When someone is harmed-whether by an act of violence, a catastrophic car crash, or an accident caused by someone else's negligence-the civil justice system should offer them more than just a path to compensation. It should offer safety. It should offer dignity. It should understand that for many, the act of seeking justice is as psychologically complex as it is legally challenging.
In Part 1 of a 3 part series, the question being asked is are survivors of sexual abuse at risk of exposing personal information without court safeguards?
The legal system is often a minefield for those navigating trauma, especially survivors of intimate partner violence, sexual assault, or other interpersonal harms.
The Ontario government is proposing drastic changes to how civil case are done. This proposal, while aimed at increasing efficiency and reducing costs, raises serious concerns about whether the justice system is taking trauma-informed principles seriously.
Ontario's Phase 2 Consultation Report to the Civil Rules Committee introduces a controversial proposal within its Pre-Litigation Procedure (PLP) that among other contentious requirements, mandates that before launching a civil suit, the plaintiff must provide a package of personal medical, psychological, and financial records to defendants with the intention is to give defendants an opportunity to assess the claim's merits and consider settlement.
However, when the defendant is self-represented, this transfer of deeply sensitive information happens without legal safeguards, privacy controls, or institutional oversight. Even more troubling is the reality that the unrepresented defendant may be:
- The convicted criminal in related criminal proceedings (e.g., sexual assault);
- A former intimate partner, potentially still posing a safety risk;
- A person with a history of coercion, manipulation, or violence.
In such cases, the proposed procedure risks becoming a form of state-sanctioned re-traumatization that places plaintiffs at emotional, psychological and even possibly physical risk.
The Current System: Imperfect but Safer.
Under Ontario's existing rules, disclosure of private records happens after a claim is filed. Once the court is engaged, rules govern how and what must be shared. For instance, no one, not even an unrepresented defendant is allowed to use the information obtained in the legal proceeding for any other purpose other than that proceeding. The information cannot be shared, put on the internet or otherwise used outside of the legal case.
As well, if a plaintiff needs to withhold sensitive content or redact psychiatric records, motions can be brought to ask the Court permission to remove such sensitive information. The process, while still intimidating, includes legal safeguards and judicial oversight.
Contrast this with Phase 2's approach. It forces early, unsupervised disclosures with no safeguards over private information or even access to protective orders. It expects plaintiffs to negotiate directly with the other party-sometimes without a lawyer-before any legal structure is in place.
That isn't transparency. That's exposure.
Who Is Affected?
The harm of this reform isn't limited to victims of sexual abuse, although they may be among the most deeply impacted. Phase 2 affects all personal injury plaintiffs:
- The senior who suffers a hip fracture after a fall on unsafe property;
- The working parent whose life is changed by a rear-end collision;
- The immigrant worker dealing with both physical injury and language barriers;
- And yes, the survivor of interpersonal violence, struggling to remain anonymous.
All of these individuals will now be asked to hand over their medical files and financial documents to a person who may be hostile, uninformed, or even dangerous.
Trauma-Informed? Not Even Close.
A trauma-informed process takes into account the psychological vulnerabilities of the person navigating it. It offers choice. It ensures safety. It reduces unnecessary exposure to power imbalances.
Phase 2 does none of that.
Instead, it asks people to re-live their trauma, collect sensitive files, and deliver them directly to the party responsible-all without the protection of a court process. That's not just flawed. It's reckless.
Legal Re-Traumatization Has Real Consequences.
Legal professionals may underestimate the harm this can cause. But the evidence is there. Dorahy et al. (2015) have shown that re-traumatization during legal proceedings increases psychological distress and, in some cases, suicidal ideation or even suicide.
That's not an abstract concern. That's the human cost of procedural reform without compassion.
What Could Be Done Instead?
If Ontario wants to be a leader in civil justice, it must rethink this approach. A few key changes would go a long way to a implementing a Trauma-Informed system:
- Optional participation in PLPs for survivors of violence, with a simple exemption process;
- Use of neutral intermediaries or legal representatives to manage pre-claim disclosures;
- A clear threshold before private information must be disclosed (e.g., once the claim is issued);
- Development of confidentiality protocols enforceable even before litigation;
- Incorporation of trauma-informed training for legal professionals and judges implementing PLPs
Other jurisdictions have implemented flexible, trauma-aware timelines without sacrificing judicial efficiency. Ontario can, too.
Final Thoughts.
In our practice, we see what trauma looks like in the legal process. We see how hard it is for clients to share their stories, even when the law is designed to help them. Forcing them bare their stories-without legal protection and before they even issue a court case-turns civil justice into another site of harm.
The justice system must do more than process files. It must uphold values. It must protect people.
We cannot allow a desire for speed to outweigh the need for safety. We cannot design systems that prioritize perceived efficiency and convenience over plaintiffs' healing and safety. And we cannot ask survivors to trade privacy for access.
Justice should not begin with exposure. It should begin with respect.
If you are a survivor of sexual assault or abuse, our team of trauma-informed Toronto sexual abuse lawyers are here to help. We will listen to you with compassion and empathy and your initial meeting with us is always a confidential free consultation with no obligation.
If you are concerned about these proposed changes, you can submit feedback to Ontario's Civil Rules Committee. Speak up. The people who depend on this system-who are brave enough to ask for justice-need your voice.
References:
- Dorahy, M. J., et al. (2015). *The impact of adversarial legal proceedings on adult survivors of child sexual abuse*. *Psychiatry, Psychology and Law*, 22(3), 404-417.
- Herman, J. L. (1992). *Trauma and Recovery*. Basic Books.
- Ontario Civil Rules Review Phase 2 Consultation Report (2025).