As barristers we spend years – whether by choice or obligation – honing our advocacy skills through various courses. From the New Practitioners Programme (NPP) to the Established Practitioners Programme (EPP) the BSB requires counsel to review, record, reflect and report on their continuing professional development.

 By Simranjit Kamal, Barrister, Albion Chambers

In recent years, the Bar has become increasingly aware of the psychological and emotional dimensions that shape a client or witness’s experience of the justice system. Whilst not necessarily mandatory, many barristers have completed additional courses such as vulnerable witness training (I understand the Inns of Court College of Advocacy’s national programme is now titled ‘Advocacy for Vulnerable People and Children’). Following the success of a course designed for criminal practitioners, the ICCA went on to collaborate with the Family Law Bar Association to create a complementary course for family practitioners.

The ICCA has created a number of other guides and courses such as ‘Advocacy for children in conflict with the Law’, ‘Principles for Remote Advocacy’ and ‘Trauma-Informed Advocacy’.

At the beginning of the year, I completed the ICCA Trauma-Informed Advocacy course and found it to be an interesting, balanced and reflective exercise. According to the course, “In the context of the legal system, a Trauma-Informed practice seeks to promote justice and minimise compounding existing trauma for individuals engaging with the legal system.”  Understanding Trauma-Informed Advocacy is the first step to building a practice that recognises the prevalence of trauma, understands its effects, and actively works to create a legal environment that is safe, respectful, and empowering for all involved. Not only does this approach benefit vulnerable parties and witnesses, but it also supports practitioners in doing their job more effectively and compassionately.

What follows are some key takeaways from the course, but these insights are no substitute for undertaking the training yourself.

Understanding Trauma in the Legal Context

The course starts by helping you recognise what trauma is, distinguish between acute, chronic, and complex trauma, and understand how adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) can influence trauma.

Whilst I was aware of acute (single isolated traumatic experiences) and chronic (prolonged harm with multiple traumatic incidents) trauma, I was not aware of complex trauma, which is where there has been exposure to multiple and often interrelated forms of traumatic experiences. In Family and Criminal Courts, our clients are likely to have had traumatic experiences starting in childhood, which then resulted in further traumatic experiences because of self-medicating or dysfunctional coping mechanisms. It was interesting to think about this layered trauma and how that might have impacted some of my clients in recent cases.

The most interesting part of the course for me was learning about the trauma responses – the “5 F’s”. Like most people, I had heard of Fight or Flight and I understood that the Fight response often presents as preparing for physical confrontations and being quick to anger, whereas the Flight response looks at creating physical distance between yourself and the danger. However, I was not aware that there were three more responses: Freeze, Flop and Friend. Flop is where your body reacts with a limp physical state and may try to reduce the sensation of physical pain, which – hopefully! – is unlikely to be present in court proceedings. On the other hand, Freeze and Friend could feature in court proceedings. Freeze is where you would adopt a tense, motionless posture and almost ‘play dead’ and Friend is where you feel compelled to co-operate to reduce the threat and end up agreeing with others, over-apologising and trying to avoid conflict. Understanding these responses can be key in supporting your clients because it allows you to interpret their behaviour as a natural reaction to their stress rather than as evasive or uncooperative.

Last, I was intrigued by the ‘window of tolerance’ which is a psychological concept used to describe the optimal zone of arousal in which a person can function most effectively. When a person is hyperaroused (red zone) they can present as angry, frustrated and overwhelmed, though this takes a lot of energy and is unlikely to last long before they ‘shut down’. When a person is hypoaroused (blue zone) they can present as overly calm and feel sad, disappointed and like they want to be alone. When a person is in their ‘window of tolerance’ (green zone) they present as more balanced, in control and relaxed. Engaging in Trauma-Informed Advocacy means that witnesses can stay in their window of tolerance for longer therefore achieving the best evidence.

Why Trauma-Informed Advocacy benefits counsel, clients and the legal system

The benefit for witnesses – whether they are your client or whether they are on the other side – is that a Trauma-Informed Advocate is more likely to make them feel heard, respected, and safe. For some witnesses, the legal process itself can exacerbate trauma: cross-examination, adversarial questioning, and prolonged uncertainty can re-traumatise individuals or lead to emotional shutdown. Importantly, Trauma-Informed Advocacy does not mean there will be a removal of robust questioning or a change in the order of questioning. Put another way, just because a barrister is considering trauma in how they question and respond to a witness does not mean that they are not properly representing their clients or putting a strong case. However, there are ways to test and challenge evidence, whilst properly asserting a case, without re-traumatising a witness.

At a systemic level, a Trauma-Informed approach can reduce procedural delays caused by client disengagement or mental health crises. Hearings are likely to run more smoothly when parties feel safe and understood. Judges, too, can benefit from training in trauma awareness, as it informs more sensitive and appropriate case management. A Trauma-Informed justice system is not just kinder, it is more efficient, fair, and productive.

For barristers, a Trauma-Informed approach enhances professional relationships and effectiveness. First, it enables better communication with clients, fewer misunderstandings, and more efficient case preparation. Clients who feel supported by their barristers are also more likely to participate fully in their case, improving the quality of evidence and whilst this does not guarantee a favourable outcome, it does ensure that the legal process itself does not become another source of harm. Second, by understanding the impact of trauma on counsel (the course explores both vicarious trauma and secondary traumatic stress), barristers can ensure that they are looking after their mental and emotional wellbeing. Trauma-Informed Advocacy encourages self-awareness and self-care among practitioners, promoting resilience and reducing burnout.

Practical tips

Most traumatic experiences come from situations where there was a lack of control, no information about the situation or predictability about what was coming next or when it would stop, disempowerment and a lack of safety and trust. To that end, the course focuses on five key principles to build into a trauma-informed practice: choice, safety, empowerment, trust and collaboration.

With those principles in mind, I have noted some practical tips from the course and some experiences from my own practice:

1. Giving choices to clients/witnesses

Although there is no choice about being cross-examined and being appropriately challenged, there can be some choice of how – what time, what day and via which method (where application for special measures have been made). Furthermore, clients can be asked if they would like to have a supporter to attend the court building with them, any stress toys or other comfort aids.

It is important to remind your clients that they are part of the process and that, despite how it may feel, the legal process is not happening to them. Reminding clients that they can ask to take a break during their evidence if they need to, they can clarify questions before they answer and they can take a moment or drink water in their evidence can help them to feel more in control.

2. Transparency

There is so little predictability within the court system. Parties may face different venues, types of hearing (remote, attended, hybrid), different judges, different advocates and varied timescales that are always subject to change. Unpredictability is often a feature of the trauma experience so it can help to be open about the pressures on the legal system, explaining what changes may arise and if they do arise, how the client or witness will be informed about the changes. This open dialogue removes some of the helplessness that comes with being part of legal proceedings.

3. Speaking to witnesses at court

This is perhaps a stronger feature in criminal proceedings, where the witness or client may not have met the barrister representing them (or the Crown in criminal cases) before, or at least not in person, but the course reminds practitioners that this is an essential part of being a Trauma-Informed Advocate. The idea comes again from the principles of empowerment, trust and collaboration. The purpose of this meeting is to explain what we can about the process generally, the specific hearing on the day and the likely next steps. This is a key opportunity to explain the nature of the cross-examination and the types of questions to expect. This trust and collaboration are further compounded by meeting the witness again after court and crucially, making sure you come back when you say you will. It can be daunting asking a judge for extra time to do so, but perhaps having the confidence to do so will continue to shift the culture towards a more understanding approach.

In family cases, particularly private law proceedings, more and more parties are representing themselves. In those cases, there is an onus to have pre-hearing discussions with the litigant in person in a way that allows them to understand and participate in the proceedings and discussions. For example, explaining how long the hearing is likely to be, what the room set up is likely to be, who is likely to enter the courtroom first, who speaks first and where to sit can help a litigant in person who may have experienced trauma.

Conclusion

By sharing my experience of the course, I hope to encourage other practitioners to engage with the work themselves. The course is entirely online and you can pick up different parts (videos, activities, passages to read) as and when you like – there is no need to complete the course in one sitting.

If Trauma-Informed training was embedded in the legal profession from the outset it could transform the culture of advocacy. Rather than relying solely on adversarial techniques, barristers could be equipped with a wider toolbox, enabling them to work effectively with all kinds of clients and witnesses, including the most vulnerable. Chambers could also adopt Trauma-Informed policies, ensuring that trauma awareness is part of how we supervise, mentor, and care for our colleagues.

At its core, our role as barristers demands that we act not only in our client’s best interests but also with unwavering honesty and integrity – ensuring that our advocacy advances justice while preserving the dignity of those we represent or question is doing just that.

Simranjit Kamal, Barrister, Albion Chambers