CHRIS:

Yeah. And I think it would be helpful for our listeners to, you've now been for the better part of five, six years, but even before that, what would be your assessment of kind of what the current state of lawyer well-being is. We know that the report was released three or four years ago, right? We think that that was a significant catalyst and a national discussion. It feels like we've been making progress but I just be curious on your current assessment of where we're at and what you think is on the horizon in terms of where we need to go.

ANNE:

Yeah, good question. I think it's, for me, I feel like it's a really exciting time to be in this area right now. And I've had this conversation with Bree as well. I think people who have been doing well-being legal profession for a while are feeling like there's movement now. We're starting to make progress in a way that's really exciting.

ANNE:

And I do think the National Task Force's report that came out in 2017 was a catalyst for that, that there already was so much talk and action going on in kind of small cells and that the report then really catalyzed thinking organizations around this idea of well-being.

ANNE:

And now, I don't think you can talk to a firm or a lawyer who hasn't thought in some way about your well-being and that was not true. When I was growing up as an associate, well-being wasn't talked about really at all. And it was sort of considered, it's your problem not mine, where I think now organizations are getting more onboard and saying, this is really a team effort that we are responsible to each other for this.

ANNE:

So, I think that's great progress. I think we're still at the very beginning though. I think, well, where I'm hoping to see the evolution will go to is from this individual level, which is really where the movement is primarily focused now. So, things like stress relief, meditation, resilience, these more individually focused programs, nutrition, physical fitness. These are a lot of the things that I see that firms are doing and I see at least around and that's fantastic. It's a great place to start. And it's probably the easiest place to start.

BREE:

Right, absolutely.

ANNE:

But I think, yeah, the next part of our evolution needs to be more organizationally where and I think firms are starting ... They're sort of at the beginning of that now. I'm seeing this as more widescale culture change that if we really want to promote well-being, we have to seriously look at the cultures that are recreating the ill health that we're seeing in lawyers, like what about the way that law firms, and I come from a law firm background, but when I say law firms, I really mean all kinds of legal employers. But what are they doing and not doing to support well-being and seriously, looking at their policies and practices. And how can we change those.

ANNE:

And I think then we also need to evolve to more of an institutional level. Or people raise their eyebrows when I say it, but even things about how our court system is run, how judges treat lawyers, how clients, inhouse clients treat their outside lawyers and how the outside lawyers treat their clients.

ANNE:

I was a litigator myself thinking about the judges, and multiple times and judges deny lawyers' request to move something because they had a vacation or they weren't feeling well, or judges just being disrespectful. And lawyers sometimes being disrespectful to judges as well.

ANNE:

But I do think it's an institutional wide challenge of how can we rethink our system so that lawyers can still be their best and do their best for their clients, but also be well themselves. And I think we've made great progress, but we have a long way to go.

BREE:

No kidding. Yeah. And I also talk a lot about the fact that it's not just individual lawyers that we're trying to get to change the way they go about their work, but it's the culture change, and that's really hard. And so, I know that when we were writing the report, there was discussion about what are sort of the levers of the legal system that we can push to try and bring about some shifts to this, and particularly around, you've talked about with legal employers. And I know that you currently go out and speak to major law firms on these topics and what they can do differently. Can you give us some examples of what a law firm, a midsize or large law firm could do to bring about some culture change so that well-being is prioritized?

ANNE:

Yeah, I think the first place for organizations to start, and I actually think it might be the number one recommendation the National Task Force Report, number one or number two, but it's about leaders. And I truly believe this. And my book that you mentioned when you're introducing me, Positive Professionals, that's really what it's focused on, leaders and law firms.

ANNE:

And by leaders, I mean, partners and anyone who is responsible for supporting and influencing others. And I think a lot of partners don't actually think of themselves as leaders if they don't have a formal leadership position, but they really are because they have such an impact on other people.

ANNE:

And the organizational science part of this shows that leaders really are the creators of culture. They are the most important lever when we talk about creating cultures and changing cultures. And so, often when I talk to firms, what I'm talking about is focused on partners and how they interact with associates. So, many of our firms, although this is changing, but many of our firms have not thought about doing any kind of sort of leadership development with their aspiring partners and their current partners. And so, we think there's many partners that want to be better, want to do better, but just have never had the skills, tools or training to do so.

ANNE:

And I so I think that is the first place to start of really talking to the partners about how their own kind of supervisory skills, but also with their role modeling to the associates and to not just associates, the staff and everyone around them that you can come out with the best well-being policy and your professional development people and your well-being director can have really good words to say. But if the partners aren't doing it, that's what everyone else is going to follow because they're what staff and associates and all the other lawyers, they want to do well. And so, they look to the partners to know what that looks like.

ANNE:

So, if say they see partners that are not sleeping themselves, that are typing emails in the middle of the night, that aren't taking vacation, that are rude to others, like that's the pattern that they're going to follow.

BREE:

Absolutely.

ANNE:

And so, it's one of the things that I always underscore when I'm talking to partners is that everyone is watching you very closely. The higher you get up into an organizational hierarchy, the more people are watching you, both for what is the value system here and what do you think of me.

BREE:

Right.

ANNE:

And so, although you might not think of yourself as any different, oh, I'm still the same Anne Brafford, I just have a new partner title, like nope, you're actually different because people are treating you differently, and your behavior has a much bigger impact on them both for their own well-being and for them watching what's valued.

ANNE:

And so, I think there are other levers, but I think that one is so important and such a challenge, that that's where we should just be focusing for a while.

CHRIS:

Anne, are you optimistic that the cultural elements that position those leaders to move the profession forward is going in the right direction, the wrong direction or there's generational things that are in play, right? There's societal factors in play. It certainly feels like there's more willingness for folks to be vulnerable, which is a probably a driver that could be really helpful in culture shifts within the professions. I'm just kind of curious on your outlook of how optimistic are you? And what do you think are the kind of the underlying drivers that could either accelerate or hinder our ability to engineer this shift?

ANNE:

I think I'm always optimistic.

CHRIS:

We know that of you.

ANNE:

But I would say that my experience is that organizations are still all over the map. I would say like the ABA has come out with a wonderful ABA Well-Being Pledge, where many organizations, especially law firms have signed up saying that they're going to really commit themselves to lawyer well-being.

ANNE:

And I would say, even within that group who have made a public commitment, they're all over the map, that some of them, it's nice window dressing, but everyone else is doing it. So, we need to do it to show that we care about well-being.

ANNE:

There's others that I would say really are trying to figure this out. So, I think that at least now they're interested and asking questions, even the ones that just have it as window dressing, that's progress. It's better than what it was before. Once you start making public statements about your commitment, you're much more likely to start taking action because people are going to start questioning you. And you also want to be consistent with your public statements.

ANNE:

So, I think I am optimistic, but I think there are many obstacles to getting to where we want to go. Just our billable hour system, which is going to take a really long time to change, is everyone knows it's a problem. I don't know that you could find a single law firm leader that says they like the billable hour structure, but just no one has found a way to change it yet.

BREE:

Anne, I think that you're a heretic for saying that, I mean. I mean, to go ahead and call it out, I get up and talk. And I usually don't do this in a big room because I'm just afraid what's going to happen but really, if I can get around to it, the billable hours, the 800, 8,000 pound gorilla in the room until we have some shift with that, it's going to be a hard time to really change culture.

ANNE:

It is and I'm with you. I don't often talk about it in large rooms. I talk about it in small rooms, but I will also say that the science on it, on number of hours worked is really interesting. So, there was a big study in 2014 led by Larry Krieger on what makes lawyers happy? Let's stop talking about only what makes them sad. So, what makes lawyers happy.

ANNE:

And their study found that number of hours alone was not related to well-being or happiness, but billable hours work were. The more that billable hours rose, the less happy that people became. So, you could have two lawyers working the same number of hours but have different levels of happiness based on whether one felt like they were doing it freely and autonomously because it was their own choice versus feeling like they were forced to because of billable hours.

ANNE:

So, there's this idea of a basic human need that we have is autonomy. And it supports intrinsic motivation, like am I doing this because I enjoy it, because it's my choice to be doing it. And it's highly related to happiness and energy and all sorts of well-being that we care about. And so, it's not just that.

ANNE:

I think when people think about billable hours, it's often, oh, because we're being overworked. And yes, there is a lot of overwork in the profession. That's absolutely true. But there's also it's just harmful cultures that it's [crosstalk 00:19:04] worst.

BREE:

Yeah. What are you billing your time doing, which can be really mind numbing and it gets back to that meaning piece.

ANNE:

Yeah. And do I feel like I'm just making up hours because I have to. Am I having to find work when I really need to go take a job just because I need billable hours rather than because I'm so engaged in what I'm doing. So, I think billable hours is a challenge for a number of problems. But firms tend to be extremely competitive. And when you get to the partnership level, the way compensation works, there's all kinds of issues. I think the billable hours is just kind of the tip of the iceberg. But I do think there are a number of the ways that have just been standard practice within the legal profession that are posing obstacles that they're going to be hard to change, but again, I'm ready remain optimistic. It's just not going to happen overnight.

BREE:

Yeah, and I just want to commend everybody, the study that Anne just mentioned, it's called What Makes Lawyers Happy by Professor Larry Krieger, and it's really a great piece of work and maybe we can get Larry on the podcast.

CHRIS:

Yeah. It's probably a good time to take a quick break here from one of our sponsors. What a great conversation. And again, thank you for being here. Let's take a quick break and we'll be right back.

 

—

Your law firm is worth protecting. And so is your time. ALPS has the quickest application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates and bind coverage – all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com

—

BREE:

Welcome back, everybody. We have Anne Brafford with us today, who is the founder and owner of Aspire and also has been a pivotal leader in the National Task Force and lawyer well-being movement across the country. And one of the things we're going to talk about with Anne in this part of the presentation is about her pivotal role as being a founder of Lawyer Well-Being Week.

BREE:

And Chris is going to talk to her about that in just a minute but Anne, really one of the reasons I wanted you to be our first guest is that you can really speak to a foundational component of our work, which is how we defined well-being. And in fact, I remember when we were writing, you, as the editor in chief, kept pulling us back to, okay, we need to define these terms. We need to substantiate what we're saying with data and studies and all of the 200 plus whatever footnotes that were in the report and really tying us back to science. So, could you talk a little bit about how we came about to define lawyer well-being? What does that mean?

ANNE:

Yes, so this was set out in the report. We had a couple of pages of just saying, okay, we're all wanting to talk about lawyer well-being, let's talk about what we mean. And I need to give a shout out to Courtney Wylie and Patrick Krill, the three of us are the ones who really did the research and debated with each other and then offered it up, proposed it to the whole National Task Force for acceptance.

ANNE:

But what we did initially was to look at what other organizations were doing, both like corporate organizations and also organizations like the World Health Organization and other large organizations and how they were defining well-being and how they were approaching it.

ANNE:

And the first thing that was obvious is that this was a multidimensional concept. It's not binary, you're well, you're not well. It's a continuum and has lots of different dimensions. And the other thing that the World Health Organization agreed with, thankfully, was that it was, well-being isn't just the absence of illness. It's also the presence of full well-being.

ANNE:

And Bree, you'll recall that I wasn't only harping about the evidence, I also was always wanting to remind us to not only focus on the absence of illness in our report. And understandably, that's where a lot of people tend to focus because that's important of when people's lives are really being harmed and ruined by alcohol use disorders and mental health. You want to focus there on just helping those people get better.

ANNE:

But there's so many lawyers in the profession that although they don't have a diagnosable illness, they're not fully well. And so, we wanted to capture the full continuum of well-being and all of lawyers no matter kind of where they were in the continuum. And so, that's how we define well-being of really making sure the first thing we noted is just like the World Health Organization, we are defining this to mean both sides of this, curing illness and also promoting full well-being and then the multidimensional concept of this involves both mental health, intellectual health, physical health, of all the different areas of our lives. These work synergy synergistically to make us fully well.

ANNE:

And then when you look at one of the big dimensions that is important to lawyers, all of them are, but it's occupational health. As lawyers, are we fully well and we define that. And that's an area where I have focused more on lately, like what do we really mean? And how do we measure it? And is it just again, like so many people will focus on things like burnout or depression, but what else is it?

ANNE:

If we're looking at optimal functioning, what we want to look at is yes, we want the absence of illness, but we also want things like engagement, job satisfaction, high performance, low turnover intentions, like people who actually want to stay and thrive here.

ANNE:

So, I think even just getting into each dimension, there's more that we need to understand and figure out how to measure so that we know whether we're making progress or not. But that's basically the gist.

CHRIS:

One of the pages that I'll refer to our listeners to is page nine of the report, which I think has just a wonderful graphic of the holistic dimensions that I think you cite, the emotional well-being, the occupational well-being, intellectual, spiritual, physical, social. And I'm curious and just because of how much scientific research that you've done in your work on the occupational side, you've done some work as part of your master's program on building the positive law firm. And what does some of the research kind of say out there with respect to that part of the well-being definition that I think that you're spending considerable amount of time really waiting into?

ANNE:

Yeah, so my master's capstone was on building the positive law firm. And then that was further expanded in my book, Positive Professionals. And there's a lot of dimensions to that. The first thing I already covered, which is the importance of good leaders because they create culture.

ANNE:

I think that one of the other things that it's so important in the legal profession that gets missed is that working hard isn't the problem. That people who are highly engaged and love their work, they work hard and they work a lot of hours, but failing to take time to recover, that's when the wheels can start coming off.

ANNE:

And so, I don't think that there's so much focus on lawyers work too hard. I think we should just turn it and say lawyers need to recover. Good lawyers are going to work hard. Anyone who loves what they do and are passionate about what they do are going to work a lot of hours. But thinking about how we recover and there's a whole body of research just on what are the best ways to recover.

ANNE:

And I talk about it a little bit in my book, but it's things like just sitting on a sofa and watching TV is not actually the best way to recover and actually conserve energy. So, one of the best things for lawyers, people who are very cognitively invested in their work, so lots of brain power, one of the best ways to recover is actually physical activity. It's very engaging. It makes your mind come off your work. And also, just physical movement is really good for both our brains and our bodies.

ANNE:

And the disengagement from work is a really important component of recovery, of finding something that will engage your attention. So, thinking about what are called mastery activities, so art, music, sewing, knitting, anything that will fully absorb your attention is a really good and important activity for recovery because it helps you disconnect a little bit from work and also has other sorts of great benefits.

ANNE:

And I don't think we can talk about recovery without talking about the importance of sleep, which I do think is a challenge. When I was a lawyer at my firm, it was honestly like people would sort of be competitive about how little sleep they have had for the week. And that's toxic. Those kinds of things have to change.

BREE:

Yeah, and I talk about that when I go out and speak to new lawyers and just talking to them about the importance of sleep and how everything that you need to do as a lawyer is not going to be online if you're not sleeping and there's no honor in bragging about being powered by Red Bull. You're not going to get the best work product.

ANNE:

I was one of those people, like I'm embarrassed by some of the things. Guys, if you would know me back then, some of the things that came out of my mouth ... I was one of those people. So, I totally get it. It is hard to change. I'm still recovering on that whole sleep is good sort of thing. And I read all the science, like I'm absolutely convinced, but there's just this draw of I have to get more done. So, sleep is a really important thing to work on in our organizational cultures.

CHRIS:

Let's spend a couple of minutes in talking about something that in your capacity as a leader of the ABA's Law Practice Division's Attorney Well-Being committee, you kind of hatched an idea knowing that we needed to continue to keep this issue front and center and that was Lawyer Well-Being Week, which we just enjoyed.

CHRIS:

Anne, I just love your perspective on why you felt like that week was so important to sustain awareness of this particular issue, what will you ultimately learn from Lawyer Well-Being Week in terms of the amount of activity, which I think was enormous and encouraging and why it's so important that we continue to keep this issue front and center?

ANNE:

Yeah, so, Lawyer Well-Being Week had been on my mind for several years and very excited that it finally came together. And there were a number of reasons why I thought it was important. One was that there were so many people that wanted to contribute in some way but didn't know how. And so, I wanted to create one event that was big enough and diverse enough for a lot of different people to contribute.

ANNE:

And then second is just what you said, Chris, of keeping attention this important topic that we've all seen kind of fads come and go in the legal profession that something is there's so much energy and attention around it for a couple of years and then we move on to the next thing.

ANNE:

And this well-being just can't be one of those things. We have to sustain this lawyer. Well-being is too important for it just become another fad. And so, creating an annual event to really focus attention around the idea, keep attention on it, create a time and space for more innovation, discussion around it, firms get to see what other firms are doing just based on social media and by communicating with each other.

ANNE:

And so, we had the first Well-Being Week was just this last May. Unexpectedly, we had a global pandemic occur. And we had to pivot pretty quickly. Firms and other organizations have been planning some really cool in-person events that hopefully they'll still be able to do next year, but everything had to go remote.

ANNE:

And I will say I was pretty disappointed. A lot of people were pretty disappointed. But in the end, I think the silver lining was that people were even more open to the idea of needing to care about well-being in the middle of this really difficult time.

ANNE:

So, although we couldn't do a lot of the programming that we wanted, it may have even been better in that people were so much more open to this message than they might otherwise have been. And so, there was lots of engagement involvement by bar associations, law firms, in-house departments because I think everyone has become interested in well-being but also they were looking for stuff to get out to their lawyers during this time that they knew a lot of people were struggling.

ANNE:

And I do hope it continues to be absolutely raising awareness. But I also really emphasize innovation of really thinking about how do we move this forward. The meditation sessions and resilience sessions are really important, but how can we push Lawyer Well-Being Week to get organizations to think more culturally and institutionally as well.

ANNE:

And I've gotten very positive feedback about it. And so, we're hoping that it continues and that it will be an annual event for many years and that we just keep making it better and better and find even better ways to serve the profession.

BREE:

Absolutely. And it's definitely a priority for the National Task Force for 2021. So, let's hope we can get together and enjoy that in person.

BREE:

Anne, because you're really are, and I mean this, and it's complimentary, but I really mean it, you are a visionary and a thought leader in the space. And so, I'm going to push you a little bit to think about how do we know that lawyer well-being is done? It's fixed. We can check that box. I mean, when we sat in the room, the original founders in 2016, we talked about that this is a project that will take at least 10 years because we had a sense that it was a really a lot of heavy lifting. But we didn't really break it down to what would the world look like?

CHRIS:

Yeah. What does success look like?

BREE:

Yeah, right, Chris, what does success look like in the lawyer well-being?

CHRIS:

You're a metrics person, too, so, this is even better.

ANNE:

Yeah. So, I actually think those were two different questions. And I think what does success look like is a different question than when will we be done, because I don't think we'll ever be done.

CHRIS:

That's right.

ANNE:

Because the profession will continue to evolve. The world will continue to evolve. People's values will continue to evolve. And so, what lawyer well-being means and how we get there will be a forever project.

ANNE:

But the urgency that created the National Task Force Report had a lot to do with ill being, which was the statistics that got all of our attention on the level of alcohol use disorders and mental health disorders. And so, alleviating that I think is job one.

ANNE:

And how do we know that we've succeeded? I've thought a lot about that just with respect to Lawyer Well-Being Week, how do we know we succeeded. And I think like one, more simple one is, have we raised awareness about the importance of this issue? And how would we measure that.

ANNE:

But then, have we decrease the incidence of alcohol use disorders and raised the incidence of people's willingness to seek help? And I think no organization yet has been doing broad scale regular surveying to measure that, for a lot of reasons.

ANNE:

But I do think like that those would be the kinds of measures that I would want to look at first because those are the things that are potentially ruining people's lives. And these aren't mutually exclusive. But then also looking at the more thriving aspects of well-being or do we have high job satisfaction, high engagement? Do people feel that their work is meaningful? Those kinds of things which there's measures for all of that.

ANNE:

So, I think those things are hard to get out. That's costly to do all those things. But I do think that's how I would measure it. But I don't want to undermine the importance of our people realizing that this is important, like have we got people's attention. And I think, on that score, we've made incredible progress.

CHRIS:

Yeah.

ANNE:

Whether we've made a dent yet in alcohol use disorders and mental health, I'm not sure but we have to have that first level of awareness before we get to the next and then next, are we getting to full thriving, are organizational cultures fixed or institution? I'm not sure what those measures are yet, but I think that's a longer way off.

CHRIS:

Yeah, the full thriving I think is really an interesting component because again, the opportunity for folks to pursue a legal career and find personal and professional satisfaction, so many of I think of our colleagues ultimately will find that they may have made a wrong decision.

CHRIS:

And one of the questions that I ask oftentimes when I get up the podium at a regional or a state bar gathering is, would you recommend that if your son or daughter or one of their close friends came to you and said, "Should I go to law school?" That generally the answer is a little startling of a lot of people saying no. And to me, that says something about the systemic nature of problems that people can't maybe find what they are actually looking for or there's a false sense of expectation on what they thought it would be like, versus what it ultimately is.

ANNE:

Yeah, I think it's all those things. Even though I've left law, I would actually say yes, go to law school. There are so many great things about being a lawyer, but also stay true to the reason that you're going to law school.

ANNE:

That Larry Krieger, who we mentioned earlier has done on work on the evolution of values for law students throughout law school. And what he finds is that law school culture is channeled lawyers toward, well, the brightest and best go to the big firms. And that's great. There are lots of great opportunities at big firms and if that's the right fit, do that.

ANNE:

But there are other people like maybe me, that when I had a different value system but I wanted to do what the best kids were doing.

CHRIS:

Yeah.

ANNE:

And so, I was actually going to be a prosecutor and was looking for internships with prosecutor's offices, and a professor came to me and said, "What are you doing? You have good grades, you should go to a big firm." And I'm like, "Why would I do that?" I said, "That's not what I wanted to do when I came to law school." And he said, "You can always go from a big firm to a prosecutor's office, but you can't do the reverse. So, just go try it."

ANNE:

And so, I did. And I got into employment law, which I really liked, it was super interesting. And then you just get carried away with like, whatever the next thing is, I'm going to get that, I'm an achiever like so many lawyers are.

ANNE:

So, I do think like, yes, be a lawyer. There are so many great things about being a lawyer. It's super interesting work. You can make a positive impact, but stay in the right lane. Do what you think you'll love in 20 years and not just what seems prestigious right now.

CHRIS:

Yeah. Well, Anne, in our last question that I wanted to pose to you is one of the things that we're so excited about is the growing army of folks who are passionate about this issue. And this podcast was developed for those particular folks who are leading state task forces, working on subcommittees at the state and local level. Just be curious on your words of wisdom as you get to kind of address an army of well-being advocates across the country, any thoughts about just this fight, this culture shift, any recommendations or motivational words to really an incredible growing number of people who are passionate about this issue?

ANNE:

Well, get involved in Lawyer Well-Being Week. And part of resilience is anticipating failure along the way and figuring out when you face those failures, what are the 10 or 20 different ways that you're going to get around those obstacles?

ANNE:

And I think that that doesn't sound very inspiring, expect failure. I think it's absolutely important to the cause that we're undertaking because there are so many obstacles. But it's so important. So, expect that this is a long road. Things aren't going to change tomorrow and really think about what those obstacles are. And when you have a failure, don't feel like a failure, that think of the 20 different ways that you can get around whatever that obstacle is.

ANNE:

And that's how I've approached it, that when I have a door closed or hear a no, I'm going different ways to get to my yes, maybe not as easily as or as quickly as I wanted. But this is a long game, this isn't a short game. And so, just keep at it and really engage, get connected with people who feel as passionate as you do so that we can all help keep our energy up.

BREE:

I want to point out to everybody, we've been talking about Lawyer Well-Being Week and if you want to learn more about that, go to the National Task Force website, which is lawyerwellbeing.net. And all of the information, the great materials and worksheets and ideas for well-being is still up there. And it's applicable throughout the year. And so, I'm hoping people will use that.

CHRIS:

Anne, thank you so much again for your leadership, for your inspiration, for taking risks in your personal life to become a leader in our movement, for the work that you're doing on the science side of well-being. I mean, we are truly fortunate to have you amongst us and being a leader in our movement. So, thank you for being our first podcast guest.

BREE:

Thank you.

CHRIS:

Really cool. And we will be back with the Path to Lawyer Well-Being podcast in a couple weeks. Again, our goal is to do probably two a month, where we'll bring more great guests like Anne into the fold and talk about specific areas of lawyer well-being. So, for me, signing off. Bree, any final closing thoughts?

BREE:

Just a delight to get to spend time with you, Anne, as always. Thanks so much.

ANNE:

Yeah. Thanks for having me.

CHRIS:

All right. Thank you.

 

Beginnings

Podcast co-hosts Bree Buchanan and Chris Newbold, who also serve as co-chairs of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, introduce themselves, provide perspective on how the lawyer well-being movement began, how and why the issue has sparked a national conversation, why a culture shift in the profession is needed and share their individual stories of what brought them into the lawyer well-being movement.    

 

Transcript: 

 

CHRIS NEWBOLD:                

Welcome to the Path to Lawyer Well-Being, a podcast about cool people doing awesome work in the space of lawyer well-being. This podcast is presented by the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being. I'm Chris Newbold, and I'm joining you from Missoula, Montana, and I'm excited to be joined by my co-host Bree Buchanan.

BREE BUCHANAN:               

Hi, everybody. I'm Bree, and I'm joining you from Eugene, Oregon. Chris and I are both co-chairs of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being. So, a little bit just about what that group is, we're a group of lawyers representing different parts of the bar when each of us are a leader within that group. What binds us together is a passion for improving the lives of lawyers. We all hold a belief that to achieve that goal, there has to be a systemic change within our profession, so that well-being of its members is a top priority.

CHRIS:             

This is our inaugural podcast, and I think this is the right time to do a few things, I think, in our first podcast, which is to introduce a little bit about the well-being movement. To introduce you to the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, and most importantly, probably to introduce you to us. Why we find a personal passion in lawyer well-being, what our hopes and aspirations are as we think about the vision of this podcast series. Because there's incredible work going on around the country right now in this space of lawyer well-being launched several years ago with a legendary report that I think ignited a national discussion on this particular issue.

This is, I think, just a really exciting time for us in the movement, as we have grown really a large contingent of folks who are really fundamentally hoping to see some systemic changes in our profession for the betterment, as we think about lawyer health and well-being. So, we're going to have some fun today, I think, in our first podcast, Bree.

BREE:               

Absolutely.

CHRIS:             

Let's talk about the notion of a theme around beginnings.

BREE:               

Sure, and I thought it would be really great today, yeah talking about beginning of this podcast, talking about the beginnings of the national task force. How did it come about? Why did we do this? How was it envisioned, and what is it that we're trying to do? Then, also I thought it would be, this is the perfect time to talk about, Chris, you and I, our beginnings in this movement. What drew us to this? There's a real passion on the part of everybody that's working in this movement. So, what got us to this point, and I think it's a pretty interesting story.

CHRIS:              

It is.

BREE:               

So, I look forward to sharing it. Yeah.

CHRIS:             

It's been I think a really unique journey and, again, I think something that we continue to be very optimistic about where this movement is moving and the type of change that I think that we can engineer as we grow an army of well-being advocates around the country. So, Bree, let's start. I'd love to go back to the namesake of this podcast, is the Path To Lawyer Well-Being, and that name, I think, resonates with you as someone who's really a co-founder of our movement, and the report that got started by a coalition of organizations that began to really take an interesting look at this particular issue. Can you take us back to those early days of well-being?

BREE:        

Sure.

CHRIS:            

How did it come together and what have been some of the crowning achievements as we think about it?

BREE:             

Sure, in some ways it's a bit of an improbable story. It sounds like sort of an official group, and it really started back in 2016. There were a group of us who were each in our own right leaders of a national organization that worked in the space of lawyer impairment, lawyer well-being. We basically commandeered an empty conference room, the ABA annual meeting in San Francisco in 2016. We don't get to see each other very often and said, "Let's sit down and talk about the fact that we now have these two really significant large studies about the rates of impairment and the state of affairs of lawyer and law student's well-being in the country."

We haven't had that before. I come to this movement out of the lawyers assistance program world. I was an incoming chair of the ABA Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs. I had known, just from the work that I did and the calls that I answered every day at the L-A-P, the LAP, that there was a real problem. That the profession was experiencing with depression, and substance abuse, and alcohol use disorder, et cetera. We had a couple of folks from the National Organization of Bar Counsel, the people who regulate the profession, and a couple of folks from the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers.

The lawyers who often end up defending lawyers who were in the disciplinary system, and really work around in the space of ethics and professional responsibility. So, the small group of us sat down in that room, and I don't know what was in the water or the air that day, but we decided that given that we finally had the data, the hard data, to prove what we had known all along, we felt that there was a window of opportunity for us to move with that information. On that day, we decided that we were going to gulp, create a movement to bring about systemic change within the legal profession, in regards to how the health and well-being of its members are ... basically, how that's prioritized, because we had seen too much suffering.

Some of us had suffering in our own lives. I had witnessed too many lawyer suicides, and we really were so motivated to do something and do something quickly. So, we had that charge moving forward. We left that room. We brought together a coalition of national organizations, and we had some pretty, ultimately, ended up with some pretty prestigious groups, such as the Conference of Chief Justices. The National Association of Bar Executives is coming on board, et cetera. We decided that we needed to do a report to the profession and say, "We now have this information.

We know that there are real issues within our profession, and we need to do something about it." Hear the best minds that we could bring together who work and think about these issues every day. These are our recommendations to the profession. Chris, you were part of that. Talk a little bit about your role in all of that.

CHRIS:             

Yeah. I come from the side of Lawyers Professional Liability insurance, right? So, we have a vested interest in seeing lawyers practice with the duty of competence. I think one of the things that we saw as a recurring theme in some of our claims activity is the notion that impairment oftentimes is a precursor to a malpractice claim. So, based upon a really simple premise that I think that the report kind of signaled, which is to be a good lawyer, one has to be a healthy lawyer. So, that was for Alps, the company that I worked for, which is the largest direct writer of lawyers malpractice insurance in the country, and other malpractice insurance carriers.

It was that kind of a natural fit that we want to see lawyers thrive. We want to see them be just wonderful advocates on behalf of their clients. Too often, when lawyers are finding themselves in tough situations, they were reverting to things that would generally take them into a downward trajectory and open themself up to a malpractice claim. So, what I think is really cool, Bree, about the way that this movement got started, it's just the diversity of the groups were at the table. You're talking about a real sense of a grassroots. So, you got chief justices, you got disciplinary council. You got, obviously, the incredible work that our lawyer assistance programs do around the country.

You got the association of professional responsibility lawyers, various entities that have associations with the American bar association, what an interesting kind of group to come together. I don't really know of many other kind of legal issues that have started from such a grassroots perspective. Let's reset the timeline a little bit. This happened in August of 2016. So, we're about four years now away from this getting started, and really I'd love for you to walk us through one year later after that. We were on the cusp of releasing the report that got everything going.

That's a pretty short period of time-

BREE:              

Yeah, it is.

CHRIS:               

... to mobilize that group to publish, produce, research what ultimately came to be known as the path to lawyer well-being.

Bree Buchanan:               

It really is amazing in a little touch of a miracle that it all came together. You have these disparate backgrounds, and we really did everything by consensus. You've probably heard me talk about this before Chris, but I felt like it was birthing a child. It took nine months to write the report. It was a tremendous amount of work. All of us had not only our day jobs, but we're also leaders of national organization. So, we crammed all of this work in between the little pieces of open time that there might be. Really, everything that we decided ultimately, just about, was by consensus.                         

Everyone was amazingly on the same page. We broke up into to writing groups based upon the stakeholder group that we were involved in. It was just really quite miraculous. The editor in chief for the report is Anne Bradford. I'm excited to announce that she's going to be our first guest on this podcast. She was the editor-in-chief and just did an amazing job. Also, the founder of the Lawyer Well-Being Week, which we just launched this past spring. So, it was pretty incredible process. We finished the report and published it in early summer of 2017. We immediately took it to the Conference of Chief Justices and asked if they would endorse it.

Effectively, they passed a resolution encouraging all members of the profession to read and take heed of the report. Then, within days of that, we were able to leverage that support and take it to the ABA. We're back there at the next annual meeting, August the 27th, and there was a resolution introduced and passed by the house of delegates supporting the report. So, so much happened so quickly. It was just, in some way, it's one of those things where it felt like it was kind of meant to be.

CHRIS:               

Yeah, and for our listeners out there, if you haven't had a chance to see the report, the report can be found at lawyerwellbeing.net, where you can download the report. One of the things, I work a lot in the bar association world, and it was really exciting to see just how fast that we've struck a chord, I think, with folks who really want to see the lawyers, again, thrive in being successful in law practice. I know we'll get to our personal stories and I'll talk a little bit about why I got involved in the movement. But I think that it was exciting to see the report itself, which we flirted with actually naming this podcast 44 recommendations, right?

Because it was a fairly comprehensive report that outlined for various stakeholders pathways to being part of the solution when it comes to lawyer well-being. We talked a lot about the challenges of our profession. What I loved about it was it was a forward looking document that said, "If you're interested in being part of the solution, here are the pathways."

BREE:              

Absolutely, and everybody that got involved from the beginning all the way through to when we were passing resolutions, when the president of the ABA, Hilarie Bass picked this up and said she wanted to make it a priority, I believe that it was so successful because every person who pick this up and looked at it, he or she had experienced either maybe within their own career, but certainly over the course of their career, they had known lawyers or maybe judges, or even a law student, who had experienced some of these problems. Had experienced some severe episode of depression, or perhaps of a substance use disorder.

Even though we don't talk about these things in the profession, we have all bumped up against it in one way or another, over the course of our career. Really, what most tragically motivates so many people, especially if you've been in this field for a couple of decades or more, we all have stories of someone we have worked with, have known, a colleague who has taken his or her own life. Unfortunately, the tragedy, with those tragedies comes some opportunities to look at how we can do things better and it really motivates people to make some change. So, it seems like the task force and the report, it was the right thing at the right time.

Since that time, what we've really worked towards is trying to build, I guess, you'd say, grassroots movement across the country. That starts with each of the States taking the report. We actually talked about sort of, I talk about being cheeky. Because you look in the report, it's actually to the Chief Justice of each State and saying to her or him, "This is ultimately your responsibility for the well-being of the legal community under you. We're asking you to pull together a task force or commissioner committee pulling together the heads of the different stakeholder groups within the profession. Take a look at this report.

See if there's something that inspires you see. If there are things that need to happen in your State, what works for you. If it doesn't work for your State, then don't do it." A large number of States are picking up that charge and it really is occurring in a, again, in a really compressed timeline. It's amazing, Chris, you've been a part of a number of those States coming together to try and pull, put together their own task force.

CHRIS:              

Yeah, and it's been really, again, impressive to see the amount of interest at the local level. I think change generally starts at the local level. So, when you think about, we had a number of States and I'll give a shout out to a couple of them. States like Vermont, they went really early. Put together a task force, had a very supportive Chief Justice in Chief Justice Paul Reiber, and really have done a really significant work moving it forward. Virginia's another great example.

BREE:         

Absolutely.

CHRIS:              

One of our national task force original members was the Chief Justice there.

BREE:              

Don Lemons

CHRIS:               

Don Lemons in Virginia. Again, this is just an issue that resonated with him, and we do a lot of malpractice insurance in the Commonwealth. I just think that there's a yearning to be the very best lawyers that we can possibly be and to have the support of the judiciary there, and the Virginia State Bar. Utah, another great example of a State that got out in front and really started to set the tone for a movement of state task forces or state commissions to really look at the issue. Identify how well-being is occurring at the local level.

Make suggestions, make recommendations, and again, strive for systemic change to our particular profession. Bree, do you have the latest numbers on how many States have engaged in some type of activity at the state level for a task force or a commission?

BREE:                

Sure, yeah. One cool thing you can do is on our website, lawyerwellbeing.net, if you scroll down and there's an interactive map. So, you can see the States, it's wonderful to see it visually, the States where they have implemented a commission or a task force, so that sort of thing. In some States, they haven't done a multi-stakeholder group. Maybe it is the state bar has put together a lawyer well-being committee or commission, that's doing a lot of the work around this. Universally, or almost universally, the Lawyers Assistance Programs are very involved in this work, too.

So, it's taken different forms, but I would say the last time I counted, there's about 32 to 35 States now that are working in this space. So, well over a majority. So, it's exciting.

CHRIS:                

Yeah, and I think ultimately, what is most exciting for those of us in the space is what started out as a small group of 20 to 25 people, really kind of concerned about the issue, has really multiplied by many, many factors in terms of, there are literally people in every state and every territory around the United States that are vested in this particular issue, are working with their respective state bars, or their regulatory entities, or their Supreme Courts. That's the underpinnings of, again, a change in the environment.

A change in what we're trying to promote, which is, I think, obviously, a healthier legal profession of folks who find professional satisfaction in the practice of law. As we know from the numbers, that's not always the case. We have a lot of work to do because we work in an adversarial system. We work in a stressful system, and then, you add on top of that, some of the events of 2020, and you double down on that even further. So, there just can't be, I think, a more important time for us to be launching this podcast series to talk about the issues that are affecting the current and the future of lawyer well-being.

Really bring on, again, really cool people doing awesome work in this particular field, because there are great people. We will talk to the Anne Bradfords and the Patrick Krills. But we'll also go down, those are national, I think, pioneers in our space, but we'll also, I think, go down and also look for stories that's happening at the local level. We'll look at specific topics. We have all these state task force chairs that are looking for guidance in particular areas of the well-being discussion. We have modifications to the rules of professional conduct that are happening with respect to well-being. We have incredible stories happening in our law schools.

BREE:       

Absolutely.

CHRIS:               

We have developments on character and fitness parts of bar applications. We have pathways for reducing stigma in law firm culture. I what I'm excited about is the, I think, the intellectual journey that is in front of us. As you, Bree, as you think about the vision of this podcast, what gets you excited about? What's on the horizon? Because there's just so many areas that we could go as we co-host this podcast series, and what has you excited?

BREE:            

Well, I'm excited now after hearing the list all of those things out. I am really jazzed about the future of what we're going to do, because again, there are so many people working in this space and anybody that starts to work on the issues around lawyer impairment and lawyer well-being. If you dig just a little bit under the surface, there's a story there, and I'm excited about bringing forward some of those stories. So, on that topic, Chris, let's talk about our stories and our [crosstalk].

CHRIS:              

Yeah. Bree, let's take a quick break. I want to hear from our friends at ALPS. ALPS is, obviously, the entity as you will learn is where I do my day job. We've been able to leverage the marketing department here. So, let's hear from our friends at ALPS and then we'll come back and we'll pick up and talk about our own stories.

BREE:              

Great.

CHRIS:            

Okay.

—

Your law firm is worth protecting. And so is your time. ALPS has the quickest application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates and bind coverage – all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com

—

Welcome back. Bree, this is the part of, I think, our first podcast that I was looking forward most. Even though you and I have worked together for three to four years now,. Sometimes, we don't know the personal story about the why, right. As we think about beginnings and the beginning of this podcast, I thought it would be, I think we both thought it would be appropriate that we share our individual stories and why we bring passion, that passion, I think, originated from differing sources. So, I just thought we'd close out our first podcast with a little bit of an introduction of ourselves to our listeners.

BREE:               

Sure.

CHRIS:                

If you could start us off with your story and how you find yourself, where you are today.

BREE:           

Yeah. How I find myself today, it's a miracle really. It's just astounding to be in this space and be able to work on these issues because, the issues around depression, and anxiety, and substance use disorders and all of those things are things that plagued me throughout my life and my career. So, to come through that and through recovery, and on the other side, and be in a position now where I can work to make such a difference, it's just miraculous. When I started law school, I'll just give you everything. I graduated law school in 1989. So, you can do the math.

But I got to law school and I was absolutely terrified. I was one of those many, I think probably many nobody ever talks about it, but feeling like an imposter, there's a thing called the imposter syndrome. Then, I was, what was I doing here? I'm not nearly as smart as all these other people who are fronting and acting so smart and covering over their own insecurities. So, by the time I got to the first end of the first semester, the first year of law school and got my grades, I ended up with a full blown panic disorder, which is miserable. Lots of anxiety every single day. So, I started doing what worked and what was certainly the go-to for anything and everything, in the legal profession, which was alcohol.

I found that if I drank and drank pretty heavily, that anxiety would go away. I graduated from law school. I got the job that I had always wanted, which was to work at legal aid and was doing domestic violence litigation for about 10 years and loved it. But was absolutely terrified the whole time, particularly the first couple of years. Again, raising that issue of the imposter syndrome, being so afraid that I'm new, and every time the phone rings, that it's going to be an opposing counsel, and they're going to beat up or take advantage of this new lawyer. I also was dealing with the incredibly difficult content of the cases, the evidence, the horrific fact patterns.

Later on got involved in litigation with child abuse and representing children that are in the foster care system. So, if you think about the type of facts and stories that I was living in every day, I dealt with what is now called compassion fatigue. I had no idea what that was at the time in the early 90s. Dealt with burnout, too much work, and not enough time to do it all, not enough support systems, et cetera. So, I dealt with a lot of depression. I still had some anxiety. Again, what I found worked, "worked" in the moment was to use alcohol. Over the course of my career, I really ended up taking sort of two paths.

There was the public face. Then, there was the private face. So, publicly, look at my CV. It looks good. It had some jobs, leadership positions, president of this, whatever, you'd think, "Oh, she's got it together." But what was going on in my home, where no one could see, was a lot of very unhappy existence, exhaustion, not ever feeling good enough because I held myself to a standard of perfection. Ultimately, as it tends to happen, I drank more over time. We know that the prolonged sustained drinking of alcohol and heavy amounts starts to create changes in the brain.

I started to become physically dependent to it, upon it. Ultimately, I lost my marriage. That wasn't enough to get me to stop drinking. I find that listening to the stories of hundreds, if not thousands of lawyers dealing with similar problems, when I was at the Lawyers Assistance Program, that was common. Lawyers will let everything else fall in their life. Then, when it gets to work, which is where it finally got to me, when it affects your career, then that's the bottom. Not too long after I lost my marriage, I lost my job. That point was my low point. I finally was ready to admit that I couldn't control my drinking anymore, and I got into recovery.

Just as I tend to throw myself full on into whatever I do, I did that with recovery as well. That, for me, meant really making use of all the resources that were available. The thing that I learned early on and what I try to impart so much to people, lawyers who are suffering, is you've got to ask for help. We've got to be willing to say, "I'm suffering, I'm struggling, and I need help." I did that in spades. I called and got involved with a therapist. I saw a psychiatrist to get treatment for my depression and anxiety. I participated in a mutual support program for my drinking, worked that program.

I got involved with the lawyer's assistance program and ultimately ended up getting a job there. So, fast forward, I've been in recovery now for 10 and a half years, and my life is amazing. It is beyond anything that I could have ever imagined, but I had to get to that point and that realization where I was willing to be vulnerable, ask for help, and then do the work. Ask for help and then do what I was told to do by people who are experts in the field. So, you can see, I have a real sort of homegrown passion for this. I understand really what it's like to live every day, going to work as a lawyer, and being afraid and not feeling like you're enough.

Anyway, so just out of all of that, I've grown to have a real passion for making sure as few others as possible have that same experience, and will share my story when people are interested, and I think that it would be of help.

CHRIS:               

Well, thank you, Bree, for a couple of things. First of all, being vulnerable and telling your own personal story. I think that we will consistently encourage that to all of our guests, I think, on the podcast, because that vulnerability, I think, is something that naturally allows us to be better understanding of how you have ... The depth of personal struggles that you have endured have led you to this position of moving into leadership and helping others. That's awesome stuff. I was going to take a couple of minutes on my story. It's interesting.

My story is that I take a completely different track. It's not as much developed from its core from a personal perspective as much as from an observation perspective, which is, I ... Just a history on myself, I'm a first-generation college graduate in my family. So, everything was new. So, as I looked at going to law school and understanding that I was entering a profession, that I was very much public interest oriented probably when I went into law school. Just kind of saw some things happening in law school amongst classmates and others that gave me a concern.

Then, as I reflected, I'm a 2001 graduate of the University of Montana School of Law. One of the things, as I reflected on really kind of a tenure point in my legal career, was that when I queried my classmates about their professional satisfaction in the practice of law, I just, frankly, wasn't getting a response that was positive. So, when you think about the fact that folks have went down a course in terms of selection of a professional career and to not be finding professional satisfaction, and to almost actively be encouraging their kids to not think about pursuing a passion in law, it just gave me a belief that there's something systemically broken in our profession.

Again, great things happening in a lot of different respects. I think our profession is one that has ... I'm always driven by seeing organizations and individuals realize their potential. If we think about the legal profession, I just kind of reflected on the notion that I don't think our legal profession is realizing its potential. Part of it has to do with the manner in which there's just a nature of unhealthiness undercurrent, beneath the hood a little bit that is pulling away from our profession, realizing its potential.

I happened to be in a class of, graduating class of '75, at the University of Montana and have had to endure three suicides in our class. Again, you just sit there and go, "What's going on? Why is this happening?" It's not always related to the law. Obviously, we are human beings before we are lawyers. We always have to remember that, but I've spent a lot of my time really thinking about why are some of these things occurring? In my day job here at ALPS, I spent a lot of time working with State bar associations and doing strategic planning. I know how much this issue affects members of bar associations.

So, I just felt like I'm an accidental leader in some respects in this movement, but I was drawn to it because I believe in the potential of our profession, and in working toward making it better. I felt like if I have some skills and some passion, and if I can somehow advance the conversation that this would be an appropriate venue to get involved. I happened to get introduced to the well-being movement by somebody who also, Bree, you know very well. That's our dear friend, Jim Coyle out of Colorado.

BREE:           

Absolutely.

CHRIS:               

Jim would be incredible, and Bree, we got to get Jim on to the podcast, because I think that he was single-handedly responsible for seeing something in me and seeing somehow how my perspectives would add perspective and flavor to our discussions. Jim was an original co-chair of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, after having sat and served with distinction in the office of the Disciplinary Counsel and Attorney Regulation, I guess they call it in Colorado. So, Jim introduced me and said, "You got something to give to this movement." Invited me in, and it's been a wonderful and rewarding journey thus far, and we still have a lot of work to go.

BREE:            

Absolutely. Absolutely. I'm hearing your story, what brought you to the movement, and that's a first for me. It really strikes me that between our two stories, it encapsulates what the issues that the National Task Force is working on. I come to this because I have a history of basically impairments, or the depression, and substance use disorder. We're really about, the national task force, is really about trying to provide, make sure that there is treatment, there are resources, there's education and information about that out there. There's providers who can talk about that.

But it's also really about, so much of what we wanted to do is about the fact that so many of our colleagues are not thriving in the practice of law. What a loss, what a loss personally, and what a loss to the profession, when we're not able to work up to our full capacity. So, I think this is a great partnership, Chris.

CHRIS:              

Yeah, it is. I'm excited for the journey. I do think that I wanted to give a little bit of a preview of who our intended audience is, because I think that that's an important part of why we develop the podcast series in the first place. This podcast series is specifically designed for folks who are taking an active leadership role in the well-being movement, for you to hear from others around the country. To learn their stories and learn about their expertise so that you can find and connect dots into resources that you need to help us move this movement forward. There are other podcasts out there that I think focused on individual lawyers.

There's, obviously, mindfulness, meditation, eating well, taking care of yourself. Those are very important attributes to taking each lawyer individually and comprising our legal profession. Our goal, I think, in this particular podcast is to think about those who are thinking about it holistically, thinking about it in terms of how they can move the needle at the local level. So, this is a podcast that's specifically developed for all those folks who have a real passion in becoming leaders in our movement, and connecting those folks through the sharing of information and education,

BREE:                

Right. We've always, the task force have always been about really looking at systemic change. We said from the very beginning, we're going to try and lecture individual lawyers that they need to eat their vegetables and exercise, because we knew that and an individual lawyer can meditate, and run, and eat all the broccoli in the world, but they can't change the systemic issues within the legal system that make it almost impossible for everyone to be able to really thrive. So, that's what we're trying to get at, the big picture stuff.

CHRIS:                

Yup, and Bree, you and I, we have a goal, right? That we want to keep these episodes to probably 20 to 45 minutes. We're targeting probably two podcasts a month as we look to continue to add new guests and new perspectives to this podcast series. So, Bree, we got to wrap this up. We got a lot of preparation to do as we nail down future speakers. We're excited, I think, by the journey that lies ahead. So, I'm wishing you well. This is Chris.

BREE:              

And Bree.

CHRIS:                

We'll sign off. Thank you for listening, and we'll be back with a podcast probably in a couple of weeks. Thank you.