Law Times

Law Times • sepTember 5, 2016 Page 7 www.lawtimesnews.com COMMENT Law school doesn't have to make you sick I t's that time of year again. Eager, young, talented, passionate, driven minds converge on law schools across Canada to begin what they hope will be a rewarding and exciting journey in the legal profession. This cohort represents the best of the best of the undergraduate population. They have mastered the daunting task of accumulating the stratospheric marks necessary for admission into the very exclusive club that is law school. Sounds great, doesn't it? Well, it is and it isn't. As most who have been down this path before know, law school teaches one how to "think like a lawyer," how to distin- guish similar cases, how to effectively and succinctly advocate positions on either side of an issue and how to master sub- jects from contracts to constitutional law. All of this is in service of gaining the necessary expertise to become a success- ful lawyer — a member of an honoured and (mostly) respected profession. However, as study upon study has shown, the law school experience can in- duce significant distress in students, ren- dering the experience painful and often traumatizing. In one study of law student depression, for instance, Andrew Benjamin found that at the beginning of law school, the law stu- dents he studied had the same incidence of depression as other undergraduates. However, by the end of first year, 32% of those students now suffered with de- pression. As well, by the end of third year, a full 40% of those same students had the condition. It is as though law school made them sick. Other studies have confirmed these findings, in addition to document- ing significantly elevated risk for anxiety and substance abuse. So, law school can be a place that builds you up and it can be a place that tears you down. The latter, however, is not inevitable, and it can be counteracted. The reasons that the law school experience can be painful are varied and unique to each individual. However, there are some common themes that emerge when ex- amining the law school life. To begin with, when the best of the best I referred to earlier — the "A" students — reach law school, who gets the C when everyone's used to being an A? Further, with the ever-growing law school tuition and debt burden associated thereto, the pressure to earn marks that will lead to a lucrative, debt-eradicating job correspondingly grows. The classmates one should ideally share the law school experience with be- come competitors and obstacles to one's career and financial prospects. This was true in my day when law school tuitions weren't so oppressive, so now, the pressure is that much worse. Law students have a habit of turning up the pressure on each other. They talk about what it takes to get a good job, what it takes to be a good lawyer and how ex- ceedingly diligent and hardworking they are in the pursuit of that endeavour. The problem, respectfully, is that law students have no idea what they're talking about. They have no experience in the practice of law and they circulate stress-inducing conjecture and rumour through this echo chamber of ambition and fear leading to well-earned anxiety, depression and worse. Finally, while the anticipa- tion of attending law school is f lush with optimism and imag- es of a rewarding and fascinat- ing career, for some, law school doesn't turn out as they had en- visioned. The truth is that some, in- cluding me, go to law school because it seems like the logical next career step, but when they get there, it doesn't resonate. I recall in law school often feeling that I didn't understand concepts and hiding that self-diagnosed intelligence deficit from my colleagues out of shame and fear. Not sharing those struggles and doubts, as well as other challenges, leads one to think that we are the only person suffering, not good or smart enough. Everyone else in law school seems so bright and talented. "I must be the only fail- ure in the bunch." That myopic cognitive distortion is inherently stress-inducing. The good news is that there are proactive ways to create an infrastructure of self-care that will carry you successfully through your law school experience. First, make sure you sleep. Look up the term "sleep hy- giene" and follow the guidelines you find. Sufficient sleep is not a luxury, it is a necessity. Secondly, readjust your expec- tations. In a bell-curved world, most peo- ple in law school don't get As. I even heard one law student describe how she entered law school with the man- tra of "Cs get you degrees" and she went on to have a rewarding, successful law school career and has since moved on to a successful life in law, all without the un- necessary burden of perfectionism. Some other wellness ideas that work include a daily mindfulness practice, good nutrition, exercise, keeping a grati- tude journal to counteract the inevitable pessimistic law student mindset and maintaining a strong, supportive and non-judgmental social network. When your personal or professional life gets out of control or overwhelming, there are many services geared specifi- cally to helping law students. Law schools have become very good at supporting their students, including a few who have hired in-house clinical profes- sionals to assist students. And across Canada, every jurisdiction has a free, confidential lawyer assistance program that, despite the name, also sup- ports law students with services as varied as counselling and peer support. The help exists when you need it. And, finally, one last piece of good news. If, after everything, you come to the real- ization that law school is just not for you, take solace in the fact that law school isn't the mafia: You can get out if you want to. On the other hand, if, like most, law school is the beginning of an exciting journey of professional fulfilment, get started now building your own wellness infrastructure. It'll serve well through law school and beyond. Congratulations to all of our new law students. Here's wishing you a great ride. LT uDoron Gold is a registered social worker who's also a former practising lawyer. He works with lawyers and law students in his role as a staff clinician and presenter with the Member Assis- tance Program as well as with members of the general public in his private psy- chotherapy practice. He's available at dorongold.com. Culture, ethics and family law of Ontario BY JAY CHAUHAN O ntario inherited a system of English law, which solves family problems in an adver- sarial legal system requiring each party to make allegations against the other, resulting in hostility and considerable anguish to the spouses and children. Statistics Canada confirmed that about 42 per cent of marriages in Ontario ended in divorce in 2008 and about 70 per cent of the litigants in family courts are self represented as the cost of lawyers is too high. Society suffers as the next generation of children is caught in the conf lict of parents with lawyers eager to win. To minimize conf licts over divisions of property, Ontario has streamlined family law by creating the "net family property" law concept, which requires dividing the property gained in the marriage between husband and wife equally from the date of marriage to the mo- ment of separation. Marriage agreements are now per- missible, which, at one time in the history of the com- mon law, were not allowed. Notwithstanding signifi- cant changes to family law in the last 30 years, the legal business for family lawyers is f lourishing in Ontario. The method for resolving family disputes where the parties make a claim against the other party, inherited from England, is still adversarial. An adversarial setting creates a hostile atmosphere for problem solving when the family unit is broken. Patchwork development of the legal system, to accommodate social changes, has become exceedingly complex. An unprecedented number of self-represented litigants attempts to use the complicated standardized forms and personally argue the net family property and other legal issues such as custody and support. The institution of marriage, being outside the arena of economic endeavour in society, creates difficult prob- lems when it comes to quantifying claims of property rights, support and custody. No value is provided for the time, love and support expended to bring up children. More women than men feel let down by the system. Lawyers who make a living out of family law are left with the stark ethical choice of deciding between making fees or the client's family interest a priority. The lawyer representing a client seeks to win and to do so must show the opposing side in a negative way. This angers the opposing side because there was in the past a loving relationship. Hostilities increase in the adverse environment. The policies of the federal Multiculturalism Act were initiated by former prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau and are continued in policies of diversity by the current prime minister, Justin Trudeau. The stat- ute requires equal participation by all communities in law, but it is rarely if ever discussed in the courtroom or seminars. It specifically requires that the diverse cul- tures of Canada be recognized and promoted equally, but, in reality, non-traditional cultural values are for the most part ignored in legal proceedings. In my 24 years of experience in the courtroom, issues of multi- culturalism and understanding of other cultures in the courtroom are usually met with silence. For example, women often present with lesser finan- cial means and resources and face greater disadvantag- es than men. In Canada, the biggest low-income group is single women with children. Lawyers charging $300 to $400 are too expensive for most litigants. Legal Aid has not solved this problem. The biggest loser — the innocent child who is most affected by the outcome — is not even a party to the proceedings. In my view, an appropriate methodology for prob- lem solving in family law requires moving toward a mediation-arbitration type of resolution made with a panel of a lawyer, a psychologist and a social worker with a mandate to find a binding resolution in a private setting in which the child's welfare is kept paramount. When the legal system consists of lawyers, the court and the legal regime, police officers and social work- ers, a child's lawyer and enforcement office deal with issues only from the point of view of carrying out their individual mandates. Parties feel herded through the system. When the existing institutions are not sensitive to the different cultural norms of others, the results can be traumatic. Broken families with uneducated children cause considerable loss of productivity in the economy. Chil- dren are traumatized and scarred for life. They begin to perceive institutions as uncaring and hostile to them. There is ample statistical evidence that confirms a high correlation between crime and broken families. Ontar- io and Canadian society need to give this issue a much higher priority to maintain the quality of life in the country. Our mandate as lawyers in a self-governing profession leaves the initiative to us to come up with ethical solutions to this dilemma. LT uJay Chauhan is a consulting lawyer and called to the bar in several jurisdictions and is a retired deputy judge in Richmond Hill. u SPEAKER'S CORNER The Lawyer Therapist Doron Gold

• Cover