SINGAPORE: Lawyers are leaving private practice amid toxic workplace cultures, bullying, unreasonable workloads and a profession that intrudes into their personal lives, according to a study commissioned by the Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc).
The Legal Profession Sustainability Study released on Tuesday (Jun 23) also found that some respondents felt law schools had not adequately prepared them for the realities of legal practice, and cited multiple lawyers saying that they were "scolded, ridiculed or publicly humiliated" by judicial officers over inflexible court timelines.
The four-year study was conducted by research firm Anthro Insights for LawSoc, and surveyed 855 practising and former lawyers and drew on 31 in-depth interviews with members of the legal community, including former judges, senior practitioners, junior lawyers and lawyers who had left the practice.
The 223-page report was commissioned by the late LawSoc president Adrian Tan, who had warned in 2022 that young lawyers were facing a “perfect storm” of record-high departures and record-low entrants into the profession. Mr Tan died on Jul 8, 2023.
“The legal profession now possesses systematic evidence about why lawyers leave and what might keep them,” the report stated in its executive summary, adding that "attrition stems not from individual failings, but from structural and cultural conditions that may have remained unchanged for decades".
The study found that workplace culture and its association with poorer mental health were among the strongest factors associated with lawyers leaving private practice and, in some cases, the profession altogether.
“Current interventions appear to fall short because they treat symptoms while underlying conditions continue to generate harm.
"This evidence points to the need for close collaboration across the legal ecosystem."
The study's findings add to longstanding concerns about lawyer attrition that have also been raised by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who said in April that one in three new lawyers may quit within three years due to workload and poor culture. Minister for Law Edwin Tong has also addressed the issue in parliament, noting that lawyers leave the profession for a variety of reasons.
On Tuesday, the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) said the study's findings should be taken seriously and considered carefully.
"The findings reported in the study touch on a range of issues from across a broad spectrum of the legal profession, identifying various organisational and practice related stress points, alongside the economic realities of legal practice," a spokesperson said.
Describing Singapore's legal talent as a "precious asset", the spokesperson said it was important to have an open and honest conversation about sustaining the balance between industry demands, professional development, individual wellbeing and the long-term sustainability of the legal practice.
Responding to the study, Chief Justice Menon said that an effective justice system relied on mutual respect, collaboration, and "a shared commitment to sustainability between the Bench and the Bar".
"While we must maintain the high standards necessary to deliver timely justice, our courtrooms must always remain places of dignity, professionalism and mutual respect. We hold all our judges and judicial officers to these strict tenets of conduct."
A judiciary spokesperson said it takes the findings seriously, adding that the study identified multiple drivers of stress and attrition that would require action across the legal ecosystem.
"A resilient legal profession is essential to the administration of justice. While the courts must maintain the rigorous standards expected by the public, the judiciary recognises that the long-term sustainability of the profession is vital to upholding those standards," the spokesperson said.
To this end, a Judiciary–Law Society Joint Working Committee will be established to address the feedback within the courts' purview.
The committee will be led by Supreme Court chief executive Juthika Ramanathan and Registrar Jill Tan representing the judiciary, and LawSoc's Young Lawyers Committee co-chairpersons, Ms Charmaine Yap and Mr Darryl Chew, and Senior Counsel Lok Vi Ming, among others, representing LawSoc.
LawSoc has also convened a task force to examine the findings and its implications, as well as to come up with recommendations.
LawSoc's Task Force on the Fulfilment and Sustainability of Younger Lawyers will be led by Ms Yap and Mr Chew.
MinLaw said it welcomed the establishment of the task force and the working committee as immediate steps, adding that it will continue working with relevant parties across the legal sector through continued engagement and the Future of the Legal Profession Committee, which was established in December 2025.
"MinLaw recognises that long-term sustainability is essential to a resilient and robust legal sector that can grow and serve Singapore well, and remains committed to supporting efforts that strengthen and sustain it," its spokesperson said.
Researchers found "structural issues" with early career roles, not because of generational weaknesses or a lack of resilience of young lawyers.
Instead, the attrition of young lawyers was due to premature specialisation, limited exposure to diverse practice areas, insufficient psychological safety to learn from mistakes, as well as an "excessive dependence on a single supervisor", said the study.
"When every generation of senior lawyers has criticised the generation entering behind them for decades, the pattern points not to recurring generational deficiency but to persistent structural flaws in the design of early career roles," researchers said in the report's executive summary.
Workplace culture remains the "most powerful driver" of lawyer retention but remains "deeply resistant to change despite decades of documented problems", the study said.
Toxic workplace patterns, including incivility and bullying, were reported across all levels of the profession, from trainees to senior lawyers.
Respondents described hostile communication as normalised behaviour.
One junior lawyer wrote: “Toxic bosses need to face some form of regulation and punishment. I know friends and colleagues who have been verbally abused or borderline sexually harassed by bosses, yet nothing is done because these are the partners or directors in the law firms who bring in the work."
One senior lawyer said culture was largely shaped by senior members of the profession who needed to reflect on their own conduct.
The study suggested that such behaviour is often internalised by junior lawyers, perpetuating a cycle of toxic workplace practices.
Expectations that lawyers remain constantly available — including during annual leave and medical leave — also contribute to the profession's mental burden.
A junior lawyer said: "We are expected to work at all hours of the day and drop what we are doing if something comes up. This makes us constantly checking our phones to see whether something comes up.
"We cannot plan anything during weekdays, such as exercise classes or meeting up with friends. We have to work during our leave and on MC. It feels like our illness is not taken seriously and we have to justify and 'prove' that we are sick."
Personal health and mental wellbeing were among the strongest factors associated with lawyers leaving the profession, the study said.
"The evidence supports the interpretation that poor workplace culture does not directly expel lawyers from practice. Instead, culture operates indirectly by systematically eroding health through accumulated stress, boundary violations, inadequate support and relentless time pressure sustained across months and years.
"Eventually, this damage reaches a point where continuing in legal practice becomes physically and psychologically unbearable," the report stated.
Junior lawyers in particular experienced severe burnout in their first years of practice, with those who began with a genuine passion leaving within one to two years.
Even senior lawyers are not exempt.
One senior lawyer considered leaving the profession but said he or she lacked the courage to resign, despite describing severe physical and emotional strain, including daily crying, chronic migraines and unexplained weight gain.
While billable hours started as a way for firms to track how lawyers spent their time and charge clients, they have since evolved into the primary means of measuring a lawyer's performance.
Billable hours are the hours a lawyer spends working on tasks that can be charged or invoiced to the client.
Such targets may create unhealthy competition among colleagues, with senior lawyers keeping lucrative cases for themselves.
One junior lawyer said that those early in their careers are at the losing end as they do not have control over work assignments, quality of billable work, discounting, or collection, yet end up competing with their seniors to meet individual billing targets.
Another suggested flat fees or subscription-based pricing as more flexible arrangements that could provide greater transparency and predictability, reducing the pressure to constantly track time.
Respondents identified court deadlines and judicial interactions as significant stressors, with decades-old institutional practices persisting despite changing circumstances.
They cited rigid court timelines, difficulties obtaining extensions and negative interactions with some judicial officers.
Court timelines, imposed in the 1990s to clear case backlogs, have persisted and created unnecessary time pressure, even as the original problem no longer exists.
Former judicial officers and practising lawyers also observed that case timelines appeared to be driven by completion targets rather than the complexity of individual cases or other legitimate constraints.
Lawyers also reported varying court processes depending on the judicial officer involved, with High Court judges perceived as more flexible than registrars.
Apart from concerns over metrics, lawyers across various experience levels described being scolded, screamed at, ridiculed, or personally faulted by judicial officers.
One junior lawyer quoted in the report said the court was "no longer a place that appreciates good argument and counsel as it used to".
"Nowadays, it has become a place for dehumanising and humiliating lawyers, especially junior ones. It makes lawyers want to leave the profession altogether," said the lawyer, who added that he or she had stopped going to court as often as before.
The report found that lawyers lacked a safe avenue to provide feedback on judicial conduct, with many fearing repercussions.
"Critically, no formal mechanism currently exists for lawyers to provide feedback on judicial conduct or timeline practices without career risk. This absence of accountability allows problematic patterns to persist uncorrected," said the study.
In response, the judiciary said its formal, independent judiciary complaints process remains active and accessible for complaints about judicial conduct.
In the past three years, two formal conduct complaints were received, both of which were investigated thoroughly, a judiciary spokesperson said.
"We recognise, however, that the study suggests these existing channels have not been sufficiently utilised at the practitioner level, particularly on matters of day-to-day courtroom experience and timeline pressures," the spokesperson added.
The spokesperson acknowledged that some concerns raised in the study may not be comfortably aired through a formal complaints process, but noted that informal channels also exist.
The Joint Working Committee will review whether current dialogue mechanisms are working as intended at the ground level, and whether awareness of available channels is sufficiently widespread among practitioners.
"It will also consider how the feedback channels can be strengthened to better enable practitioners to raise relevant concerns. The goal is to build a more responsive and calibrated relationship between the Bench and the Bar," the spokesperson said.
"The judiciary holds all judges and judicial officers to high standards of conduct, including in their interactions with lawyers."
Lawyers outside the State Courts of Singapore on May 12, 2026. (Photo: CNA/Raydza Rahman)
The study also identified a gap between legal education and legal practice.
While the study found that Singapore's law schools produce graduates who are intellectually rigorous and possess strong analytical capabilities, some respondents felt they were not adequately prepared for the realities of legal practice.
Respondents quoted said their legal education provided limited exposure to practical skills such as drafting and client interviews, while others pointed to gaps in interpersonal skills and professional development.
The judiciary spokesperson pointed to the Singapore Judicial College's Judicial Competency Framework which outlines knowledge, skills and attributes that guide judicial learning, including dedicated competencies in communication, case management and wellbeing.
Its programmes include modules on courtroom communication and the management of emotions and psychological responses in the courtroom, as well as case management strategies.
"The Singapore Judicial College will review and strengthen its curriculum in light of the study, with particular attention to modules on courtroom communication and case management," the spokesperson said.
More than 520 newly appointed advocates and solicitors are called to the Bar in 2019. (Photo: Supreme Court)
The study found that the steady loss of lawyers from private practice is driven by the structural and cultural conditions of legal work rather than by any shortcoming in the lawyers themselves.
Meaningful change will require coordinated action across the whole legal ecosystem, including firms, clients, the courts, and the institutions that educate, admit and regulate new lawyers, said Anthro in a press release.
Among other things, the study suggested that firms conduct internal assessments across various areas, such as organisational support, psychological safety, work-life support, and prioritise weaknesses before taking action.
It also called for junior lawyers to be exposed to different practice areas before specialisation, and for mentorship to be embedded into everyday work.
On mental health, the study argued for validated instruments to regularly measure mental, physical, social and financial wellbeing of lawyers.
The study also identified two priorities for future research: why lawyers stay in the profession, and how students are selected to enter the industry in the first place.
On the latter, it noted that presently, admissions rest heavily on academic predictors, which can only weakly predict one's resilience, interpersonal skill and ethical reasoning — which are "central to sustainable practice".
"Future work should test whether broadening selection criteria changes who enters the profession and, over time, who stays and thrives."
The profession faces a defining choice, the report said in its conclusion.
“Leaving the causes of attrition unchanged means that the problem of attrition will not improve and may even worsen.”
Continue reading...
The Legal Profession Sustainability Study released on Tuesday (Jun 23) also found that some respondents felt law schools had not adequately prepared them for the realities of legal practice, and cited multiple lawyers saying that they were "scolded, ridiculed or publicly humiliated" by judicial officers over inflexible court timelines.
The four-year study was conducted by research firm Anthro Insights for LawSoc, and surveyed 855 practising and former lawyers and drew on 31 in-depth interviews with members of the legal community, including former judges, senior practitioners, junior lawyers and lawyers who had left the practice.
The 223-page report was commissioned by the late LawSoc president Adrian Tan, who had warned in 2022 that young lawyers were facing a “perfect storm” of record-high departures and record-low entrants into the profession. Mr Tan died on Jul 8, 2023.
“The legal profession now possesses systematic evidence about why lawyers leave and what might keep them,” the report stated in its executive summary, adding that "attrition stems not from individual failings, but from structural and cultural conditions that may have remained unchanged for decades".
The study found that workplace culture and its association with poorer mental health were among the strongest factors associated with lawyers leaving private practice and, in some cases, the profession altogether.
“Current interventions appear to fall short because they treat symptoms while underlying conditions continue to generate harm.
"This evidence points to the need for close collaboration across the legal ecosystem."
The study's findings add to longstanding concerns about lawyer attrition that have also been raised by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who said in April that one in three new lawyers may quit within three years due to workload and poor culture. Minister for Law Edwin Tong has also addressed the issue in parliament, noting that lawyers leave the profession for a variety of reasons.
On Tuesday, the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) said the study's findings should be taken seriously and considered carefully.
"The findings reported in the study touch on a range of issues from across a broad spectrum of the legal profession, identifying various organisational and practice related stress points, alongside the economic realities of legal practice," a spokesperson said.
Describing Singapore's legal talent as a "precious asset", the spokesperson said it was important to have an open and honest conversation about sustaining the balance between industry demands, professional development, individual wellbeing and the long-term sustainability of the legal practice.
Responding to the study, Chief Justice Menon said that an effective justice system relied on mutual respect, collaboration, and "a shared commitment to sustainability between the Bench and the Bar".
"While we must maintain the high standards necessary to deliver timely justice, our courtrooms must always remain places of dignity, professionalism and mutual respect. We hold all our judges and judicial officers to these strict tenets of conduct."
A judiciary spokesperson said it takes the findings seriously, adding that the study identified multiple drivers of stress and attrition that would require action across the legal ecosystem.
"A resilient legal profession is essential to the administration of justice. While the courts must maintain the rigorous standards expected by the public, the judiciary recognises that the long-term sustainability of the profession is vital to upholding those standards," the spokesperson said.
To this end, a Judiciary–Law Society Joint Working Committee will be established to address the feedback within the courts' purview.
The committee will be led by Supreme Court chief executive Juthika Ramanathan and Registrar Jill Tan representing the judiciary, and LawSoc's Young Lawyers Committee co-chairpersons, Ms Charmaine Yap and Mr Darryl Chew, and Senior Counsel Lok Vi Ming, among others, representing LawSoc.
LawSoc has also convened a task force to examine the findings and its implications, as well as to come up with recommendations.
LawSoc's Task Force on the Fulfilment and Sustainability of Younger Lawyers will be led by Ms Yap and Mr Chew.
MinLaw said it welcomed the establishment of the task force and the working committee as immediate steps, adding that it will continue working with relevant parties across the legal sector through continued engagement and the Future of the Legal Profession Committee, which was established in December 2025.
"MinLaw recognises that long-term sustainability is essential to a resilient and robust legal sector that can grow and serve Singapore well, and remains committed to supporting efforts that strengthen and sustain it," its spokesperson said.
Related:
STRUCTURAL WORKPLACE ISSUES
Researchers found "structural issues" with early career roles, not because of generational weaknesses or a lack of resilience of young lawyers.
Instead, the attrition of young lawyers was due to premature specialisation, limited exposure to diverse practice areas, insufficient psychological safety to learn from mistakes, as well as an "excessive dependence on a single supervisor", said the study.
"When every generation of senior lawyers has criticised the generation entering behind them for decades, the pattern points not to recurring generational deficiency but to persistent structural flaws in the design of early career roles," researchers said in the report's executive summary.
Workplace culture remains the "most powerful driver" of lawyer retention but remains "deeply resistant to change despite decades of documented problems", the study said.
Toxic workplace patterns, including incivility and bullying, were reported across all levels of the profession, from trainees to senior lawyers.
Respondents described hostile communication as normalised behaviour.
One junior lawyer wrote: “Toxic bosses need to face some form of regulation and punishment. I know friends and colleagues who have been verbally abused or borderline sexually harassed by bosses, yet nothing is done because these are the partners or directors in the law firms who bring in the work."
One senior lawyer said culture was largely shaped by senior members of the profession who needed to reflect on their own conduct.
The study suggested that such behaviour is often internalised by junior lawyers, perpetuating a cycle of toxic workplace practices.
Expectations that lawyers remain constantly available — including during annual leave and medical leave — also contribute to the profession's mental burden.
A junior lawyer said: "We are expected to work at all hours of the day and drop what we are doing if something comes up. This makes us constantly checking our phones to see whether something comes up.
"We cannot plan anything during weekdays, such as exercise classes or meeting up with friends. We have to work during our leave and on MC. It feels like our illness is not taken seriously and we have to justify and 'prove' that we are sick."
DEEPENING WELLBEING CRISIS
Personal health and mental wellbeing were among the strongest factors associated with lawyers leaving the profession, the study said.
"The evidence supports the interpretation that poor workplace culture does not directly expel lawyers from practice. Instead, culture operates indirectly by systematically eroding health through accumulated stress, boundary violations, inadequate support and relentless time pressure sustained across months and years.
"Eventually, this damage reaches a point where continuing in legal practice becomes physically and psychologically unbearable," the report stated.
Junior lawyers in particular experienced severe burnout in their first years of practice, with those who began with a genuine passion leaving within one to two years.
Even senior lawyers are not exempt.
One senior lawyer considered leaving the profession but said he or she lacked the courage to resign, despite describing severe physical and emotional strain, including daily crying, chronic migraines and unexplained weight gain.
BILLABLE HOURS DETERMINING LAWYER'S WORTH
While billable hours started as a way for firms to track how lawyers spent their time and charge clients, they have since evolved into the primary means of measuring a lawyer's performance.
Billable hours are the hours a lawyer spends working on tasks that can be charged or invoiced to the client.
Such targets may create unhealthy competition among colleagues, with senior lawyers keeping lucrative cases for themselves.
One junior lawyer said that those early in their careers are at the losing end as they do not have control over work assignments, quality of billable work, discounting, or collection, yet end up competing with their seniors to meet individual billing targets.
Another suggested flat fees or subscription-based pricing as more flexible arrangements that could provide greater transparency and predictability, reducing the pressure to constantly track time.
NEGATIVE INTERACTIONS WITH COURTS
Respondents identified court deadlines and judicial interactions as significant stressors, with decades-old institutional practices persisting despite changing circumstances.
They cited rigid court timelines, difficulties obtaining extensions and negative interactions with some judicial officers.
Court timelines, imposed in the 1990s to clear case backlogs, have persisted and created unnecessary time pressure, even as the original problem no longer exists.
Former judicial officers and practising lawyers also observed that case timelines appeared to be driven by completion targets rather than the complexity of individual cases or other legitimate constraints.
Lawyers also reported varying court processes depending on the judicial officer involved, with High Court judges perceived as more flexible than registrars.
Apart from concerns over metrics, lawyers across various experience levels described being scolded, screamed at, ridiculed, or personally faulted by judicial officers.
One junior lawyer quoted in the report said the court was "no longer a place that appreciates good argument and counsel as it used to".
"Nowadays, it has become a place for dehumanising and humiliating lawyers, especially junior ones. It makes lawyers want to leave the profession altogether," said the lawyer, who added that he or she had stopped going to court as often as before.
The report found that lawyers lacked a safe avenue to provide feedback on judicial conduct, with many fearing repercussions.
"Critically, no formal mechanism currently exists for lawyers to provide feedback on judicial conduct or timeline practices without career risk. This absence of accountability allows problematic patterns to persist uncorrected," said the study.
In response, the judiciary said its formal, independent judiciary complaints process remains active and accessible for complaints about judicial conduct.
In the past three years, two formal conduct complaints were received, both of which were investigated thoroughly, a judiciary spokesperson said.
"We recognise, however, that the study suggests these existing channels have not been sufficiently utilised at the practitioner level, particularly on matters of day-to-day courtroom experience and timeline pressures," the spokesperson added.
The spokesperson acknowledged that some concerns raised in the study may not be comfortably aired through a formal complaints process, but noted that informal channels also exist.
The Joint Working Committee will review whether current dialogue mechanisms are working as intended at the ground level, and whether awareness of available channels is sufficiently widespread among practitioners.
"It will also consider how the feedback channels can be strengthened to better enable practitioners to raise relevant concerns. The goal is to build a more responsive and calibrated relationship between the Bench and the Bar," the spokesperson said.
"The judiciary holds all judges and judicial officers to high standards of conduct, including in their interactions with lawyers."
Lawyers outside the State Courts of Singapore on May 12, 2026. (Photo: CNA/Raydza Rahman)
LAW GRADUATES NOT PREPARED FOR REALITIES
The study also identified a gap between legal education and legal practice.
While the study found that Singapore's law schools produce graduates who are intellectually rigorous and possess strong analytical capabilities, some respondents felt they were not adequately prepared for the realities of legal practice.
Respondents quoted said their legal education provided limited exposure to practical skills such as drafting and client interviews, while others pointed to gaps in interpersonal skills and professional development.
The judiciary spokesperson pointed to the Singapore Judicial College's Judicial Competency Framework which outlines knowledge, skills and attributes that guide judicial learning, including dedicated competencies in communication, case management and wellbeing.
Its programmes include modules on courtroom communication and the management of emotions and psychological responses in the courtroom, as well as case management strategies.
"The Singapore Judicial College will review and strengthen its curriculum in light of the study, with particular attention to modules on courtroom communication and case management," the spokesperson said.
More than 520 newly appointed advocates and solicitors are called to the Bar in 2019. (Photo: Supreme Court)
PROFESSION NEEDS MEANINGFUL CHANGE
The study found that the steady loss of lawyers from private practice is driven by the structural and cultural conditions of legal work rather than by any shortcoming in the lawyers themselves.
Meaningful change will require coordinated action across the whole legal ecosystem, including firms, clients, the courts, and the institutions that educate, admit and regulate new lawyers, said Anthro in a press release.
Among other things, the study suggested that firms conduct internal assessments across various areas, such as organisational support, psychological safety, work-life support, and prioritise weaknesses before taking action.
It also called for junior lawyers to be exposed to different practice areas before specialisation, and for mentorship to be embedded into everyday work.
On mental health, the study argued for validated instruments to regularly measure mental, physical, social and financial wellbeing of lawyers.
The study also identified two priorities for future research: why lawyers stay in the profession, and how students are selected to enter the industry in the first place.
On the latter, it noted that presently, admissions rest heavily on academic predictors, which can only weakly predict one's resilience, interpersonal skill and ethical reasoning — which are "central to sustainable practice".
"Future work should test whether broadening selection criteria changes who enters the profession and, over time, who stays and thrives."
The profession faces a defining choice, the report said in its conclusion.
“Leaving the causes of attrition unchanged means that the problem of attrition will not improve and may even worsen.”
Continue reading...