After a Year Marked by Tragedy, Attorney Mental Health Takes the Spotlight
Lawyer suicides sparked an industrywide conversation on attorney mental health and well-being in 2018 that is gaining steam.
December 28, 2018 at 12:00 PM
4 minute read
From a heart-wrenching account of a legal career's toll on a young partner to a path-breaking mental health pledge signed by a growing list of the country's largest law firms, the past year sharpened the industry's attention on attorney well-being, substance abuse and work-life balance. Expect the focus to intensify in 2019.
While it has long been the case that lawyers are more likely than the general population to suffer from depression, substance abuse and other mental health problems, those issues were again cast into painful relief in 2018.
In October, 42-year-old Sidley Austin bankruptcy partner Gabe MacConaill fatally shot himself near the firm's Los Angeles office. Less than a month later, his widow, Joanna Litt, who had met her husband in law school, penned a personal essay for The American Lawyer describing the extreme stress and workload her husband faced, and how they might have contributed to his death. One phrase, Litt wrote, replayed in her head as she searched for answers in the weeks after MacConaill's suicide: “Big Law killed my husband.”
The suicide and Litt's writing propelled an ongoing discussion about lawyer well-being and mental health challenges as the year came to a close. But even before that, a sense of momentum had been building in the aftermath of a data-backed wake-up call in 2016, when a study funded by the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation and the American Bar Association showed the legal industry's drinking and mental health issues were worse than previously thought. In 2018, key players in the profession committed to tackling those kinds of issues.
Strategies took different forms. Large firms rolled out wellness initiatives, such as Reed Smith's “Wellness Works” program, launched in January 2018 to help support the firm's lawyers and staff as they manage stress and try to balance their work and personal lives. Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, which started a wellness program in 2016, also expanded its offerings in 2018. Those firms, however, are hardly alone.
On an industrywide level, the ABA launched a pledge campaign in September aimed at reducing mental health distress and substance abuse among lawyers. The pledge asks law firms and other legal employers to adopt robust education for attorneys and staff on well-being issues, and to develop partnerships with outside resources and mental health experts. Following an initial group of 13 signatories, a total of 39 law firms have now committed to the wellness campaign and, toward the end of the year, 3M Co. became the first corporate legal department to sign on.
Taken together, issues surrounding well-being have a grip on the industry, according to Patrick Krill, an advocate for lawyer mental health who was instrumental in both the Hazelden study and the ABA's pledge campaign. Krill expects awareness will keep growing, and firms will continue to grapple with ways to ease the path for lawyers.
“I think 2019, candidly, is going to be the year of well-being,” Krill says.
Law school curricula and continuing legal education classes have already begun to take mental health into account, Krill says. He expects the trend will accelerate over the next year, and that a more firms will sign on to the ABA pledge and launch their own individual wellness initiatives. In his view, it's now virtually impossible for firms to ignore the very real struggles facing many in the profession—and people throughout the industry are searching for concrete ways to address structural issues.
“Firms are looking for innovative solutions to bridge that gap,” Krill says. “And they're going to have to continue to do that. More and more lawyers are expecting that from their employers. Even firms that don't want to engage with the subject are going to be forced to—if for no other reason than remaining competitive.”
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDechert 'Spark Tank' Competition Encourages Firmwide Innovation Focus
Akerman Opens Charlotte Office With Focus on Renewable Energy, Data Center Practices
4 minute readDLA Piper Sued by 2 Houston Companies, Alleging a 'Fake Lawyer' Represented Them in Argentina
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome', DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250