Author: webadmin4level

In her article, Deborah Henderson describes the role of Communication Assistants (CAs) in the legal system. She draws parallels between her own overwhelming experience at a medical appointment and the confusion clients might face in court. Henderson highlights how CAs, often speech-language therapists, help clients understand legal processes through plain language, visual aids, and frequent breaks. She emphasises the importance of effective communication by legal professionals and offers practical tips to improve clarity and comprehension for clients with communication needs.

I sit at the hospital.
I wait for my specialist appointment.
I hear my name.

The specialist quickly begins talking, already under time pressure, detailing and outlining the procedure and what is going to happen before, during, and after. Copious amounts of information come at me, with terms I haven’t heard before and no explanation of those medical terms. Numerous questions are asked of me, back-to-back, with minimal clarification about what relevance they have. Little opportunity is given for my own questions. Having finished filling in their forms, the appointment ends.

I walk away.
I feel overwhelmed, uncertain and stupid.
I have questions.

After the above incident, I realised that perhaps people feel the same way as I did, at my medical appointment, when they have to come to court. Entering an unfamiliar place, dealing with people they have never seen before, following an unknown process and hearing words they would never use in their normal life (think ‘remand’, ‘adjournment’, ‘bail’). There is also the uncertainty of outcome. After my medical appointment, I decided to work harder to make my clients’ experience at court as easy and simple as possible – so that when they walked
away, they wouldn’t feel as I did leaving the hospital.

As lawyers, we need to be great communicators. We are comfortable with the legal arena, and the specialised legal language used in that arena. We need to be able to pass on information – often lots of information – that is rarely easy, straightforward, or simple to explain. Our challenge is to make sure that we communicate efficiently so that the receiver understands everything. I have learnt a lot from seeing communication assistants (CA) in action. CAs are now being used more regularly in court. They are often speech-language therapists who assess clients to see if they need any help with communicating at court. The client may need concepts interpreted in plain English, a visual description of what is going to be happening, or advocacy for more breaks during the court process to facilitate better concentration.

After watching a CA work, I often now use diagrams to explain court processes. I am now more aware that the concept of time can be very difficult. With young people, I might use the idea of sleeps, rather than days, to reconceptualise time. I also try to reframe my questions so they are more straightforward. It is still a work in progress. I met with a client recently, gave them all the information in a plain English format, and walked away thinking I had communicated well. I thought they had understood me. It turns out that answering ‘yes’ to all questions can be an indicator of poor understanding.

They were later assessed and given a CA. To get a CA, a client is referred for an assessment. The Court can request one or at the request of Counsel or Police/other agencies. The referral form can be found on the website of moretalk.co.nz – the agency that covers Dunedin (another helpful website is talkingtroublenz.org, which shows ways to communicate information).

Following an assessment, the CA provides a report to the court about the needs of the client. If required, the CA attends all court appearances with the client, to make sure they understand what is going on and to make sure all their needs are met.

Tips from a CA include: slowing down generally with all explanations about processes, pausing after each idea to allow clients to process what’s been said, and never asking ‘Do you understand?’ – rather ‘Tell me what you understand about today?’

The toolkits on theadvocatesgateway.org also provide ideas about how to frame questions to make them easier to understand. Examples of this are:

• Using simpler language and plain English wherever possible: Asking ‘Who was there when that happened?’ rather than ‘Who was present at the incident?’
• Avoiding tag questions: Asking “Did you go to the neighbour’s house?’ rather than ‘You went to the neighbour’s house, didn’t you?’
• Avoiding figures of speech or idioms: Asking ‘Did you and Jane agree about things?’ rather than ‘Did you and Jane see eye to eye?’

Try rewriting the second paragraph of this article in simpler, plain English – what alternatives are available for terms such as ‘copious’ and ‘procedure’? Perhaps also when meeting with a client, you could challenge yourself to streamline your delivery of information and provide additional modes of delivering the content of that information (e.g. symbols or a visual guide).

If our clients feel heard and empowered because they understand the information we have given them, then we are great communicators and we have made a difference.