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, psychological, social and economic integrity in the face of situations of injustice.

Most states have judicial mechanisms aimed at restoring the balance between two parties when either has committed a misdemeanour or a crime over the other, including penalties in the civil and criminal fields.

All persons can have recourse to this system when they perceive themselves to be victims of a wrong, and we also have an obligation to respond to it when we have committed a breach of the rule of law.

Liticafobia consists of an irrational fear of situations of this type (contentious) , and which is much more frequent than it might seem. We therefore proceed to address its fundamental aspects.

What is liticaphobia?

Lithacaphobia (known as lithium phobia) is a term in which two words of classical origin, but of different origins, converge. The first comes from the Latin “litigium”, which in turn is based on the root “lis” (dispute or lawsuit), and the second (phobos) is a Greek heritage (fear or aversion). Thus, liticaphobia describes a phobia of a situational type, which is limited to the moment when one is part of the defense or the accusation in a trial.

The truth is that problems of a legal nature are very stressful situations for most people, even though they do not suffer from any anxiety disorder. The knowledge of having been prosecuted in an investigation or legal case always triggers mixed reactions, both for the victim and the offender. Thus, the former may fear that they will not feel acknowledged as having been harmed, and the latter may fear being subjected to an excessively severe court ruling.

For this reason it is difficult to draw a line that clearly distinguishes the point at which anxiety, which arises in a reasonable way in a context such as this, becomes a psychopathological phenomenon. In any case , dimensions related to the interference on daily life (prejudice in relevant areas) and the intensity or scope (disproportionate expectation with respect to the consequences that are expected as a result of the process) must be considered.

In the following lines we will deepen in this specific phobia, making special emphasis in the way it is expressed and in its possible causes. At the end, a brief review of the therapeutic strategies of application will be made.

Symptoms

The fear of litigation can be expressed in various ways . Below are some of its most common symptoms. People with this anxiety tend to experience more than one of them. Their anxiety is precipitated by situations that are related to ordinary civil and criminal disputes (from hearings prior to the last appeal); where they appear as part of any of the agents involved.

1. Pre-trial anxiety

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) to the time when the case ends. Throughout this period, the person imagines how events will unfold, adding dramatic overtones to his or her situation (content of the judgment, severity of the application of the law, etc.) and exacerbating the fear of the imminent future.

The symptoms usually become more pronounced as time passes and the day of the court appearance approaches . During this period negative thoughts of an automatic nature may arise (“they are going to destroy my life” for example), hyperactivation of the autonomic nervous system (acceleration of the heart rate and breathing, sweating, muscular tension, diffuse pain, etc.) and avoidance behaviours (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 a misdemeanour, which translates into an attitude of condescension even when there is an obvious violation of rights. It supposes an attitude that denies any potential offense to a third party , which inhibits the expression of opinions or acts that could evolve towards tensions that would merit judicial mediation. Thus, courtesy would become excessive and would clearly transcend the lower limits of assertiveness (passivity).

Fear of participating as a witness in civil or criminal proceedings

People with a diagnosis of litigaphobia are intensely afraid to participate in a legal process as a witness, even though they do not take a position in favour of either party (either as an accuser or as a defence). For this reason they tend to withdraw from the scene of an illegal situation they have witnessed, so that they are not called 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 inquiry of the judges and by the fear that the accused will decide to take revenge in some way on all those who contributed to the indictment process. In other cases, there may be fear that mere participation may degenerate into a situation of personal involvement, even though there is no evidence to support this idea.

4. Uncertainty about one’s ability as part of a jury

One of the most distressing situations for someone with liticaphobia is being called to sit on a people’s jury . If this (random) circumstance arises, they may try to invoke any legal loophole that allows them to avoid the task entrusted to them, since they perceive that they do not have sufficient critical capacity to decide on the innocence or guilt of a third party. They also fear that the accused may try to seek revenge at a later date.

It should be noted that the formation of a people’s jury is carried out by means of a public draw in even-numbered years, and that it assigns this responsibility for a period of up to twenty-four months (which are experienced with an overwhelming anxiety).

5. Resistance to filing complaints

In litigation, there is usually an evident refusal to process complaints in the face of facts in which the subject has felt harmed, due to the intense fear of participating in a process that would expose him to great emotional tension and that may last several years. Such a way of proceeding leaves him defenceless in legal terms, as he will not obtain any retribution for the injury received. The situation is worse in the case of an objective life risk (intentional crimes of physical violence, for example).

This is a classic avoidance mechanism for specific phobias, which can be associated with beliefs about the futility of the legal system or the fear that the lawsuit will impose a situation of outright unprotection (that police or other devices will not be articulated to protect the complainant). In any case, it has important consequences, as the person is deprived of the resource available in any democratic system to resolve conflict situations for which no agreement is reached (through mediation or during the hearing).

6. Distorted thoughts on procedural consequences

The moment that people with litigation have been unable to avoid participating in a trial, the fear shifts to its potential consequences. One of the most frequent concerns is the financial availability to hire a good lawyer , as well as to cover the costs of the process in case it ends unfavourably. This type of thinking, which is articulated over many months of tension, becomes significantly detached from the reality of the trial itself.

Thus, there may be fears that a civil case will somehow evolve into a criminal one, or that the defence itself will raise suspicions in the judge and turn against oneself. In serious cases, there is a fear of imprisonment, even if the offence committed is very minor and the penalty is of equivalent magnitude.

7. Distress in the face of double victimization

When one has been the victim of a particularly serious crime, which has involved the outbreak of considerable emotional damage, there may be a strong fear that the judicial process will involve double victimization . This concept alludes to the harm resulting from the system not creating or recognizing the magnitude of the harm, or diminishing its importance, or even diverting the responsibility of the act from the one who has suffered the direct consequences of it.

This fear is common in cases of harassment, abuse and rape; and it is not limited to the legal system, but also extends to the health care system or any body responsible for ensuring the care of those in such a situation. In some cases it is a factor that prevents the reporting of events that progressively erode the self-image and self-esteem , interacting with the rest of those previously mentioned.

Causes

The causes of lithiacaphobia are varied, and result from the confluence of a set of environmental and personality factors . Among the former, the possibility of having experienced personally (or in the family) a situation of a very adverse legal nature, with very harmful consequences for those who suffer from this specific phobia or for their relatives (extreme financial penalty, deprivation of liberty, etc.), especially during childhood, is noteworthy.

In other cases it is possible that phobic fear is associated in a secondary way to the potential consequences that could arise from a lawsuit. Thus, the fear would be the result of a feeling of vulnerability to which the system is considered unable to respond adequately.

Finally, lithiacaphobia is more common among people who have difficulty tolerating uncertainty, as 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 with these traits, and they tend to avoid it deliberately.

Treatment

Lithia 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 the 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 take place (from the slightest to the most serious). For this purpose, some relaxation techniques are usually taught.

Addressing irrational beliefs linked to judicial contexts is often also important, since the person may harbour thoughts that do not fit the reality of the facts he or she is facing. Aligning what is expected with what might actually happen is a necessary step to alleviate feelings of unrest.
The combination of these two procedures is more effective than each of them alone.

Bibliographic references:

  • Carpenter, J.K., Andrews, L.A., Witcraft. S.M., Powers, M.B., Smits, J.A. and Hoffman, S.G. (2019). Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anxiety and Related Disorders: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials. Depression and Anxiety, 35(6), 502-514.
  • Kakzkurkin, A.N. and Foa, E.B. (2015). Cognitive-behavioral therapy for anxiety disorders: an update on the empirical evidence. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 17(3), 337-346.