I have been asked on occassion what I thought about age and law school. Well, here are my thoughts:
1. Chronological age and maturity do not mean the same thing.
2. Life experience speaks volumes both for law school and for the profession of a lawyer. Whatever you can bring to the table from your previous life will prove invaluable.
3. Law schools are letting students in to law school at too young an age, on average. Law students should have to have a certain number of years of 'real life' experience. Too many jump from high school to undergrad to law school to lawyer. They don't know what real work is like, and many of them jump ship because they learn that this kind of 'real life' is not what they had counted on.
4. You are almost never too old to attend law school. I know some great lawyers who started their legal careers in their 40's and 50's and are loving it, and are really good at what they do. I have seen some keen minds at 60, but they will likely have difficulty in entering the job market.
5. Young lawyers tend to be taken advantage of by law firms. The partners are very aware that they can encourage these young prodigies to work unbelievable numbers of hours - they know that they do not have families, that they are incredibly keen to make partner, and that they will do anything to prove themselves. They do not have as many friends or colleagues that they are tied to, and they are vulnerable.
What do you think? Prove me wrong.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You are probably right that it is best for law students and new lawyers to have some life experience, but who is to say how much life experience any given 22-year-old has? One may have as much as any 50-year-old while another may only have that of the average 10-year-old, but, several aspects of life experience cannot be communicated on paper or through a standard application. So, as a current undergrad that fully plans to enter law school at the age of 22, I have a bit of a problem with people assuming I have no life experience just because of my age (something most people do, VERY falsely).
Hi Adam,
still in the process of skimming through your first book and used it for research on a work assignment I received for my summer job. I think having some students at both extremes of the age spectrum entering law school would be ideal. It makes for a interesting, and diverse first year class. I was accepted to law school at 19 and chose to defer it to pursue another opportunity for a year. Sure when you're comparing someone who's 20 to someone who's 35 there would be undoubtedly a difference in 'life experiences'. I don't regret deferring my admission, I'm 'slightly' older when I did start law schoolbut did that one year make that big of a difference in how ready i was? Nope, not really.
With regards to the crazy long hours during my first few years as an associate? I'm glad that I will be young, and free from other obligations. I'm glad that I won't have to feel guilty about turning down job because of other responsibilities I may have at home. All that extra work will undoubtedly have its advantages (more work = more experience = better lawyer (hopefully!)). Like it or not, new lawyers 23, or 32 years of age are going to have to pull the occasional all nighter...I'm positive my body will take it much better now than when I'm 30. Ask me again the 23 year-old me in two years when I'm a new associate trying to meet deadlines at 3 am...and I might change my mind though ;)!
I'll be looking out for your new edition Mr. Letourneau!
Post a Comment