Orlando da Silva has changed the conversation inside the legal profession around mental health. Julie talks with Orlando about his decision to go public with his own mental health challenges, and the impact on both law firms and law schools. Orlando describes some of the consequences of a traditional lawyering culture that prizes aggressive, catastrophic strategies over kindness and pragmatism in solving legal problems, and how to stay emotionally healthy in such a bruising environment. Reflecting on Orlando’s interview, Elizabeth Roberts offers insights from the perspective of a litigant with invisible disabilities, and how we might create a gentler, fairer justice system.
Related links:
“Shaking Off the Mental Health Stigma” – previous podcast episode with lawyer Beth Beattie
“New head of Ontario Bar Association speaks out about depression” (The Star, Sep 2014)
In Other News:
In other news: first, we encourage all our listeners to learn more about the movement that began in Wet’suwet’en over the construction of the Coastal Gaslink pipeline, and has escalated (as of February 6th) with members of the first nation being arrested by the RCMP; the Law Society of Saskatchewan and the Ministry of Justice Legal Services Task Team has implemented amendments to the Legal Profession Act, giving limited licenses to alternative legal service providers in the province; and lastly, Julie recently published an article on slaw.ca about the value of the NSRLP, some of the current and future aspirations of the project, and the need to ensure the permanence of our organization going forward.
“Country erupts into Wet’suwet’en solidarity demonstrations: A week in pictures” (APTN)
“Striving for Truth and Reconciliation” (Jumping Off the Ivory Tower)
“Law Society of Saskatchewan: Expanding access to justice” (Saskatoon Star Phoenix)
“Take the Pledge: We Are Legal Service Professionals, not Lawyers and non-Lawyers” (NSRLP)
“The Value of the National Self-Represented Litigants Project” (Slaw)
Jumping Off the Ivory Tower is produced and hosted by Julie Macfarlane and Dayna Cornwall; production and editing by Brauntë Petric; Other News produced and hosted by Ali Tejani; promotion by Moya McAlister and Ali Tejani.
a gentler and fairer legal scene eh?? Ok,, well why not try manners,, civility,, all the things we were hopefully taught growing up, The culture of the legal field may be aggressive and dishonest,, but if you know within yourself that this is wrong, instead of attacking people,, why not actually follow the evidence? If the evidence has problems with it,, demand full disclosure, When it is not fully disclosed,, the lawyer who has been hiding evidence, is actually committing fraud, That is a criminal offence,, Why is the court not acting on that? Why do judges not only encourage wrong, and criminal behavior,, but commit these offenses themselves, Attacking people personally, instead of following the evidence is what Trump does, It is bullying,, It has always been bullying, When i stood in open court,, and a woman lawyer actually suggested to the judge that i probably didn’t even know who my childs father was,, How was that a correct behavior,, why did the judge not correct this behavior?? I was shocked by this personal low life attack on myself when i was simply asking for an examination of the dna evidence. Maybe you are “just human”,, but how nice it would be, if lawyers and judges simply acted human, and got their manners back on,
Interesting that even the NSRLP obfuscates their legal position to SRLs: “You have to agree to the comment policy” …however we won’t disclose that policy until we decide you have violated it…
Perhaps many SRLs take personal attacks personally. We should understand the difference between valid legal argument and argument “ad hominem”. I find that lawyers generally argue “ad hominem” or “against the person him/herself” when they have no valid legal argument in their favor. In other words if you can’t attack your opponent’s legal position, attack their character. Most judges and lawyers recognize this immediately and know it matters little. I think they engage in ad hominem theatrics in order to improve the likelihood that their client will not feel gouged when the invoice arrives. So one good rule for SRLs: Sticks and stones…
Hi Richard, our comment policy can be found at the top of the main page of our blog: https://representingyourselfcanada.com/blog/.
Thank you to Orlando and Elisabeth for speaking out about these important issues.
It’s good that lawyers are speaking up about mental health challenges for them in the profession, but often the misery and anxiety is double for even the best-prepared and articulate of self-represented litigants. A “navigator” may help in some cases, but the adversarial process is soul-destroying and financially devastating even for the best-prepared. A financial and emotional meat-grinder. Prolonged courtroom battles against large corporations or government monopolies have led some self-reps to depression, family breakdown, and tragically, suicide.
If a party is self-represented, they should have access to more timely and cost-efficient dispute resolution options. In my 8 years of observation of hearings and trials, and as a former self-rep myself, I have come to the conclusion that the courtroom and the Ontario Tribunal system for self-reps is not a level playing field, and rarely produces fair or just outcomes.
Barbara Captijn, Consumer Advocate
Suggestion: where you have “LEAVE A REPLY” and the next line reads: “You have to agree to the comment policy.” provide the policy with a click on link for busy people. But thanks for the directions.
Hi Richard, thanks for the suggestion, we will see what we can do.
Hi again Richard, just wanted to let you know that we have been able to update the site, and link to the comment policies from the “leave a reply” line. Thanks again for your suggestion, it was a good one.
After a few times on your site one can navigate. It would be amazing if the courts could respond as quickly with online process access for SRLs.
We would love that too!