Should Vicarious Trauma education address the demands of the 21st Century Lawyer ?

In this new blog written for the upcoming OU conference 'Vicarious Trauma Education and the legal profession – Now and the Future', Associate Lecturer Gillian Mawdsley asks, 'Should Vicarious Trauma Education address the Demands of the 21st Century Lawyer?'

Even twenty-plus years ago, a lawyer’s education in the UK was different from today. Now, there is increasing recognition that today’s legal education additionally requires knowledge and the embedding of softer skills such as vicarious trauma education.

Lawyers engage in seismic events demonstrated by the Letby case with baby deaths, historic child abuse or Covid-19 and more. Recently, sentencing in the Southport killings heard about “14 minutes of terror that left three children dead.” No doubt harrowing for all in that court.

The legal profession’s focus requires successful delivery for their client by representing their best interests, while respecting professional ethics as a member of the legal profession. Potentially, the impact of dealing with such events may cause vicarious trauma.

In Scotland, the victims’ needs are the focus in the provision of a trauma-informed approach, demonstrated in the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill. That approach deals with the victim. Arguably, that does not address that of the lawyers themselves, their potential vulnerability and sensitivity in the recounting of such events. What is common ground with these respective approaches is an acceptance that it should not be just continuing business as usual.

Legal profession education needs to equip lawyers appropriately to oversee such cases without having an adverse effect on their well-being. Their interns, trainees and staff needs as administrators, or otherwise, supporting their teams’ delivery are just as valid. No- one is immune from the potential effects given the circumstances of such cases. A duty exists to manage and support all.

Current approaches to vicarious trauma education continue to be piecemeal. No overall responsibility exists in achieving that basic standard of awareness and knowledge.

Traditionally, the legal journey starts at school with grades and motivation. Few then appreciate fully the nature of the profession to which they aspire.

Universities (HE) go on to teach based on the delivery of traditional academic law. Opportunities to work on pro bono projects may exist bridging academia to legal practice. They qualify, having also fulfilled the regulatory body’s requirements. They retain membership of that legal elite by upholding the conduct standards and CPD.

Where lies delivery of vicarious trauma education?

The profession requires vicarious trauma education to meet societal demands, while learning the skills of writing, research, and problem-based analysis. Introducing such education early is best to promote understanding of the strains and stresses of the profession and the subject -matter of cases, contemporaneously with learning the skills and knowledge to become a lawyer. From that platform, the fledgling lawyer moves on to employers who must ensure that the basic knowledge does not stagnate, providing relevant support from then to their career conclusion.

Just how this might be achieved lies outside these discussions as initially, consensus from the legal profession of the importance of vicarious trauma education is needed with it then being provided at the earliest opportunity which is at HE delivery. Lawyers can learn from other practices including those from outside the profession by encouraging cross-disciplinary discussion. Other professions such as medicine and the police recognised inherent risks early ensuring adaption to include vicarious trauma education, defined there as representing a process of change resulting from empathetic engagement with trauma survivors.

The understanding of society and its demands have changed much including through social media and technology. There is greater accountability required from the legal profession. Those studying law today differ from the current generation of lawyers. Their underlying resilience is not the issue. However, the responsibility for equipping them with relevant skills including vicarious trauma education is ours.

Gillian Mawdsley