Shunned lifelines

How closely do solicitors' own charities meet the profession's needs? What are the obstacles they face, and what more could be done? These questions were posed at an informal round table event held recently at the Society on the theme of pastoral support available to solicitors in Scotland.

Convened by Neil Stevenson, the Society's Director of Representation and Support, the discussion saw input from the Regulation, Professional Support, Education & Training, and Finance teams at Drumsheugh Gardens, including some members who also hold trustee roles with the Scottish Solicitors Benevolent Fund, the Kenneth Pritchard Trust and similar endowments. Also represented, apart from the Journal, were LawCare, the Royal Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow, Master Policy brokers Marsh, and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) - the last two of whom tend to be involved when things go wrong within a firm, though Marsh also offer risk management advice.

First hurdle

It has long been the belief of those who look after the Benevolent Fund, the similar (larger) fund run by the Royal Faculty for the benefit of members present and past and their dependants, and the Tod Endowment, which provides locum relief and the means for stressed-out solicitors to take a break, that there are many more who might qualify for assistance than actually apply for it. The meeting quickly turned to possible reasons why.

Continuing lack of awareness may well be one, despite recent attempts to raise the profile of the funds through the Journal (see, e.g. August 2008, 32) and the wider media. But it was also acknowledged that professional pride is a "huge issue", preventing many from coming forward. Another strong influence is the confidentiality factor: the belief, in fact, unfounded that if they apply for financial help - or even phone LawCare for advice - information will feed back to the Society who may then decide that other action is needed. But all applications or calls are strictly confidential.

In fact, as someone pointed out, the earlier you seek help, the less likely that the matter will end up coming to official attention. But the hardest thing is getting people to take that first step.

Best advice

Of course we are not just talking about money here, and the group identified various other potential sources of support. LawCare is there as a 365-day advice and support helpline, offering practical advice on both professional and personal issues (problems in one area can readily impact on the other). It has an online "wellbeing portal" if you prefer that to picking up the phone. The Society is encouraging local faculties to act as a conduit for information and to offer support to those in need - as some already do.

It is also re-establishing the sole practitioner networks. Tayside and Edinburgh groups have already met; a first meeting for a Glasgow group will shortly be confirmed. Groups in Borders and other regions will also be established. A subgroup of the Society's LinkedIn group has been set up specifically for sole practitioners to network and discuss issues informally.

One way sole practitioners might be able to help each other is by adapting the "buddy" system that enables them to use ARTL: if the Society were able to develop a central register of available solicitors, as is planned, it would be easier to organise.

A point made more than once was that it isn't all down to the particular individual to seek help. LawCare report that in a significant proportion of their cases, the initial call comes from a colleague or family member. One question canvassed was whether it would be appropriate for, say, Marsh, or the Master Policy insurers, or the SLCC to hand out information on where to seek help to solicitors facing a claim or complaint, and the sensitivities were recognised; but maybe intervention from friends or colleagues could achieve more. Could training for client relations partners, for example, be designed to increase awareness of such issues? The Society has this in mind.

Another facility the Society used to offer was a "rescue service": a pool of senior practitioners, perhaps retired, who might visit a practice that appeared to be potentially failing, spending a half day or at most a day there, and writing a report to the practice with their recommendations. It appears that it fell from use because it was often thought, wrongly, that the report would be copied straight to Drumsheugh Gardens. But the Society only has hearsay to go on that the rescue service did achieve a lot in its time, even if sometimes the advice delivered was that it was best just to close down.

In fact, the Society recently discovered a latent demand for practice management advice, not just among those at risk, when it offered a series of one-to-one slots with an independent coach. Successful applicants received 90 minutes' worth of advice, described by one solicitor as "the best thing I've ever had from the Society". A total of 36 sessions were laid on after the Society provided additional funding, but some 20 or so applicants missed out. A variation has now been set up for trainees and newly qualifieds who have been unable to find a qualified position.

This prompted the suggestion of a mentoring scheme especially for more recently qualified lawyers - someone available to talk things through and offer guidance, preferably just a few years older than the person being helped, so they could relate better to their stage and experience.

Cost of qualifying

The problems of those seeking to enter the profession received a great deal of attention during the evening, particularly the serious levels of debt now being run up by many students during their degree and Diploma years. While a number of educational trusts have been set up to help deserving cases, they may in practice turn out to be too restrictive as to who qualifies: the Kenneth Pritchard Trust, for example, cannot accept claims if an applicant already has funding from elsewhere, but even those who win a funded Diploma place now have to find another £2,000 or so from their own resources, plus living costs. Even that funding is only continued from year to year, and there is a real fear that if it were to end, we would be back to the situation where only those of certain means would be able to enter the profession, an outcome the Society has spent years trying to get away from.

Some suggested that the younger element represented the area of greatest need for this reason, though others thought it might simply be that they are more willing to ask for help. However, not all their problems relate to finance. The Society runs a confidential helpline service for trainees, but this ends abruptly on qualifying, though new solicitors may be equally in need of support. It also has a current research project to assess the level of bullying within the profession, and whether that is a particular issue for those at this stage (see below for the interim report). And stress in one form or another features in about 60% of calls to LawCare, affecting those from trainee level upwards.

"One of the things we will be judged on as a profession is how we treat our younger members", it was observed.

Next moves

So what scope is there for further initiatives? The question was raised - how does law compare with other professions? It seems that while some, such as medicine (with the benefit of public funding), have a more developed network of support, similar problems exist in overcoming the twin barriers of professional pride and confidentiality fears.

One thing the meeting agreed it would be good to have prepared was a reference leaflet with a comprehensive list of potential sources of help, that anyone could hand out in appropriate circumstances. You would keep it for when you needed it - or thought someone else did.

Partly also it's a question of education, and the more people are taught early that law is stressful, that help is available and that there's no shame in asking for it, the more likely it is that they will seek help or act in support of someone else when needed.

It was recognised that if the likes of the Benevolent Fund were suddenly to attract an upsurge in numbers of claimants, extra income would be needed; and the Society plans to make it easier for individuals to add a donation with their practising certificate renewal (already a popular option) when online renewal is offered from next year.

As was said at the end, whatever can be done, it is the profession's responsibility. No one else is likely to step in to do it for us.

Who to ask for help or advice

Law Society of Scotland

For advice on professional rules and guidance see the A-Z in the members' section on the website www.lawscot.org.uk, or call the professional practice helpline:

Professional practice & general issues

Bruce Ritchie - 0131 476 8124

Fiona Robb - 0131 226 8883

Stella McCraw - 0131 476 8176

John Scott - 0131 226 8894

Accounts rules and Guarantee Fund issues

Ian Messer - 0131 476 8358

LawCare

Tel: 0800 279 6869

Visit: www.lawcare.org.uk

Royal Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow

Contact: Alastair Campbell, administrator of the charitable funds

Tel: 0141 552 3422

Email: ajc@mitchells-roberton.co.uk

Marsh

Contact: Alistair Sim

Tel: 0131 311 4283

Email: alistair.j.sim@marsh.com

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission

Contact: David Buchanan-Cook, case investigations manager, Tel: 0131 528 5153

Email: david.buchanancook@ scottishlegalcomplaints.org.uk

Scottish Solicitors' Benevolent Fund

Including the Tod Foundation

Enquiries to: Secretary, Scottish Law Agents Society, 166 Buchanan Street, Glasgow G1 2LW (tel: 0141 332 3536)

Are any other faculties or societies of solicitors operating assistance funds, or other forms of support, for any section of the profession? Please get in touch with the Journal or with Neil Stevenson at the Society if you know of any.