Login
Overcoming disproportionate interruptions faced by female judges
Amelia Loughland initially set out to replicate a US study assessing the volume of conservatives interrupting progressive justices. Her study of the High Court of Australia, though, demonstrated quite a different trend.
Tasha Levy
Ms Loughland joins host Jerome Doraisamy on this episode of The Lawyers Weekly Show to unpack the findings of her research paper, “Female Judges, Interrupted”, which suggests that the volume of interruptions faced by female judges on the High Court of Australia far exceeds that of their male counterparts.
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
She comments on the nature of the interruptions, provides possible explanations for the discrepancy and suggests some potential strategies to help the profession overcome this imbalance.
If you like this episode, show your support by rating us or leaving a review on Apple Podcasts (The Lawyers Weekly Show) and by following Lawyers Weekly on social media: Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.
If you have any questions about what you heard today, any topics of interest you have in mind, or if you’d like to lend your voice to the show, email
Plus, in case you missed them, check out our most recent episodes:
• New obligations under annualised salary changes
• The aftermath of the Lawyer X royal commission
• Lessons in resilience from an Olympian-turned-lawyer
