We live in a society whose relationships are regulated by rights and duties. As human beings we are provided with legal guarantees that safeguard our physical, mental, social and economic integrity in situations of injustice.
Most states have judicial mechanisms aimed at restoring balance between two parties when either of them has committed a fault or crime against the other, including penalties in the civil and criminal spheres.
All people can resort to this system when we perceive ourselves to be victims of harm, and we also have the obligation to respond to it when we have incurred an infraction among those contemplated in the rule of law.
Liticaphobia consists of an irrational fear of situations of this type (contentious) , and that is much more common than it might seem. We proceed, therefore, to address its fundamental aspects.
Liticaphobia (known as litigophobia) is a term in which two words of classical origin, but of disparate origins, converge. The first of them comes from the Latin “litigium”, which in turn comes from the root “lis” (dispute or lawsuit), and the second (phobos) is a Hellenic inheritance (fear or aversion). Thus, liticaphobia describes a situational phobia, which is limited to the moment in which one is part of the defense or prosecution in a trial.
The truth is Legal problems constitute very stressful situations for most people, even if they do not suffer from any anxiety disorder. The knowledge of having been prosecuted in an investigation or judicial case always triggers mixed reactions, both for the victim and the perpetrator. Thus, the first may fear that her condition as a victim will not be recognized, and the second may fear that she will be subject to an excessively harsh judicial ruling.
For this reason, it is difficult to draw a line that clearly distinguishes the point at which anxiety, which arises reasonably in a context like this, becomes a psychopathological phenomenon. In any case dimensions related to interference with daily life must be considered (harm in relevant areas) and intensity or scope (expectation disproportionate to the consequences anticipated as a result of the process).
In the following lines we will delve into this specific phobia, placing special emphasis on the way in which it is expressed and its possible causes. At the end, a brief review of the therapeutic application strategies will be made.
Symptoms
Fear of litigation can be expressed in various ways Below are some of its most common symptoms. People who suffer from this anxiety condition tend to experience more than one of them. Their anguish is precipitated by situations that are related to ordinary, civil and criminal disputes (from prior hearings to the last appeal); in which he appears as part of any of the agents involved.
One of the common symptoms is anticipatory anxiety. These are concerns that extend from the very notification of the injunction (or the forced imposition of a lawsuit) until the moment in which the case ends. Throughout this period, the person imagines what the future of events will be like, adding dramatic overtones to their situation (content of the ruling, severity in the application of the law, etc.) and exacerbating the fear of the imminent future.
The symptoms usually worsen as time passes and the day you are scheduled to appear in court approaches During this period, negative automatic thoughts may arise (“they are going to destroy my life,” for example), hyperactivation of the autonomic nervous system (acceleration of heart rate and breathing, sweating, muscle tension, diffuse pain, etc.) and behaviors avoidance (unsuccessful efforts to stop thinking or to do activities that take the problem out of the mind, for example).
2. Fear of being accused
Another common symptom is the irresistible fear of being accused by another person of a crime or misdemeanor, which translates into an attitude of condescension even when suffering an obvious violation of rights. Suppose an attitude that denies any potential offense to a third party , which inhibits the expression of opinions or acts that could evolve into tensions that warrant judicial mediation. Thus, politeness would become excessive and would clearly transcend the lower limits of assertiveness (passivity).
3. Fear of participating as a witness in a civil or criminal proceeding
People with a diagnosis of liticaphobia intensely fear participating in a judicial process as witnesses, even though they do not take a position in favor of any of the parties (neither as accusation nor as defense). For this reason, they tend to withdraw from the scene of an illegal situation that they have witnessed, so that they are not called upon to testify in court. This attitude means that the victim may lose a valuable legal resource in claiming their own rights.
This fear may be motivated both by the magistrates’ investigation and by the fear that the accused party will decide to take revenge in some way on all the people who contributed to the indictment process. In other cases, there may be fears that mere participation will end up degenerating into a situation of personal involvement, even though there is no evidence that could support this idea.
4. Uncertainty about one’s own ability as part of a jury
One of the most distressing situations for someone with liticaphobia is be asked to be part of a popular jury If this (random) circumstance arises, they may try to invoke any legal loophole that allows them to evade the assigned task, since they perceive that they do not have sufficient critical capacity to resolve the innocence or guilt of a third party. They are also wary that the accused/defendants may try to take revenge later.
It is necessary to take into account that the formation of a popular jury is carried out by public draw in even-numbered years, and that this responsibility is assigned for a period of up to twenty-four months (which are experienced with overwhelming anxiety).
5. Resistance to filing complaints
In liticaphobia, there is usually an evident refusal to file complaints regarding events in which the subject has felt harmed, for example. the intense fear of participating in a process that would expose one to great emotional tension and that can last several years. Such a way of proceeding leaves you helpless in legal terms, since you will not obtain any retribution for the grievance received. The situation worsens in the case of an objective life-threatening risk (intentional crimes of physical violence, for example).
This is a classic avoidance mechanism in specific phobias, which can be associated with beliefs regarding the uselessness of the legal system or the fear that the lawsuit will impose a situation of frank lack of protection (that police or other types of devices are not articulated). to protect those who report). In any case, it has important consequences, since the person is deprived of the resource available in any democratic system to resolve conflict situations for which agreements are not reached (through mediation or during the preview).
6. Distorted thoughts about procedural consequences
At the moment when people with liticaphobia have not been able to avoid participating in a trial, the fear shifts towards its potential consequences. One of the most frequently raised concerns is on the financial availability to hire a good lawyer , as well as to cover the costs of the process in the event that it concludes unfavorably. These types of thoughts, which are articulated over many months of tension, become significantly separated from the reality of the trial itself.
In this way, there may be fears that a civil case will somehow evolve into a criminal trial, or that one’s own defense will raise suspicions in the judge and turn against oneself. In serious cases, a fear of incarceration emerges, even though the offense committed is very minor and a sanction of equivalent magnitude applies.
7. Anguish over double victimization
When you have been the victim of a particularly serious crime, which has caused considerable emotional damage, there may be a tenacious fear that the judicial process implies double victimization This concept refers to the damage resulting from the system not believing or recognizing the magnitude of the damages, downplaying them or even diverting responsibility for the event to those who have suffered its direct consequences.
This fear is common in cases of harassment, abuse, and rape; and it is not limited only to the legal system, but also extends to the health system or any organization responsible for ensuring the care of those who go through a situation of this type. In some cases It is a factor that prevents reporting events that progressively erode self-image and self-esteem interacting with the rest of those that have been previously reviewed.
Causes
The causes of liticaphobia are varied, and result from the confluence of a set of environmental and personality factors Among the first, the possibility of having experienced personally (or in the family) a situation of a very adverse legal nature, with very harmful consequences for the person suffering from this specific phobia or for their loved ones (extreme pecuniary penalty, deprivation of liberty, etc.), especially during childhood.
In other cases it is possible that the phobic fear is secondarily associated with the potential consequences that could arise from a lawsuit. Thus, fear would be the result of a feeling of vulnerability to which it is considered that the system cannot respond adequately.
Finally, liticaphobia is more common among people who have difficulties tolerating uncertainty, since these are processes in which a certain margin of unpredictability must be recognized and which tend to last for a long time. It is therefore a very aversive experience for those who have these traits, which is why they usually avoid it deliberately.
Treatment
Liticaphobia has an effective cognitive-behavioral treatment Given that the characteristics of the phobic stimulus make the development of an in vivo exposure difficult, it is advisable to design a program in imagination through which a series of scenes related to what is feared are presented (having previously ordered them according to the level of anxiety that the patient attributes to them). ), so that a progressive habituation can occur (from the mildest to the most severe). For this, some relaxation technique is also usually taught.
Addressing irrational beliefs linked to judicial contexts It is also usually important, since the person may harbor thoughts that do not fit the reality of the facts they are facing. Aligning what is expected with what could actually happen is a necessary step to alleviate feelings of restlessness. The combination of these two procedures is more effective than each of them alone.
