Professor Richard Kemp2, Associate Professor Carly Schrever3, Associate Professor Kevin O’Sullivan2, Professor Kylie Burns4, Adjunct Associate Professor Terese Henning5, Professor Jill Hunter7, Professor Sharyn Roach Anleu6, Professor Natalie Skead3, Professor Prue Vines7, Emeritus Professor Kate Warner5, Dr Nina Hudson1,8,9
1Tasmania Law Reform Institute, Hobart, Australia, 2School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Australia, 3Law School, University of Western Australia, Australia, 4Law School, Griffith University, Australia, 5Law School, University of Tasmania, Australia, 6Judicial Research Project, Flinders University, Australia, 7Law School, University of New South Wales, Australia, 8Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, Australia, 9Independent Research Consultant, Australia
Biography:
Professor Richard Kemp is a cognitive and forensic psychologist who works to apply research in the fields of human memory and perception to aspects of the legal system. Richard obtained his PhD from London University and moved to UNSW Sydney in 2001. His research interests include, face recognition, identity verification, eyewitness memory, police interviewing, jury decision making, forensic science evidence, forensic mental health and judicial wellbeing. Richard has undertaken his research in collaboration with a variety of partner organisations, including State and Federal government agencies, Police and emergency service organisations and banks and financial service providers. He has provided expert evidence in a number of significant court cases in Australia and is regularly asked to address conferences of judges, lawyers, police and other legal professionals. Richard has been awarded over $6 million in research funding. In addition to over 140 journal publications, Richard has contributed to several psychology texts and is co-author of a bestselling guide to statistics for psychologists which is in its 8th edition.
Dr Carly Schrever is a lawyer, psychologist, empirical researcher. She has worked in and around the legal profession and the courts for 20 years, focusing specifically on judicial and lawyer wellbeing since 2015. Carly’s doctoral project (University of Melbourne) was Australia’s first empirical and psychologically grounded research into the sources and nature of work-related stress among the Australian judiciary. This research has been published in peer-reviewed journals and textbooks, and the findings presented to judicial audiences globally. Through her psychological consultancy, Human Ethos, she has been engaged by Australian and international jurisdictions to design and deliver tailored judicial wellbeing programs.
Kevin O’Sullivan is clinical psychologist working in Sydney. After completing his training in the UK, he moved to Australia to set up the Violence Prevention Program (now the Violent Offenders Therapeutic Program) for Corrective Services New South Wales. He moved into general practice for some years before returning to NSW Corrections as Director of Offender Programs. He completed his PhD in UNSW Sydney on desistance from crime. For the past twelve years he has worked in general practice, first in the inner city and later in regional NSW. His clinical interests include interpersonal process group work, trauma in judicial officers and non-pathologising Narrative Approaches to therapeutic work. Kevin now teaches life story writing as a way of blending therapeutic insights and narrative process.
Abstract:
The adoption of the Nauru Declaration on Judicial Wellbeing and the establishment of the UN International Day for Judicial Wellbeing have marked a turning point in global recognition of the critical role judicial wellbeing plays in upholding judicial integrity and the rule of law. Yet despite growing awareness, fundamental questions remain: What aspects of judicial work or the court environment most threaten judicial wellbeing? And conversely, what conditions best support a sustainable and engaged judicial career? These questions are increasingly urgent for governments, judicial leaders, and court administrators seeking to design evidence-based wellbeing strategies for their jurisdictions. This presentation shares findings from a recent national study of Australian judicial officers that investigated the drivers of stress and satisfaction in judicial life. At the heart of the project is the Judicial Attitudes to Work Scale (JAWS)—a novel tool developed specifically to identify risk and protective factors for judicial wellbeing. Drawing on responses from across Australian jurisdictions, the study reveals key insights into the work demands, interpersonal dynamics, and organisational features that impact judicial mental health and resilience. This session will unpack the findings from the JAWS Scale and consider how they can inform targeted, effective approaches to safeguarding judicial wellbeing—both in Australia and internationally.