We were lucky to catch up with Rachel Dane (and Bruce Wiener) recently and have shared our conversation below.

Rachel, thanks for taking the time to share your stories with us today Can you talk to us about serving the underserved.

Since formation in 2013, Bridge to Justice has assisted nearly 3,000 clients who could not otherwise access legal services in family law, eviction defense, public benefits, domestic violence protection orders, and “red flag” protection orders. Our clients cannot usually access legal services because they are over-income for free legal aid yet cannot afford a market-rate attorney. Unlike criminal defense attorneys, there is no right to a free attorney in
civil cases. Additionally, Colorado Legal Services — the legal aid provider in Colorado — does not assist in post-decree family law cases (for example, modifications and enforcement of child custody orders and divorce decrees). Post-decree cases are often contentious and therefore expensive. By providing reduced-rate representation, we are able to help protect our clients’ legal interests without bankrupting them.

Rachel, love having you share your insights with us. Before we ask you more questions, maybe you can take a moment to introduce yourself to our readers who might have missed our earlier conversations?

I went to law school to become a feminist lawyer, but at the time, I had no idea what that would look like. Through internships and clinics, I learned that survivors of domestic violence are more likely to lose their custody case than non-survivor parties. A groundbreaking study published in the Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law examined family law cases over the course of ten years in the United States and concluded “that a mother’s claims of abuse, especially child physical or sexual abuse, increase their risk of losing custody”. Once I began representing survivors in family courts, I witnessed this phenomenon firsthand. In Colorado, family law courts commonly use court-appointed investigators to examine domestic violence allegations. One such investigator, Dr. Mark Kilmer, was recently interviewed by the national publication ProPublica and admitted “The #MeToo movement informs us that, you know, about 90% of all allegations are true, or something around there,’ he said. ‘In my forensic work, that’s completely flipped on its
head: About 90% of the allegations I hear are false.’ Kilmer emphasized the estimates are  based on his ‘own experience,’ not scientific research.”

Dr. Kilmer bragged in an email reviewed by Bridge to Justice that he was appointed on over 600 family law cases in Colorado before he was suspended from further appointment for the quote referenced above. Unfortunately, the attitudes he espoused continue to prevail in our court system virtually unchecked. I have observed victim blaming, myths about survivor behavior, and outdated attitudes towards victims as the norm in family law cases. For
example, while various studies have found that only between 2.1%(3) – 5.9%(4) of reports of sexual violence are false, family law courts only credit a mother’s claims of child sex abuse 15% of the time. A similar, yet somewhat less pronounced, disconnect exists with respect to allegations of domestic violence. When I was a new attorney, I had major crises of confidence. I didn’t see other attorneys practicing in ways I wanted to practice and I worried I made a mistake becoming a lawyer. I left the practice of law altogether. Then, after about six months of doing HR work, I received an email from a nonprofit I worked for in Washington D.C. My former supervisor told me that, based in part on a theory of the case I developed, a survivor I worked with finally won custody of her young child. I believe the opposing party was a very dangerous person. I felt enormous pride that I helped keep a little boy out of a dangerous home. At that moment, I decided I needed to return to working with survivors. At the time, I didn’t see any other lawyers practicing in a way I wanted to, so I started my own practice (The Survivors’ Legal Institute). I practiced solo for about five years while teaching myself how to be a lawyer. I would purchase court records from other firms’ cases to learn how they did things. I was truly on my own figuring out how to handle extremely difficult cases. While that was very stressful, I taught me how to trust my instincts and practice according to my internal compass. If I had followed the traditional path, I likely would have picked up a more cookie cutter/one-size-fits-all approach to my practice. While I received job offers over the years, I had not found an organization that I felt shared my unique approach to the practice of law. That is, until Bridge to Justice offered me a job in 2020. Bruce Wiener, the Executive Director of Bridge to Justice, created an amazing organization. We are able to, we utilize grant-funding to provide pro bono (free to the client) representation. When grant funding isn’t available, we’re able to represent clients at a severely reduced rate ($125/hour or $145/hour depending on the client’s income). The financial burden of litigation is one of the biggest barriers to justice for all parties. By
addressing that inequality, Bruce’s organization brings justice to hundreds of members of our community that would not otherwise be able to access it. I cannot overstate the importance of affordable representation for survivors.

We often hear about learning lessons – but just as important is unlearning lessons. Have you ever had to unlearn a lesson?

Gaslighting is a major part of litigation. Opposing parties, opposing counsel, investigators, even judges can bombard you with messages that undermine your feelings on a case. A good advocate is able to objectively evaluate these criticisms and admit when they’re wrong. More importantly, however, is an advocate’s ability to push through when they believe those criticisms are wrong.

Here’s an example:

Bridge to Justice had a client who fled an abusive marriage in another state. Her abuser continued to harass her after she fled to Colorado. Bridge to Justice represented her in her request for a Civil Protection Order, which would protect her from further harassment. The abuser fought the protection order, but the trial court judge entered it over his objection. Even though the client’s request was extremely reasonable (she was asking to be left alone and protected from further harassment), the abuser appealed the protection order claiming Colorado lacked jurisdiction to protect the victim. Bridge to Justice fought the appeal and won a landmark Colorado Supreme Court case, Parocha v. Parocha. In that case, the Colorado Supreme Court entered a unanimous decision that clarified survivors of violence can be protected from harassment perpetrated by an out-of-state abuser.

How do you keep your team’s morale high?

Being an attorney is hard. Being a divorce attorney is harder. Being a family law attorney working with survivors of domestic violence is extremely hard. At Bridge to Justice, we work together more than your average law firm. We meet twice a week and discuss our cases. We also ask each other to review tough pleadings before we file them. This collaboration allows us to provide better services to our clients (it’s not uncommon for another attorney offer important insight on a case that the first attorney missed), but it also helps us commiserate and support one another in difficult cases.
We make it clear that self care is not optional if you want to be a long-term advocate. For example, Rachel tries to take five minutes to check in with herself before a client call. She asks herself things like, “on a scale of 1-10, how anxious am I right now?” She’ll then do the same check in after the call. When you’re working with people experiencing trauma, it’s easy to absorb their emotions. Being mindful of what’s “your stuff” and what’s “their stuff”
is essential in managing this work.

Contact Info:

• Website: https://www.boulderbridgetojustice.org/
• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/BridgetoJustice