The Code of Judicial Conduct makes it clear that being a judge is not easy. Adding a new area to jurisprudence will not be easy. However, an accurate understanding of mental illnesses – and how these common brain illnesses affect human thoughts, judgment, and behaviors – is necessary if we are to strive to have “justice for all” the over 1.7 million Floridians [one in every ten citizens] who have one or more of the illnesses known as depression, manic-depression [bipolar disorder], schizophrenia, and the anxiety disorders, including obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Upholding integrity, avoiding impropriety, maintaining judicial impartiality, improving the legal system and the administration of justice, and minimizing the risk of conflict with judicial duties and personal behaviors which are inappropriate for a jurist, are vital components of being a judge.

A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by word or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials, and other subject to the judge’s direction and control to do so. The “disability” of concern in this article is mental illness.

Judges are selected for their good judgment, character, and fairness. What if a person’s judgment and opinions are based on misinformation and misunderstanding? Many in our legal profession have no training about brain illnesses. As a result, many harbor the same misunderstandings and misinformation that are believed in the general public concerning those whom the public considers to be mentally ill. Many base their opinions on their exposure to a single individual, and may not have an accurate picture of the medical condition as a whole.

There is so much stigma and discrimination toward those labeled “mentally ill,” that those who are aware of their need for medical help in this area, often refuse to seek it. They fear repercussions in the workplace, and even within their own families. Even a close, personal friend or colleague of a judge or a lawyer would rarely disclose a diagnosis such as manic-depression or obsessive-compulsive disorder for fear of losing the respect and trust of that legal professional.

A 1991 Johns Hopkins medical study, cited in an American Bar Association BAR LEADER magazine, found that of thousands of professionals surveyed, lawyers ranked number one in having depression, a common – yet deadly if it progresses to suicide – mental illness. The North Carolina Bar was the first to start a mentoring program after a shocking number of attorney suicides.

How many lawyers or judges do you know that talk freely about their treatment for mental illnesses? A top Florida Bar staff member told me that there could be no committee, commission, section, or staff members working to promote “mental illness awareness” as the new Florida Bar continuing legal education course, even though in February of 2001, this subject was placed by the Florida Supreme Court in the MANDATORY category. The staff person said that forming such a group would create a presumption that the individuals affiliated were personally “mental patients.” It was thought that no one would risk that presumption or actual disclosure.