*/
Psychotherapists have it, social workers have it, CAFCASS officers have it. Why not the Bar? Marc Mason explores the emerging practice of clinical supervision for lawyers
A study I recently completed looked at how a group of solicitors were utilising clinical supervision, a type of supervision that is more commonly found in the world of counselling and psychotherapy. As a former barrister turned counsellor and academic researcher focusing on lawyers’ experiences, I found the concept of clinical supervision for lawyers fascinating. To delve deeper, I interviewed several lawyers who had incorporated clinical supervision into their family law practices, analysing their responses in the context of academic literature on both supervision and legal practice.
Clinical supervision falls somewhere between psychotherapy (in that it takes the self of the lawyer into account), coaching (in that it provides space for developing strategies and approaches to work and career), and traditional supervision (in that it aims to provide for a safe and ethical practice to benefit clients). It tends to happen on a regular schedule, commonly fortnightly or monthly, although can work on a consultation basis. In a session lasting 50-90 minutes, either online or in-person, the supervisee will discuss with the supervisor their caseload or their practice. These discussions may include the relationships, both with colleagues and clients, and emotions involved in the work. They can also take in the wider context of career development as well as considering the personal characteristics and history of the supervisee.
In the July issue of Counsel, I repeatedly came across contexts where supervision could play an important role. Reflecting on how experiences at the Bar can shape us, Fahrid Chishty recognised the need for barristers to ask themselves a question which is strongly suited to clinical supervision: ‘The Bar requires us to be so much at once – advocates, advisers, leaders, juniors, colleagues and more,’ he wrote. ‘It is not improbable that, at times, we can’t help but step back and think: “where am I amid these various roles”? Chishty’s channelling of the call to the barrister to ‘know thyself’ is also a key driver in supervision. Similarly, the ‘tact, judgement and confidence’ he acknowledged as products of experience can develop all the more quickly (and deeply) through examined experience. This is essentially what clinical supervision is.
When Chishty recounted how he reconfigured his routine to accommodate the effect of Type 1 Diabetes, and a colleague’s perception of him as a ‘strapping young lad’ who by implication shouldn’t need such reasonable adjustments, I thought about how a clinical supervisor might have eased this process. This consideration extends to Brie Stevens-Hoare KC and Lindsey de Mestre KC’s call for support for those experiencing the menopause and Hena Vissian’s account of the re-evaluation of her life brought about by fibromyalgia. Notably, Vissian also explicitly asks the reader to consider clinical supervision’s potential for mitigating the impact that the work has on the personal lives of barristers.
There was an interesting, sometimes subtle, strand of activism running through all these accounts. This element comes through strongest in the article by Bharat Malkani where he talks about the need for reflection and creativity (as well as collaboration and accountability) in the vital task of developing anti-racist legal practices. Reflectivity and creativity are often at the heart of psychotherapeutic work, including clinical supervision. I believe that these processes, properly implemented, can foster anti-racist practices and also support those suffering most acutely from the effects of racism in the legal system and professional culture (particularly if you engage a supervisor or therapist with an anti-racist practice, perhaps from the Black, African and Asian Therapy Network). Supervision also has potential to help lawyers understand their role within systems of oppression. We know that working against your moral compass can have harmful effects, and that working within systems that are harmful, such as a deliberately inhumane immigration system, can harm lawyers. Supervision can provide a space to reconcile these elements of practice.
These themes were all evident in interviews with the lawyers I spoke to for my research. Participants used supervision to develop qualities that improve their performance as lawyers, to learn more quickly and profoundly from experience, to become self-aware at a deeper level and to find ways to work with personal circumstances and life changes.
Additionally, they used supervision to tackle everyday issues, and to process the way the work was impacting on them, including issues such as burnout and vicarious trauma. The privacy of the process allowed them to discuss issues of mental health and vulnerability away from the influence of the stigma that still surrounds these topics in the profession. This area was a good example of where supervisees could rely on the experience of the supervisor to help them explore strategies for support.
‘I was so depressed about the outcome. Genuinely depressed for a while, it was like, can I do this job? ... this put me into a real spiral. And I really needed someone to talk to about that. Because there is a real worry, I think, particularly if you’re junior, if you say to someone that I’m struggling with, I’m upset with it, you’re just labelled as someone who’s not competent.’
They also spoke of how supervision helped them reflect on and navigate the sometimes complex interpersonal undercurrents of the lawyer-client relationship, including the ways this can impact on professional judgement.
‘It’s so important in what we do to not become aligned with your clients... we act for people, but we aren’t them. And it can get really blurry in our jobs... lawyers just take on their clients’ stuff, and like, have no appreciation for the fact there’s another narrative… you’re not being the objective professional for them.’
They were able to look at distortions in the way that they and their clients were experiencing each other that were getting in the way of the working relationship. They were able to recognise how often they were stepping into a relational pattern that didn’t quite fit the situation, either because of something that the client activated in them, or because they or their role unearthed something for the client. In recognising this they found themselves moving closer to the ideal of the objective professional. One lawyer describes how they were able to recognise a pattern they had of acting defensively in certain situations. Letting go of this allowed them to respond more skilfully to clients, and to escape the stress this was causing. Others recognised with more clarity that the cases that bothered them the most were the ones they most closely identified with.
Several participants spoke about how supervision was instrumental in changing some of their practices and behaviours for the better. Exploring the values underlying their existing habits or ways of practising allowed them to recognise the degree to which they had more freedom to shape their practice than they realised. With this recognition they were able to make meaningful change. This led some to take on different or less work at times, change practice structures, or take steps to advance their careers more intentionally.
‘I might take to supervision a situation about not feeling confidence to charge a client the full value of the work I’ve done and recorded . . . that turns into a full hour talking about why that might be generally, rather than about this particular client . . . more of a discussion about my own kind of confidence, my value for myself, the sort of dynamics you might have with clients . . . there’s a whole sort of wider discussion that goes across your whole kind of practice as opposed to just being about this one particular tricky situation.’
The Bar could potentially learn usefully from the reflective processes involved in clinical supervision. By fostering greater self-awareness, improving wellbeing, and providing a space for ethical reflection, supervision can enhance legal skills, support sustainable careers, and help barristers navigate the complex demands of legal practice. Integrating clinical supervision into the professional development of barristers may offer a powerful tool for addressing the personal and professional challenges that accompany the practice of law.
Mason, M. (2024) ‘From psychotherapy to legal practice: the use of clinical supervision by lawyers in England and Wales’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, pp. 1–20.
Marc Mason is Senior Lecturer at Westminster Law school where his research crosses the domains of law, psychology and psychotherapy. He also runs his own therapy practice: lawyertherapy.co.uk.
A study I recently completed looked at how a group of solicitors were utilising clinical supervision, a type of supervision that is more commonly found in the world of counselling and psychotherapy. As a former barrister turned counsellor and academic researcher focusing on lawyers’ experiences, I found the concept of clinical supervision for lawyers fascinating. To delve deeper, I interviewed several lawyers who had incorporated clinical supervision into their family law practices, analysing their responses in the context of academic literature on both supervision and legal practice.
Clinical supervision falls somewhere between psychotherapy (in that it takes the self of the lawyer into account), coaching (in that it provides space for developing strategies and approaches to work and career), and traditional supervision (in that it aims to provide for a safe and ethical practice to benefit clients). It tends to happen on a regular schedule, commonly fortnightly or monthly, although can work on a consultation basis. In a session lasting 50-90 minutes, either online or in-person, the supervisee will discuss with the supervisor their caseload or their practice. These discussions may include the relationships, both with colleagues and clients, and emotions involved in the work. They can also take in the wider context of career development as well as considering the personal characteristics and history of the supervisee.
In the July issue of Counsel, I repeatedly came across contexts where supervision could play an important role. Reflecting on how experiences at the Bar can shape us, Fahrid Chishty recognised the need for barristers to ask themselves a question which is strongly suited to clinical supervision: ‘The Bar requires us to be so much at once – advocates, advisers, leaders, juniors, colleagues and more,’ he wrote. ‘It is not improbable that, at times, we can’t help but step back and think: “where am I amid these various roles”? Chishty’s channelling of the call to the barrister to ‘know thyself’ is also a key driver in supervision. Similarly, the ‘tact, judgement and confidence’ he acknowledged as products of experience can develop all the more quickly (and deeply) through examined experience. This is essentially what clinical supervision is.
When Chishty recounted how he reconfigured his routine to accommodate the effect of Type 1 Diabetes, and a colleague’s perception of him as a ‘strapping young lad’ who by implication shouldn’t need such reasonable adjustments, I thought about how a clinical supervisor might have eased this process. This consideration extends to Brie Stevens-Hoare KC and Lindsey de Mestre KC’s call for support for those experiencing the menopause and Hena Vissian’s account of the re-evaluation of her life brought about by fibromyalgia. Notably, Vissian also explicitly asks the reader to consider clinical supervision’s potential for mitigating the impact that the work has on the personal lives of barristers.
There was an interesting, sometimes subtle, strand of activism running through all these accounts. This element comes through strongest in the article by Bharat Malkani where he talks about the need for reflection and creativity (as well as collaboration and accountability) in the vital task of developing anti-racist legal practices. Reflectivity and creativity are often at the heart of psychotherapeutic work, including clinical supervision. I believe that these processes, properly implemented, can foster anti-racist practices and also support those suffering most acutely from the effects of racism in the legal system and professional culture (particularly if you engage a supervisor or therapist with an anti-racist practice, perhaps from the Black, African and Asian Therapy Network). Supervision also has potential to help lawyers understand their role within systems of oppression. We know that working against your moral compass can have harmful effects, and that working within systems that are harmful, such as a deliberately inhumane immigration system, can harm lawyers. Supervision can provide a space to reconcile these elements of practice.
These themes were all evident in interviews with the lawyers I spoke to for my research. Participants used supervision to develop qualities that improve their performance as lawyers, to learn more quickly and profoundly from experience, to become self-aware at a deeper level and to find ways to work with personal circumstances and life changes.
Additionally, they used supervision to tackle everyday issues, and to process the way the work was impacting on them, including issues such as burnout and vicarious trauma. The privacy of the process allowed them to discuss issues of mental health and vulnerability away from the influence of the stigma that still surrounds these topics in the profession. This area was a good example of where supervisees could rely on the experience of the supervisor to help them explore strategies for support.
‘I was so depressed about the outcome. Genuinely depressed for a while, it was like, can I do this job? ... this put me into a real spiral. And I really needed someone to talk to about that. Because there is a real worry, I think, particularly if you’re junior, if you say to someone that I’m struggling with, I’m upset with it, you’re just labelled as someone who’s not competent.’
They also spoke of how supervision helped them reflect on and navigate the sometimes complex interpersonal undercurrents of the lawyer-client relationship, including the ways this can impact on professional judgement.
‘It’s so important in what we do to not become aligned with your clients... we act for people, but we aren’t them. And it can get really blurry in our jobs... lawyers just take on their clients’ stuff, and like, have no appreciation for the fact there’s another narrative… you’re not being the objective professional for them.’
They were able to look at distortions in the way that they and their clients were experiencing each other that were getting in the way of the working relationship. They were able to recognise how often they were stepping into a relational pattern that didn’t quite fit the situation, either because of something that the client activated in them, or because they or their role unearthed something for the client. In recognising this they found themselves moving closer to the ideal of the objective professional. One lawyer describes how they were able to recognise a pattern they had of acting defensively in certain situations. Letting go of this allowed them to respond more skilfully to clients, and to escape the stress this was causing. Others recognised with more clarity that the cases that bothered them the most were the ones they most closely identified with.
Several participants spoke about how supervision was instrumental in changing some of their practices and behaviours for the better. Exploring the values underlying their existing habits or ways of practising allowed them to recognise the degree to which they had more freedom to shape their practice than they realised. With this recognition they were able to make meaningful change. This led some to take on different or less work at times, change practice structures, or take steps to advance their careers more intentionally.
‘I might take to supervision a situation about not feeling confidence to charge a client the full value of the work I’ve done and recorded . . . that turns into a full hour talking about why that might be generally, rather than about this particular client . . . more of a discussion about my own kind of confidence, my value for myself, the sort of dynamics you might have with clients . . . there’s a whole sort of wider discussion that goes across your whole kind of practice as opposed to just being about this one particular tricky situation.’
The Bar could potentially learn usefully from the reflective processes involved in clinical supervision. By fostering greater self-awareness, improving wellbeing, and providing a space for ethical reflection, supervision can enhance legal skills, support sustainable careers, and help barristers navigate the complex demands of legal practice. Integrating clinical supervision into the professional development of barristers may offer a powerful tool for addressing the personal and professional challenges that accompany the practice of law.
Mason, M. (2024) ‘From psychotherapy to legal practice: the use of clinical supervision by lawyers in England and Wales’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, pp. 1–20.
Psychotherapists have it, social workers have it, CAFCASS officers have it. Why not the Bar? Marc Mason explores the emerging practice of clinical supervision for lawyers
Barbara Mills KC, the new Chair of the Bar, outlines some key themes and priorities
Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management highlights some of the ways you can cut your IHT bill
Rachel Davenport breaks down everything you need to know about AlphaBiolabs’ industry-leading laboratory testing services for legal matters
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management sets out the key steps to your dream property
A centre of excellence for youth justice, the Youth Justice Legal Centre provides specialist training, an advice line and a membership programme
By Kem Kemal of Henry Dannell
Barbara Mills KC wants to raise the profile of the family Bar. She also wants to improve wellbeing and enhance equality, diversity and inclusion in the profession. She talks to Joshua Rozenberg KC (hon) about her plans for the year ahead
Professor Dominic Regan and Seán Jones KC identify good value bottles across the price spectrum – from festive fizz to reliable reds
Reviews by Daniel Barnett
And the winner is… the Bar Council introduces the barristers honoured in the 2024 awards celebrating the achievements of the employed Bar
Mark Neale, Director General of the Bar Standards Board, offers an update on the Equality Rules consultation
ff68877c-4b42-4825-a177-8ca60fa46c1f.tmb-carlisting.jpg?sfvrsn=a20f5111_1){kind=logo}
