Asylum Attorney Burnout and Secondary Trauma

We are in the midst of a crisis of mental health for attorneys across all practice areas. Illustrating this broader phenomenon, this interdisciplinary Article shares the results of the 2020 National Asylum Attorney Burnout and Secondary Traumatic Stress Survey (“Survey”). Using well-established tools, such as the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory and the Secondary Stress Trauma Survey, the Survey assessed the well-being of over 700 immigration attorneys navigating the tumultuous asylum space. As the largest such study of United States attorneys to date, it is particularly timely. Between 2017 and 2021, the Trump administration’s extreme policies, sweeping regulatory changes, and Attorney General decisions catapulted immigration law practice into the public spotlight and created deeper dimensions of stress in an already dysfunctional and traumatizing system. The Survey findings include much higher self-reported symptoms of burnout and secondary traumatic stress among asylum attorneys than previously surveyed populations, including immigration judges, social workers, hospital doctors, nurses, and prison wardens. In addition, female-identifying attorneys, attorneys of color, and solo practitioners reported higher symptoms of burnout and secondary traumatic stress. This Article explores the inherently traumatic nature of asylum seeking and asylum lawyering, briefly touching on the ever-changing landscape of asylum law and policy. In doing so, the Article considers specifically how these changes impact asylum attorneys as one subset of immigration attorneys and as attorneys exposed to trauma. We contribute to the literature around trauma stewardship and a need for selfcare, institutional care, and proactive measures to support those joining and continuing in the field. Further, the Article provides data to inform funders and other stakeholders about the need to normalize a culture of openly discussing burnout and secondary trauma within law school settings, nonprofits, government agencies, and law firms. Ultimately, this Article argues for a fundamental shift in legal education and the legal profession more broadly in terms of how we think, talk, and teach about the psychological realities of lawyering