The People’s Therapist received an interesting and important letter a few weeks ago from a 3L (I’ve redacted it and altered some details to preserve anonymity):
Mr. Meyerhofer,
I have a question (or perhaps a topic suggestion for a post, as I’m sure many students are wondering about this) about the character and fitness part of the NY bar application.
I have seen a therapist several times over the years for issues relating to depression, eating disorders, and self-injury. On the NY bar application it asks whether you have any psychological issues that might effect your ability to perform as a lawyer. I have absolutely no idea whether I’m required to disclose my psychological treatment history, or if I do, how much of it. Is the determination based on what I personally think, or is it a reasonable person standard?
As I’ve had to go to the ER several times over the years, objectively I could see how someone could interpret that as something that could affect my performance. However, I personally don’t think that it does.
I don’t really know who I could ask about this, as I don’t really want my school administrators to know about my issues. Any information you might have would be much appreciated. Thank you so much for your help!
Sincerely,
“Stumped in Syracuse”
To begin with, here is a passage from a pamphlet, entitled “Are you fit to be a Lawyer,” published by the New York State Lawyer Assistance Trust:
Neither receiving treatment for alcoholism, drug addiction or mental health concerns, nor the status of being a recovering alcoholic or recovering addict are grounds for denial of admission to the bar.
In New York, the focus of the inquiry is on whether chemical abuse or addiction or a mental health condition impairs the applicant’s current ability to practice law.
The bar application asks whether the applicant has “any mental or emotional condition or substance abuse problem that could adversely affect” the “capability to practice law”, and whether the applicant is “currently using any illegal drugs.”
While honesty in disclosing past conduct (for example, arrests and convictions) is essential, disclosure of past treatment is not required. No questions are asked about past treatment. The Committees encourage law students who are experiencing drug, alcohol or other addiction or mental health issues to address those issues as soon as possible, regardless of when the student plans to seek admission to the bar.
The bottom line seems clear – there’s no legal duty for Stumped in Syracuse to disclose his past history of treatment on his bar application unless his mental illness currently impairs his ability to practice law. Under this standard, it would require a severe mental health condition to trigger this duty, and the majority of situations involving mental illness – certainly the ones described in Stumped in Syracuse’s letter – would not require disclosure.
The real issue here – as Stumped suggests – is stigma. Stumped, like any rational person, is afraid someone will find out about his condition and jump to the unfair assumption that he is unfit for his job. That would be a disaster for anyone interested in preserving his professional reputation. For Stumped, the ignorance surrounding mental illness may pose a greater threat than the illness itself.
For whatever reason, physical disabilities don’t attract the same stigma as mental illness. There are plenty of lawyers who use wheelchairs, live with seizure conditions, or are deaf or, like the Governor of New York State, David Paterson, legally blind. These attorneys require special assistance to overcome their disabilities, but they are universally accepted as competent professionals.
Lawyers battling issues of mental health deserve the same treatment. If you can overcome mental health and addiction issues to pursue a successful career, you are every bit as worthy of our respect as someone arriving in court in a wheelchair or using a Braille device.
There are thousands of practicing lawyers living with mental health and addiction issues. I know, because as I therapist I’ve worked personally with dozens of them. I can tell you they have enough to deal with already – they don’t need the further pressure of an unfair stigma, and the constant fear of being exposed and ostracized for their condition.
If you are a lawyer dealing with an issue of mental illness, you are probably doing what anyone else in your situation would do. You preserve your confidentiality by trusting the knowledge of your condition only to trusted friends, you seek professional help – and then you take it day by day, show up at your job, and do your best.
Maybe you are working with a therapist to overcome the crippling pain of depression.
Maybe you are battling an eating disorder, like bulimia or anorexia.
Maybe you are in recovery from alcohol or drug abuse, and drop by an Alcoholic’s Anonymous meeting each night, to count another day and recommit yourself to sobriety.
Maybe you are dealing with mood fluctuations resulting from a bipolar condition, and have to check in with a psychiatrist each month to adjust your medication.
Maybe you have a suicide attempt in your past, and work hard each day to overcome the impulse towards self-harm and to remind yourself of everything you have to live for.
Maybe you battle anxiety, and struggle with panic attacks or phobias that can take you by surprise and leave you shaken.
Despite these disabilities, like every other practicing lawyer – you wake up every morning, put on your suit, and do your job.
For that, you deserve respect.
If mental illness can’t stop you from pursuing your profession, there’s no reason to let ignorance stand in your way.
========
This piece is part of a series of columns presented by The People’s Therapist in cooperation with AboveTheLaw.com. My thanks to ATL for their help with the creation of this series.
If you enjoy these columns, please check out The People’s Therapist’s new book, Way Worse Than Being A Dentist: The Lawyer’s Quest for Meaning
I also heartily recommend my first book, an introduction to the concepts behind psychotherapy, Life is a Brief Opportunity for Joy
(Both books are also available on bn.com and the Apple iBookstore.)
The People's Therapist 
As a quick note, this might be implied in the fact that the person asks about NY (and as a caution, your reply might be seen as giving legal advice), but the disclosure rules definitely vary from state to state and question to question. At least one jurisdiction requires individuals to disclose past treatment in addition to current treatment, to give contact information for past or current treatment providers, and to disclose whether the illness “affects or if untreated could affect” the person’s ability to practice. This jurisdiction’s situation is much broader than NY–and could arguably require disclosure of any/all of the listed issues.
I’m not saying it’s right…I personally don’t like it…but it seems to be what’s required.
The real issue here – as Stumped suggests – is stigma. Stumped, like any rational person, is afraid someone will find out about his condition and jump to the unfair assumption that he is unfit for his job. That would be a disaster for anyone interested in preserving his professional reputation. For Stumped, the ignorance surrounding mental illness may pose a greater threat than the illness itself.
You have explained what you believe “stigma” is, why use th term at all?
The real issue here – as Stumped suggests – is Stumped, like any rational person, is afraid someone will find out about his condition and jump to the unfair assumption that he is unfit for his job. That would be a disaster for anyone interested in preserving his professional reputation. For Stumped, the ignorance surrounding mental illness may pose a greater threat than the illness itself.
All I did was to decline to employ one abstraction.
Harold A. Maio, retired mental health editor
I had the same problem when I filled out my application. I spoke with an ethics attorney I knew and trusted. He said he did not think I needed to disclose it, but I should also talk to my counselor, and if they said they didn’t think I needed to disclose it, not to disclose it. If it came up later on and they tried to discipline me, I could say I took reasonable steps to determine whether I needed to disclosed and relied in good faith on my counselor, my own opinion, and the ethics attorney’s opinion. I think the person should be fine without disclosing as long as their issues are currently under control. It’s like an alcoholic who has been sober throughout law school, no need to disclose if still sober.
It’s here, an industry specific search engine that focuses the legal industry. The search engine results are exactly what you’re looking for. Law Firms and that’s it. Inclusions are performed one by one.
Lawyers
This passage in the questionnaire makes it pretty clear that you need to disclose any treatment within the past 10 years, I don’t know how you could argue otherwise:
“Within the past ten years, have you been diagnosed with, treated for or hospitalized for any
of the following: a psychotic disorder (such as schizophrenia, delusional disorder or paranoia);
a severe mood or anxiety disorder (such as bipolar, major depressive mood disorder, or obsessive- compulsive disorder); alcohol, drug or substance abuse; an impulse control disorder (such as
compulsive gambling); or a personality disorder (such as antisocial personality disorder,
borderline personality disorder or paranoid personality disorder)?”
Those are severe diagnoses. If you really had a psychotic disorder within the recent past, for example, it’s likely you’d be unable to practice law competently, at least without some supervision. Very very few clients who see a psychotherapist have ever been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder this severe. And very few of them would be applying for bar admission. For most of us, going to see a therapist is just a matter of some minor depression or anxiety disorder, which properly treated, shouldn’t have any effect on your ability to do good legal work. The real issue here is your being competent to practice law, not perpetuating the stigma surrounding mental illness.
The word “stigma” derives from Ancient Greek meaning to visibly mark someone as tainted or dangerous or different. This person is reduced in the mind of others, and the world divides into Us v. Them. Stigma is the word we use for discrimination and prejudice when society deems the mistreatment as acceptable or deserved. The state has long reserved the right to choose who they deem fit to practice law, and while living with “stigma” should prepare you, finding yourself 50k in student loans later and a year from sitting the bar only to be told that a diagnosis (which is really little more than opinion with the trappings of medicine) automatically made you ineligible is pretty earth shattering.
The real stigma should be on all lawyers who have never bothered to educate themselves about mental illness, particualary about the leading mental illness of our times, depression. I have been through a divorce myself this year and had three different lawyers. The first one died during the case, insolvent and taking my retainer with him. The second waited weeks between returning my calls, emails, letters, etc, and charged me for reading them all, but didn’t reply promptly. The third did pretty much the same as the second. I told all of them I suffer from panic attacks, anxiety attacks, and Bipolar II disorder. Their entire consideraton of that illness was to keep from replying to me so they could continue to charge for reading my communications. All claimed to have experience in handling bipolar clients who suffer panic attacks and knew “a lot about the disease”, claiming years of experience. What they actually had, based on what I saw of their “skills” and “professionalism” was one year of experience (after which they closed their minds on the subject) many times repeated. In reality, they were as well versed about depression and other common mental illnesses as most janitors. I would love to tell a large audience of lawyers (with proof galore) what I have suffered from their dragging the divorce out for a year. Instead, what I expect is that my reply will be edited out.