Open Access Research Article
SECONDARY TRAUMATIC STRESS, BURNOUTS AND LACK OF SAFETY - MAJOR HURDLES IN JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING (By-Avinash Gaikwad)
Published Paper
Article Details
SECONDARY TRAUMATIC STRESS,
BURNOUTS AND LACK OF SAFETY - MAJOR HURDLES IN JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING
Authored By-Avinash Gaikwad
LLM (I), ROLL NO- 42
Under The Guidance Of
Dr. Ananya Bibave
|
1.
|
|
ABSTRACT
|
|
2.
|
|
INTRODUCTION
|
|
|
2.1
|
TERMS
DEFINED - TRAUMA, SECONDARY TRAUMA, SECONDARY TRAUMATIC STRESS
|
|
|
2.2
|
SECONDARY
TRAUMA AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
|
|
3.
|
|
STS, BURNOUT AND SAFETY CONCERNS AND IMPACT ON JUDGES
|
|
4.
|
|
ADDRESSING THE PROBLEMS OF TRAUMA : COPING STRATEGIES
|
|
5.
|
|
RECOMMENDATION
|
|
6.
|
|
CONCLUSION
|
Abstract
In the months since this research was
conducted, judges and the judicial system have been subjected to stress and
tests of their resiliency like never before. We are facing a global pandemic,
social change, economic challenges, the stress of a national election, and
other natural disasters. Judges, magistrates, public prosecutors, advocates and
other professionals in judicial administration system are engaged in the
reconciliation of these issues from every perspective and in every way and
every day and there is no doubt it is having an impact. It is our intention in
this article to demonstrate the critical importance of resiliency to members of
our judiciary and to offer methods for engaging in those practices. We stand by
these recommendations and suggestions that they are, and will continue to be,
absolutely essential as our judiciary play a pivotal role in our nation’s
recovery.
The Judiciary is responsible for fair
and efficient administration of justice. Officers working in the judiciary
encounter clients whose rights may have been violated and who vividly narrate
stories that bear content of trauma. Due to adjudication of cases involving
such clients, the officers may get vicariously traumatized and hence suffer
secondary traumatic stress (STS). This scenario, if unaddressed, may impact
negatively on judicial officers’ capacity to resolve conflicts effectively.
Judges regularly confront contentious, personal, and vitriolic proceedings.
Judges presiding over domestic relations dockets make life changing decisions
for children and families daily. Some report lying awake at night worrying
about making the right decision or the consequences of that decision. Other
judges face the stress of presiding over criminal cases with horrifying
underlying facts .
The Aim of this paper – This article is an
attempt to understand how judges and magistrates experiences challenges in
decision making due to the hurdles such as Secondary Traumatic Stress, Burnouts
and Safety concerns. And to suggests the measures in coping of such problems.
to achieve the following two objectives:
to determine the level of STS among judges and
magistrates in Kenya; and to establish ways in which judges and
magistrates’ capacity to manage
STS could be enhanced.
1.
Introduction
What Is Trauma?
In this article, the term “trauma”
refers to experiences that cause intense physical and psychological stress
reactions. It can refer to “a single event, multiple events, or a set of
circumstances that is experienced by an individual as physically and
emotionally harmful or threatening and that has lasting adverse effects on the
individual’s physical, social, emotional, or spiritual wellbeing” Although many
individuals report a single specific traumatic event, others, especially those
seeking mental health or substance abuse services, have been exposed to
multiple or chronic traumatic events.
Traumas can affect individuals,
families, groups, communities, specific cultures, and generations. It generally
overwhelms an individual’s or community’s resources to cope, and it often
ignites the “fight, flight, or freeze” reaction at the time of the event(s). It
frequently produces a sense of fear, vulnerability, and helplessness.
Resilience:
This term refers to the ability to
bounce back or rise above adversity as an individual, family, community, or
provider. It includes the process of using available resources to negotiate
hardship and/or the consequences of adverse events. It is the ability to rise
above the circumstances or to meet the challenges with fortitude.
There are three types of trauma. 1. Primary Trauma 2.
Historical and Intergenerational Trauma 3. Secondary Trauma.
Primary trauma -These are also called first hand traumas which occur when
significant, potentially life-altering events leave us feeling fearful,
helpless, overwhelmed, and profoundly changed. These feelings result from
experiences that are direct, means, they happen to us personally or we see them
happen to others. Events that cause primary trauma can be acute—in the case of
a single occurrence, such as a severe car accident—or ongoing, in the case of
an experience that happens over time, such as being abused or neglected as a
child. Primary trauma can be early
childhood physical, emotional, sexual abuse or neglect.
Historical and Intergenerational Trauma- These are inherited from prior
generations. Though these are not experienced directly, they can still leave
their imprint on us. The effect of this kind of trauma is also mental,
physical, social, psychological and economic. Historical trauma can be the
legacy of boarding schools, loss of language, and institutional racism and
oppression. Today, it is the devastating social problems—poverty, alcoholism,
drug addiction, violence, and suicide—that have resulted from continued,
unrelenting injustices.
Secondary trauma- This is primarily the topic of this
research article. For those of us in
the helping professions, such as doctors, advocates, investigators, police
officers etc., whose jobs requires to hear about or even witness the horrible
and disturbing things that happen to other people on a daily basis. When we
talk about secondary trauma, we are talking about the trauma that can be
“transferred” over to us after repeatedly engaging and empathizing with people
who have been traumatized. Research has shown that the symptoms of secondary
trauma can be just as real and personal as those of primary trauma, despite our
not having experienced the disturbing event directly. What jobs put us at risk
of secondary trauma?
o
Secondary
trauma is an occupational hazard. It is a natural consequence of working to
help those who have been traumatized.
o
Secondary
trauma is a byproduct of empathetic engagement with individuals who have
experienced firsthand trauma. While our ability to empathize may make us good
at our jobs, we must also understand that vicariously engaging in another
person’s suffering can take a profound toll over time.
o
Secondary
trauma can have serious consequences for our health, both mental and physical.
Secondary trauma may cause us to experience symptoms of trauma—tension
headaches, exhaustion, and irritability, just to name a few that did not
originate from our own experiences.
o
Secondary
trauma is not a personal failing or a lack of resiliency. It does not signal an
absence of willpower or commitment. It is distinctly different from our
personal histories of trauma and the ongoing adversities we face in other areas
o
of our lives.
Although these things may complicate the issues surrounding secondary trauma,
they are not the same thing.
Consequences Of Secondary Trauma
The negative impacts of secondary
trauma are numerous and can affect not only individual victim service providers
but also our interpersonal relationships, the organizations that employ us, and
even the people that we work so hard to help.
Physical And Mental-
·
Secondary
trauma can also have an adverse effect on interpersonal relationships,
including those with spouses, partners, children, friends, and coworkers. For
those of us working day in and day out with traumatized individuals, it can be
understandably difficult to remain emotionally present with our loved ones.
·
In
addition to distancing us from our loved ones, repeated exposure to the
survivors of firsthand trauma has the potential to intensify our responses to
everyday interactions and situations. E.g. A shelter worker who counsels abused
women, for instance, a worker with Child Protective Services (CPS) may refuse
to leave his young children with a babysitter. A lawyer who prosecutes sexual
assaults may be unwilling to let her teenage daughter attend social events.
Physical
And Psychological
·
Feeling
helpless and hopeless
·
A
sense that one can never do enough
·
Hyper
vigilance
·
Diminished
creativity
·
Chronic
exhaustion/physical ailments
·
Inability
to listen/deliberate avoidance
·
Sense
of persecution
·
Guilt
·
Fear,
Anger and cynicism
·
Inability
to empathize/numbing
·
Addictions
·
Grandiosity
(an inflated sense of importance related to work)
Organizational Consequences
When providers are suffering from secondary trauma,
workplaces suffer as well. In the face of daily pain and suffering, it can be
difficult for us to be our best selves at work. We may unintentionally unleash
our distress onto colleagues in ways that seem irrational or abusive. And
because, as the saying goes, one bad apple can spoil the bunch, the negative
attitude of one employee can lead to a chain reaction wherein other employees
begin to display the same behaviors, resulting in a toxic work environment. We
may also begin to cast blame on the organizations we work for and become angry
and resentful toward our work as a result. With organizational understanding of
and responses to secondary trauma typically lacking or even nonexistent, it is
easy to see how secondary trauma may exacerbate staff turnover and lead to shortages
in providers.
Secondary Traumatic Stress (Sts)
Interchangeably used terms as vicarious Trauma / burnout/ compassion
fatigue, but there is slight differences in these terms. STS also shares some
symptoms with post traumatic stress disorder, but is the product of being
indirectly exposed to another’s trauma. Secondary trauma is found in social
workers who work with abused children and therapists who support sexual assault
survivors. STS also affects the Public Interest Lawyers and has been documented
among Public defenders and judges. Those lawyers who are working in areas such
as criminal, family and juvenile law are particularly susceptible to secondary
traumatic stress as their work often requires them to listen to victim’s
personal stories and review evidences of traumatic events. Likewise lawyers
working on pro bono cases for clients who have survived extremely traumatic
events may also be vulnerable to the effects of the secondary trauma
particularly when asked to read , view or listen to graphic depictions of
violence.
Identifying Symptoms Of Secondary Trauma
·
AVOIDANCE – (Avoiding your clients or
missing deadlines)
·
HYPERVIGILANCE – (Feeling on edge or like all clients are
in immediate danger)
·
BECOMING ARGUMENTATIVE OR DEFENSIVE-
(Becoming
argumentative or defensive about work on a case, frequently spending large
amounts of time on a pro bone case outside of regular work hours and generally
becoming less productive and effective.)
In your personal life, it may show up
as:
·
Disturbing images from cases
appearing in dreams or intrusive thoughts.
·
Physical symptoms such as
headaches or stomachaches, feeling tired or guilty all of the time.
·
Becoming numb and detached
from your friends or family outside of the office.
Work Related Burnout
·
The third
major stressor that judges may experience is work-related burnout. The judicial
occupation can demand long hours and thus the ability to cope with a
consistently heavy workload. Because of long working hours and the plethora of
cases, judges are faced with challenges that inevitably add stress to an
already demanding job. Unprepared lawyers, uncooperative defendants, and
conflicts with other judges are some examples of job-related stressors. Judges
also may experience difficulties when they are forced to make decisions that
will have a major impact on the lives of the parties involved in the case.
Judges may also experience pressures apart from their primary occupational
duties. For example, elected judges have the additional demand of preparing for
(i.e., campaigning) and worrying about being elected. Similarly, publicity
surrounding judges’ decisions can be a contributing source of stress.
·
The
occupational stressors already mentioned are potential contributors to
work-related burnout. As discussed, judges are routinely
given responsibilities (e.g., deciding a case) that carry important
consequences and are commonly exposed to the trauma of others.
Workplace
conflict is also a prominent aspect of the judicial occupation, given the
nature of the adversarial system and the subsequent threats of violence that
many judges receive. Safety concerns stemming from workplace conflict may
contribute to work-related burnout. Notions of occupational inequity may be a
common sentiment among judges, as the job requires long hours and intense
emotional investment with relatively small rewards. Prospective judges
certainly play an active role in seeking judicial appointment or election and
should thus be aware of the long hours, heavy workloads, and important
responsibilities that the position demands. However, it is plausible that some
judges do not fully understand the nature of the position before entering it.
All of these factors suggest that judges are highly susceptible to work-related
burnout and its resulting detrimental physical and emotional consequences.
·
Some common
physical and emotional responses to burnout include headaches, hypertension,
depression, insomnia, and disillusionment. Burnout may also cause a
negative self-perception and negative attitudes toward work and others in
general. Thus, occupational stress research suggests that judges who suffer
from work-related burnout can experience a variety of negative physical and
emotional outcomes. However, these suppositions lack direct empirical evidence,
and further research is needed for accurate assessment of the prevalence of
burnout among judges. In the current study, we attempted to assess occupational
stressors in a single jurisdiction in a homogeneous sample of judges.
Safety Concerns
·
Violence
and threats of violence against judges and their families have become prominent
media topics in recent years. This incident exemplifies the growing number of
cases involving violence against judges. Recent
incidents of hostility have presumably created a tangible source of stress for
many judges, as each incident is brought to light by considerable media
coverage. Violence aimed at judges is likely to create a sense of vulnerability
and insecurity for anyone entering the judiciary. Concerns about safety may
even extend to family, as violence against family members of some judges has
occurred in recent years.
·
In-depth
interviews found that the judges shared several anxieties about courtroom
violence. They believed that attacks, threats, and harassment are common
occurrences. In addition, they unanimously expressed the belief that courtroom
protection is not now and never will be sufficient to curb potential
attacks. Taken together, these findings suggest that judges experience
anxiety and stress from threats of violence.
Sts,
Burnout And Safety Measures – Impact On Judges Decision Making
While some attempts have been made to define and
differentiate between the terms compassion fatigue, burnout, secondary trauma,
and vicarious trauma, they continue to be used interchangeably in the court
every day. Judges and other court personnel are exposed to detailed accounts,
pictures, and videos of traumatic events that affected victims. Trial judges,
to some degree, are isolated as they must make their rulings and decisions
individually without the ability to discuss ongoing cases. In addition, legal
and judicial training do not typically focus on how one feels. Judges are
usually law trained, and lawyers as a group are known to be at high risk for depression
and substance abuse.
Judges face the problems of Long hours,
substantial workloads, occasional traumatic cases, the making of important
decisions, and recent violent incidents involving judges highlight some of
the potentially traumatic occupational experiences of the judiciary. They may
experience negative physical (e.g. becoming overweight) and emotional (e.g.
boredom, burnout) outcomes from sitting on the bench for countless hours. It is
important that we begin to understand and account for these experiences, as
they have the potential not only to affect judges’ personal lives negatively,
but also to impede them from performing their duties to the best of their
abilities.
People do not typically go to court for happy reasons. They
may be involved in criminal cases involving horrific details or civil cases
involving evictions, child abuse, or family breakdowns. Judges are expected to
address each situation individually, listen impartially to witnesses, and view
other evidence. Today, evidence comes in many formats, including grisly photos
and videos or frightening emails, voice mails, and text messages. Everyone is
taking pictures and
videos at crime scenes with dash cameras, body-worn cameras
(in the case of law enforcement), and smart phones. This repeated exposure to
traumatic details that judges and other court personnel face daily can lead to
secondary or vicarious trauma. In addition to presiding over cases involving
traumatic events, judges in emotionally charged cases may have concerns about
safety. Finally, the high caseloads that many judges deal with can add to the
stress levels, which in turn make them more susceptible to vicarious trauma.
The symptoms of Secondary trauma are similar to Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). They can include: hyper vigilance, hopelessness , inability to
embrace complexity , inability to listen, avoidance , anger and cynicism ,
sleeplessness , fear , chronic exhaustion , physical ailments , minimizing ,
guilt Many of these symptoms can interfere with the judicial decision-making
process.
Our brains are wired to feel empathy, and our bodies may
experience this through sensory neurons known as “mirror neurons.” This was
first discovered with physical motions, such as viewing someone drinking a
glass of water. The same neurons light up in the person viewing the action as
in the person drinking the water. Similarly, when listening to or viewing
someone else’s trauma, our bodies can experience their pain through our
mirror-neuron system.
It
is worth noting that many of these occupational pressures and conflicts are not
unique to the judiciary. For instance, many businessmen, doctors, and
professors presumably work long hours, handle large caseloads, and make
important decisions on a regular basis. However, we argue that judges face a
unique combination of occupational experiences that may be overly burdensome.
Further,
given that judges make important decisions that often determine the fate of
parties involved (and, more generally, affect entire jurisdictions, states, or
countries), the occupational experiences of judges have a large societal impact
and are thus important to study.
There
are several ways in which judges’ occupational experiences may lead to negative
outcomes for the justice system.
For
instance, occupational burnout (i.e., physical and emotional stress stemming
from occupational factors) may negatively affect a judge's ability to consider
relevant evidence. Similarly, occupational experiences may affect judges’
abilities to protect plaintiffs, and defendants from potential stressors, such
as those presented by the media.
Finally, experiences in the judicial occupation
may influence the decisions that judges make, with obvious negative
implications for the legal system. For instance, a judge may (perhaps
subconsciously) modify a decision based on a perceived threat from one of the
parties in a case. In sum, judges play a crucial role throughout the trial
process and it is therefore important to understand and attempt to alleviate
the occupational experiences that may impede their decision-making capacities.
Although
these propositions have not been tested directly and are purely speculative, there
is some evidence that stress (which presumably stems from these experiences)
affects the occupational performance of judges. Research in the field of
occupational stress suggests that stress lowers one's memory
capacity, undermines one's decision-making processes, and increases
social stereotyping, thus leading to biased judgments. High cognitive
demand (i.e., cognitive load) can influence the ability to recall facts and
make impartial judgments. In sum, research suggests that these occupational
experiences (i.e., STS, safety concerns, and burnout) may lead to negative
outcomes for members of the judiciary and the judicial system in general.
Coupled with sparse existing research, the current study provides some
initial evidence about the impact of these experiences on the judiciary.
It was our goal in this research to draw
attention to three classes of occupational experiences that judges face (STS,
safety concerns, and burnout) and to present recommendations to alleviate them.
First, anecdotal evidence will be examined to determine judges’ susceptibility
to each of the experiences. The evidence will include a discussion of the
theoretical and empirical foundations of each experience, and the specific
implications that these experiences have for judges’ health.
It
is not uncommon for judges, especially those in family or criminal courts, to
be exposed to cases involving traumatic events. Throughout the trial process,
they are often exposed to gruesome evidence and disturbing family
circumstances. Recent high-profile cases exemplify the traumatic situations
encountered by judges. For instance, a trial of a mother accused of mutilating
and killing her baby, certainly contained evidence that was deeply disturbing
for those involved in the trial.
We can also use our mirror-neuron system to vicariously calm
ourselves. To do this we must develop resilience. There are following ways to
develop the resilience:
Awareness— First, it is important to know the
signs and symptoms of vicarious trauma in yourself and in your colleagues. This
can be accomplished by providing training to court personnel that identifies
the stressors, symptoms, and techniques for preventing or addressing vicarious
trauma by building resilience. This type of training can emphasize that developing
these types of reactions to trauma is part of being human and not a sign of
weakness.
Balance—
The second aspect of building resilience is the importance of
self-care. Individuals who are exposed to these daily descriptions and pictures
of the trauma experienced by others must learn to set boundaries between their
work and private lives. To some extent, this can be accomplished by the usual
admonitions to get enough sleep, to participate in an exercise program, and to
eat a healthy diet. Other important techniques include meditation, yoga, and
mindfulness training.
Connection—
Because trial judges are typically isolated in dealing with
specific cases, it is important to debrief with colleagues who understand the
situation. When this is not possible, or is not enough, a therapist can provide
this type of connection and support. Individuals facing this kind of vicarious
trauma need to be surrounded by a strong system of supportive relationships. By
using these techniques, courts can ensure that judges and other court staff
have the resources they need to address the symptoms of Secondary Trauma.
1.
Many courts are doing just that by providing training for judges and
court staff. Different training models and curriculum are available. Some
courts use outside educators to provide training while others develop in-house
products.
Judges
and court staff are susceptible to vicarious or secondary trauma due to the
combination of working in a busy court, hearing repeated accounts of harrowing
or traumatic events, and worrying about safety issues that may arise around
volatile or emotionally charged cases. Law-trained individuals have been found
to be at high risk for anxiety and depression, and this may be traced back to
the law-school environment. Courts can address these issues by providing
resilience training based on an awareness of the signs and symptoms, the need
for balance and self-care, and the importance of
connecting
with a strong support system that may include friends, colleagues, family, and
professional therapists
Audio Visual Evidence And Its Impact On Criminal Justice Administration.
Technology
plays an important role in the administration of justice. However the effects
of exposure to gruesome material presented in this form on criminal justice professionals
who analyse, evaluate and use this potentially traumatic content in the context
of their work are largely unknown. Proximity to violence through video being
blindsided through lack of preparedness for violent content repeated exposures
through multiple and protracted viewings, insufficient customary methods for
self protection and the enduring impact of exposure to videoed violence. Thus
criminal justice professionals are increasingly and repeatedly presented with
deeply disturbing imagery that was once imperceptible or unknowable and thus
previously held at a greater distance. Which potentially increase the risks of
secondary trauma and underscores the need for improved safety measures.
Addressing The Problems Of Trauma:
Coping Strategies
(a)
Maintaining a Healthy Work/Life
Balance:
In various studies and in the literature that has been
referred to in this article, judges have been asked to identify strategies that
help them to cope with the effects of vicarious trauma. A common theme in many
of these strategies is the idea of maintaining a healthy work-life balance.
“Balance” in this context often sounds like a meaningless buzzword, without a
clear picture of what it involves. It is based on the idea that judges should
not be defined as people by their occupation. The job of being a judge is only
one aspect of the judge’s identity. Judges are also spouses, parents,
grandparents, children, friends, lovers, neighbors, students, athletes,
coaches, mentors, musicians, hobbyists, , church members, authors (of non-law
related subjects), humorists, travelers, and so much more.
(b) Physical Fitness- Physical fitness
seems to cure a multitude of ills, and it is often identified as a means of
maintaining the type of balance which will combat job stress. It is also
beneficial in improving the quality of sleep, lowering blood pressure and
addressing other health-related concerns that exacerbate or are exacerbated by
work stresses.
(c) Laughter as a helpful coping strategy- The benefits of laughter have been
identified as assisting in relieving physical tension and stress, boosting the
immune system, aiding in the release of endorphins, improving the function of
blood vessels and increasing blood flow, which can help protect against heart
attack and other cardiovascular problems.
(d) Family Activities- Many judges surveyed in the 2003 study suggested that family
activities (not involving discussion about work) were a good method of
decreasing work stress.
(e) Meditation and Mindfulness- Practices Another positive strategy
often employed to combat work stress is the practice of meditation.
(f) Judges’ Counseling Programs and Peer Support Programs - Perhaps the greatest resource
available to judges struggling with work stress is the availability of
counseling programs especially tailored for judges, such as the Judges
Counseling Program. Counseling is available to address problems such as alcohol
and substance abuse, burnout, financial stress, bereavement, emotional
problems, relationship problems, child and elder care issues, nutrition and
healthy eating, smoking cessation and many other types of issues.
(g) On-the-job Strategies- Good judges are diligent and hard-working, and being
a judge is not a “nine to five” clock-punching career. This diligence will often
require working after sitting hours during the evenings and on weekends. Going
to one’s office to work on judgments rather than bringing them home can help in
maintaining a psychological separation of work and life and condition one to a
mindset where, when a judge is at home, he or she is not stressing about work.
The idea is that work is confined to that small area, and outside of that area,
the home is a work-free zone.
STUDY FINDINGS
What Conclusions can be
Drawn? This study highlights the need for greater awareness about the
challenges before judges and their capacity to meet the demands of their
complex role in society. Future research needs to clearly identify the process
by which Secondary Traumatic Stress emerges, together with related phenomena
such as burnout. Addressing such critical issues will allow the judiciary to
continue to conduct its essential business with the concomitant public trust
and confidence it deserves.
The purpose of this study
was to begin to document the Vicarious Traumatic experiences of judges.
Although this was a preliminary investigation, the results indicate that judges
do, unequivocally, experience trauma symptoms with respect to their work. The
surveyed judges indicated a wide range of symptoms that they identified as
stemming from their work, including cognitive (e.g., lack of concentration),
emotional (e.g., anger, anxiety), physiological (e.g., fatigue, loss of
appetite), PTSD (e.g., flashbacks), spiritual (e.g., losing faith in God or
humanity), and interpersonal (e.g., lack of empathy, sense of isolation from
others) symptoms. Clearly, judges’ categories clustered into theoretical
factors
STS in Judges sure to the
graphic evidence of human potential for cruelty exacts a high personal cost.
Age, sex, and experience may be important factors in predicting judges’
experiences of secondary trauma. Both the coping strategies and suggestions for
prevention of STS are highlighted. The importance of awareness, balance, and
connection across both personal and professional realms of experience. One of
the starkest contrasts arising from this research is to disconnect between what
judges identify as ideal coping and prevention strategies and the reality of
the judicial culture. While many of the judges emphasized on the importance of
social support and debriefing, the reality is that some judges “work in
isolation, they cannot consult about a case, they see horrific crimes, make
weighty decisions and have to keep their mouths shut about everything” .
Thus, some of the characteristics
that may define the experience of being a judge, particularly in jurisdictions
without systemic controls (i.e., massive dockets, isolation, and inability to
debrief) are those same factors that have been identified as risk factors for
vicarious trauma. On the other hand, some judges report the benefits of good
administrative supports, which may be more apparent in a specialized court with
judicial officers and court staff who are highly committed to their innovative
endeavors.
Recommendations
As discussed, judges encounter a trio of occupational experiences:
secondary traumatic stress, safety concerns, and work-related burnout.
A variety of measures are proposed in this section, many of which
have been derived from the judges’ comments in the current study.
·
First, judges should be trained
to recognize the effects of these occupational stressors. As one judge noted,
it is important for judges “to seek help from physicians, counselors, and
psychologists if necessary.” Although some judges may be able to recognize when
they are experiencing STS, safety concerns, or burnout, it is likely that many
judges are too busy to acknowledge the physical and emotional manifestations of
these experiences.
Leaders in judicial workplaces should promote an environment that
accepts stress prevention and stress relief as a natural part of the trial
process. This culture would encourage judges to take the necessary steps to
recognize symptoms of these stressors and prevent their negative consequences.
·
Second, judges should be
encouraged to take time off to relieve the effects of difficult occupational
experiences. As discussed, judges often experience an overload of
responsibility. For instance, one judge explained: And the calendar can be
very stressful in that there is constant pressure to hear the cases… . How do I
get those 10 cases heard? And then I've got the lawyers waiting that want to
start. And you're a little bit late starting on that hearing because you
finished the first hearing, and how do you juggle all of that? That can get
kind of stressful at times.
Anxiety stemming from occupational responsibilities can be remedied
by an occasional break from work. Even an extra day off to engage in a favorite
hobby can help a judge come back to the bench refreshed and relaxed.
Longer-term sabbaticals should also be encouraged from time to time to allow
judges to get away for a few weeks or months. Having a break from the constant
stream of work can help give them renewed focus. For instance, having a break
could help prevent the long-term damage of vicarious trauma.
·
Third, safety should be a
primary concern for all courthouses. As previous survey indicated, judges
do not feel that courthouses are safe enough. The judges in the current study
expressed concerns about safety as it related to judicial decision-making.
However, strict safety measures can
make great strides in helping judges feel safer. Professionals who are trained
to recognize weaknesses in safety should assess courthouses on a regular basis.
The experts’ recommendations should be followed to ensure that courthouse
employees (and visitors) are as safe as possible. Further, judges can be more
vocal about safety concerns than they might have. For instance, one judge
explained that he had once called ahead to make sure an armed bailiff was
present “because the person on the other side had made threats.”
·
Fourth, judges should be
provided with the opportunity, information, and skills needed to protect
themselves. The need for such protection was confirmed by the judges who
expressed doubt that they could protect themselves from violence in the
courtroom. For instance, personal safety programs can help judges be more
vigilant and defend themselves against a personal attack. Safety devices such
as car and personal alarms should be provided for judges who want them. While
many jurisdictions already have such measures in place, they should be a
standard feature of every jurisdiction.
·
Fifth, steps should be taken to
preserve professionalism within the courtroom. As a means of protecting the
integrity of the courtroom, several judges suggested that it was important to
establish positive rapport with legal actors. For instance, one judge stressed
the importance of patience and courtesy, explaining that a “higher level of
decorum is expected in the courtroom.” Another judge stressed the importance of
“letting people know why you [made that] decision” so that “everyone [can] walk
away from the court feeling like they were heard.” Individuals who do not
respect the courtroom and court procedure will be more likely to strike out at
judges, as suggested by one: “If you're rude to a defendant they're more likely
to send their family members after…your family members.” In contrast,
individuals who respect the authority of the court and feel it is a legitimate
governing body will follow the court's rulings and will be less likely to
retaliate. Such individuals obey court orders, not because they have to, but
because they believe that the court, as a legitimate authority, should be
obeyed. Most judges presumably understand the importance of courtroom
professionalism; however these comments serve as an important reminder that
positive courtroom rapport conveys legitimate authority and encourages respect
among the courtroom actors.
·
We also recommend that research
be conducted to get a better understanding of the occupational experiences that
lead to stress for judges. Researchers should develop measures to identify
stress so that prevention and treatment programs can be developed. The stress
theories discussed herein have not been tested on judges to the extent that
would be necessary to get a full understanding; thus, little is known about
judges’ reactions to the stressors of their jobs.
Finally, the findings presented in this article indicate that
government funding is needed to assess and address the experiences of judges.
In discussing the lack of funding for the prevention of violence in the
courtroom, one judge stated, “You sort of seem resigned that it is just going
to happen again and it is going to keep happening until we get some leadership
in the executive branch.” Courthouses need funds to make safety improvements,
court administrators need funds to provide safety programs, and researchers
need money to study stress. More employees are needed to take some of the heavy
load off of judges and allow them to take time off when needed. Ultimately, the
government should provide greater funding to protect this important branch of
government.
Conclusion
As legal gatekeepers, decision-makers, caretakers, and
disciplinarians, judges play a fundamental role in the Indian justice system.
Inherent in the judicial occupation are several experiences that can negatively
affect judges’ decisions. This research has outlined three broad experiences
that judges should understand and attempt to account for. Secondary traumatic
stress, which includes vicarious trauma, refers to trauma stemming from helping
another through a traumatic event. Results suggest that judges are vulnerable
to STS, as they are regularly exposed to trauma and often feel empathy for
victims. Safety concerns stemming from acts of violence and threats of violence
against judges and their families also may contribute to judicial stress.
Results revealed that judges often experience safety concerns. Violence against
judges is likely to create a sense of vulnerability and insecurity for anyone
assuming the bench. Finally, there was evidence that judges are at risk of
burnout, as many of the judges in the current study exhibited some of the
primary symptoms of burnout, such as workplace conflict and an overload of
responsibilities. Although no judge demonstrated extreme symptoms, all had low
levels of symptoms associated with STS, safety concerns, and burnout.
Article Information
SECONDARY TRAUMATIC STRESS, BURNOUTS AND LACK OF SAFETY - MAJOR HURDLES IN JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING (By-Avinash Gaikwad)
Authors: Avinash Gaikwad
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2022/07/16
- Volume 2
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.