Indiana State Bar Association launches wellness committee

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Incoming Indiana State Bar President C. Erik Chickedantz is asking lawyers to get active as part of a new statewide initiative to promote health and personal well-being in the legal profession.

Chickedantz has appointed Donald R. Lundberg, a partner at Barnes & Thornburg and former executive secretary of the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, as chairman of the bar’s new Standing Committee on Wellness. Terry L. Harrell, executive director of the Supreme Court’s Judges & Lawyers Assistance Program, will serve as vice chair.

“There is something about lawyering that is especially stressful, and for many of us, our commitment to an active lifestyle is the first to go amidst pressures at work and busy schedules," Chickedantz said. “With the State Bar spearheading healthy activities at lawyer functions, we aim to educate the legal community about ways to incorporate healthy lifestyle changes.”

The new committee will encourage positive lifestyle changes such as increased physical activity, healthier eating and tobacco cessation.

“The ISBA is committed to lawyers – not just lawyers as law-practicing automatons, but as real people who need to feel good about themselves,” Lundberg said. “We hope the Wellness Committee will be a catalyst for a new focus on a healthy legal profession and a resource for lawyers to stand out as leaders for healthier communities where they live and work.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2008 Indiana had the second highest cigarette-smoking rate in the country. The CDC also reports that in 2009, only eight states had obesity rates higher than Indiana’s.

The committee will officially kick things off at the ISBA Annual Meeting in French Lick with a 5K Run/Walk on Oct. 21. To find out more about the ISBA’s wellness initiative and for a schedule of upcoming activities, contact the ISBA at 1-800-266-2581.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Lori, you must really love wedding cake stories like this one ... happy enuf ending for you?

  2. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  3. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  4. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  5. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?