Action Step # 9: Measuring the Social Impact of Self-Representation

Action Step # 9: Measuring the Social Impact of Self-Representation

In November our focus is Action Step #9 – Measuring the Social Impact of Self-Representation. The social impact of the rising numbers of SRLs is reflected in the consequences described by the SRL Research Study respondents, and includes not only financial hardships, but also the difficulty of maintaining employment while acting as a SRL, pressure on parenting especially for single parents, the impact on children, and personal health consequences (including depression and other stress-related illnesses). SRLs complain consistently of high stress levels, poor personal health and social isolation.

Community agencies that do not carry a mandate for assisting SRLs (family centres, women’s shelters, men’s groups, public housing organizations) are seeing growing numbers of clients who are involved with self-representation. There is growing pressure on such agencies to consider what resources and relative funding they should anticipate going forward in order to provide support services to this population.

More research is needed to assess the social impact of the SRL phenomenon, and to develop robust community and public strategies to begin to manage the many consequences.

Share this post

Comments (3)

  • J Kirby INwood

    You talk a lot of platitudes and jargon, but what do you actually do? So far I see a bunch of smug people patting themselves on the back but doing nothing positive. Just spend your grant money so you can get more
    You make it impossible for people who actually produce results to get through the noise you make

    November 3, 2014 at 3:57 pm
  • sandra olson

    IF the courts are going to continue to treat SLR S as they have been, you can look forward to the death of justice. it does not exist now if you attend court without representation, you have as much chance of achieving a just decision as an ice cube in a cup of coffee has of survival. the biggest consequence of representing yourself, is no access to justice at all. our system is not functioning and it never will.

    November 3, 2014 at 4:30 pm
  • Evert-Jan Steen

    All desperately needed improvements. Great work. However, let us NOT forget the RULES themselves. How they differ by Province. How so many leave room for interpretation and potential Court ‘Argument.’ Surely, a Rule should be clear enough it needs no ARGUMENT to interpret it? Let an Order be an order? Not change every following order, as the times, and moods see fit! I order this + that @ such a date: OR, whenever the parties see fit to do so. What kind of ORDER is THAT? Can we work to suggest a LIMIT on MOTION filings? And let us please express ourselves in PLAIN English; a language with grammatical structure and verbiage we can ALL understand? And what is meant by ‘Relevance?’ Do we ALL comprehend the same meaning of the word? Or is it up for ‘Argument?’ Whoever has the superior rhetoric wins the ‘Argument?’ What to do when one Master says “THIS”, and the other says “THAT”? Are they both RIGHT, because they ‘SAID SO?’ Is a judge who is unaccountable for his/her actions > ABOVE the LAW? Are Rules a mere guidance for interpretation? Confucius reigns supreme in the superior Court of a wanting Democracy!….. I say: “Let’s keep at it and insist on better sense and accountability!”

    November 3, 2014 at 10:00 pm

Comments are closed.


Font Resize
Background Color