<p>i'm a girl, 24 now, planning to work 2 years before attending law school, would that be a bit late to enter a highly competitive academic environment.
and more importantly, when i graduate, i would be 29.
r there many 29 yrs old first year associates in big laws?</p>
<p>Well, the average entering age for many, many schools is 24-25. So if we generalize and figure that half are coming straight out of undergrad and are about 22 years old, then the other half are 26-28! </p>
<p>So...obviously that's not the world's best lesson in averages, but you can see that 27 is definitely not too old to start. There are also some schools (Northwestern comes to mind as one top example) that cater to older students and those with a few years of work experience (on the flip side, some schools are known for lots of straight-out-of-undergrads. BU, for example, comes to mind).</p>
<p>27 to start is fine (I did). Many are that age when they start. Many law schools favor students who have been out of college and working a few years. And yes, many are 29 when they start working in large law firms (I actually didn't start until 32 because I was a judicial clerk for an appellate court judge for two years after law school).</p>
<p>DS was 25, had worked nearly five years. He was at a top law school with a couple of folks in their 30 and late 40s, including two doctors. Maturity and work experience made up for UG grades. He knew what he wanted when he went back to school, recognized the financial sacrifice he was making, and resolved to do well. He did extremely well, clerked on the Fed Circuit afterwards, and then went to a firm. Is no longer there, but is doing interesting work that combines what he did pre-law school with his legal background, gets to travel, and loves his job.</p>
<p>Wow I'll be 27 by the time I enter law school and your thread made me feel old. I don't consider "old", in terms of starting a new career, untill someone is in their 40s.</p>
<p>Stats I just read from Boalt (UC Berkeley), for the record: </p>
<p>Average entering age - 25
Age range of 1L students - 20-42
Percentage of 1Ls above 30yrs - 13%</p>
<p>For most students, regardless of their age at matriculation, law school will get old long before they do.</p>
<p>Now for a less facetious answer: if it's solely a question of how long you will have to amortize your education expenses, a year or two (or four) extra at the beginning won't make that big a difference. I have always recommended that people take a break of some length between college and law school.</p>
<p>Do keep in mind, though, that the longer you wait after college before starting law school, the greater your opportunity costs will be. You'll probably be giving up a bigger salary at 27 than you would have at 24. </p>
<p>There was a former kindergarten teacher in my section at Boalt (in her forties, winner of that year's "Joanie Caucus Fellowship" who told me a year after graduation that she was making about the same salary as a first-year associate (at a smallish firm in the suburbs) that she would have been making by then as a teacher.</p>
<p>She practiced law for about twenty years, then retired.</p>
<p>It wasn't simply a question of money, though. She really wanted to be an attorney. </p>
<p>Should we attach some meaning to your choice to begin your post with the words, "I'm a girl"? I know a significant number of women attorneys who have chosen to take an extended hiatus from their legal careers to raise children. (My wife is one of them, incidentally; I also know a significant number of women attorneys, including my wife's sister, who have chosen not to take an extended hiatus from their legal careers after having children.)</p>
<p>If you do think you'd like to take an extended break for child rearing, that may affect your timing. You might find it easier to re-enter the job market if you take a hiatus after five or six years than you would have after one or two. Some people have children before they go to law school; some become parents while they're in school.</p>
<p>29 is not old.</p>
<p>I think the consensus here is correct, that 27 is probably not too old to consider law school. However, the subtle point made about the opportunity cost issue is likely to be more prevalent over time and for some law school applicants.</p>
<p>Law school is very expensive for many students, and salaries are NOT keeping up with the cost, so the investment value of a law degree may decline over time. Adding on the lost opportunity cost relative to a younger applicant, and at some point, its not worth it.</p>
<p>I think obama was in his late 20s when he entered hls.</p>
<p>Another late starter here--I entered law school at 26. Time in the working world was a plus for me--I really appreciated being in school, instead of being burned out and I realized how much free time I actually had--although during my first year of law school, during my waking hours I was either in class or studying--really. I limited myself to 5 minute phone calls, and even tried to spend as little time as possible in the bathroom.</p>
<p>Fortunately, I calmed down by my second year--but all the work paid off, because I graduated tenth in my class.</p>
<p>DH found that the discipline he developed in the workforce was extremely valuable in law school. In HS and UG, he sailed through on sheer brains and adrenaline without having to work too hard. He treated law school as his job, and worked 9-5 every day, whether in class or studying, and one day on the weekends. He never let himself get behind on the workload.</p>
<p>We still had a life, and he did extremely well in law school.</p>
<p>I am in a similar bind. I am 26 soon, and am thinking of law school [in the UK]. I have a BA and MA so far, and have worked a bit here and there.</p>
<p>Its 1yr for the conversation course and then another year to qualify as a solicitor or barrister. Double for part time route (so 2/4 years in total). Realistically, I wouldnt be able to start until I was 27 (next fall). </p>
<p>Would 29 thus be too old to start in a competitive field with people who so often will have 4-5 years under their belts by then?</p>
<p>27 and d29 are not too old. Especially since people are working longer and will be expected to in the future. It was not that long ago that people retired at 65 and then it went to 67 and now many are working well past 70. You are young, young, young and in a lucrative field like the legal field(if you are successful), you should do fine.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>27, to be exact.</p>
<p>In my law school class, there were two guys in their 50’s. They had made their millions in one career and wanted to start another. There were also plenty of divorced moms, or empty nester moms. I did notice that the older law school students were more motivated than the youner ones.</p>
<p>To me, you are only a kid. Do it if you want. You won’t be alone.</p>
<p>I’m a 1L, started at 28. While there is a rumor that some BigLaw firms see my age as a liability because they assume I’ll want a family life instead of 2600 billable hours, to my knowledge this has never been confirmed by anyone in a hiring position. Meanwhile, my resume has more than education and activities to fill the white space.</p>
<p>That being said, how you spend the time in between undergrad and law school matters. There is a big difference between meaningful jobs with increasing responsibility and accomplishments and working part time as a fry cook. It doesn’t have to be remotely law related, but make it meaningful.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, to be fair, they’re never going to confirm such a rumor. As a case in point, age discrimination is endemic within the tech industry, yet no employer is foolish enough to actually admit to it, for they know full well that if they actually said that they indeed discriminated against older candidates with families, they would be sued into oblivion. If they choose not to hire you, you have no real way of determining exactly why.</p>
<p>Age discrimination is only actionable if it’s directed against people who have reached the age of 40.</p>