Future of the Profession?

<p>How do you think the future looks for lawyers?</p>

<p>Yesterday I was talking with three older, very well paid and well established lawyers that work for my fathers company and they were saying how they wouldn't advise anyone to go into their profession. They were saying that the unemployment rate among lawyers is rather high and the number of lawyers in unsatisfactory jobs is extremely high. One was hinting to the idea that the pay is going down and there are so many new graduates that entry level jobs are extremely hard to find. All agreed that they got into the field because they wanted to "better society" and "fight for justice" but have now become burned out and are in it for the money. I imagine that this is the case with many lawyers these days. My mom is in the healthcare field and it seems like doctors are saying the same thing. Is it that these traditionally high paying/high status fields just don't hold the same status as before? </p>

<p>Lets note that a law degree can lead to many different types of jobs but so can many other degrees... I'm not speaking of the value of a law degree but the possibilites within the law field.</p>

<p>...ideas?</p>

<p>For every burnt out lawyer, there are 3 that are churning away, happily plying their trade. Job opportunities are cyclical, and while the money is good, there are far more lucrative professions out there.</p>

<p>The prestige factor is curious; certainly it is not what it once was. Most people respect the effort and intellect it takes to become a lawyer, and some fear the power a lawyer wields in a society that is ruled by laws. On the other hand, lawyers are generally seen in a negative light because they often represent unpopular causes, or bring lawsuits that seem frivolous on the surface. Lawyers become identified with their clients (Johninne Cochran -- O.J. Simpson) and must sometimes wear the “stink” of their clients. To be sure, there are some terrible individuals practicing law out there. But, IMHO, most of the public disdain of lawyers is a result of an uniformed public that does not understand the role of a lawyer in the legal system.</p>

<p>So, become a lawyer because you want to, not because the pay is good, or because society will love you – because the money probably won’t be as good as you like, and if you become a litigator you can be sure that at least half the people in the court room will hate you!</p>

<p>CD, right you are about not understanding the role of lawyers.</p>

<p>In the criminal side, it's quite simple: our legal system is based on the Old English trial by combat. Lawyers are the hired champions. From the adversarial process, truth will emerge.</p>

<p>There. I hope I've cleared that one up for everyone. Next?!</p>

<p>For every burnt out doctor, there are 3 that are churning away, happily plying their trade.
Seriously, as Shakespeare implied, to kill all the lawyers would be the first step in eroding all of our freedoms. I can tell you from personal experience that the lawyer sitting at your table is the absolute salt of the earth. The system, and therefore the future of Law as a career, is as solid as rock.</p>

<p>With our society the way that it is, there is no doubt that the law profession will ever go away but will it loose the prestige(which leads to salary, number of jobs, etc) that it has had in the past?</p>

<p>These are all very good posts. I really liked TheDad's :), "next?!" I do believe atturknees play a fundamental and indispensable role in today's world. I haven't looked at statistics, but there are tons of lawyers being churned out now than before, and this will boost supply, lead to lower wages, and some unemployment. However, for some, that's where the dough's at. What other career can offer what the law and medicine can, though they be in decline, both in terms of wages and public opinion? These professions are some of the oldest and most important ones in the earth's history. The profession is undoubtedly going to be around for even more centuries. This being said, there isn't much to choose, otherwise. Maybe become an accountant, but I can't think of many professions that are as important or well-regarded as the law and medicine.</p>

<p>Remember that one Simpsons episode where Marge needed a lawyer and Lisa said "Don't worry mom, todays law schools churn out 3.7 lawyers for every American." Classic!</p>

<p>A wise man once said that noone likes lawyers until you need one.</p>

<p>Someone once told me that lawyers are disliked because half of the time they are fighting for the losing person.</p>

<p>
[quote]
In the criminal side, it's quite simple: our legal system is based on the Old English trial by combat. Lawyers are the hired champions. From the adversarial process, truth will emerge.

[/quote]

Absolutely wrong! This quote may be correct regarding civil cases involving allegations such as negligence or breach of contract. Criminal Prosecutors, however, have duties that go well beyond merely winning (a la trial by combat). Prosecutors have duties to the public (yes, criminals are part of the public) to bring appropriate and reasonable charges against criminal defendants. For example, a Prosecutor is prohibited from bringing a charge not supported by probable cause. A Prosecutor must disclose the existence of evidence that tends to negate the guilt of the accused. If all that mattered was winning, these standards would not apply to prosecutors.</p>

<p>I would add as a plain old citizen that the Grand Jury & the very political nature of most prosecutors is of great concern to me.</p>

<p>As an attorney that does a great deal of criminal appellate work, I share your concern Dr. Although, as someone noted, a prosecutor's job is to seek justice -- not victories -- such is not often the case. Prosecutors routinely "overcharge" defendants to better their bargaining position in seeking guilty pleas. And, in the cities I am familiar with, prosecutors misuse the grand jury system when a particular defendant is just "too hot" to touch.</p>

<p>But, not all are like that. I have done this work long enough that I have also dealt with prosecutors that do live up the highest ideals of their position. As in most instances, sadly they are the exception, rather than the rule.</p>

<p>The older you get, the more experience you get and the more you are valued. (in most cases.)</p>

<p>Ok, I will remember that when my kids try to put me on a ice flow!</p>

<p>cd: I think you would share my enjoyment of Chris Erskine's syndicated column.</p>

<p>Dr, I have not read him (her), I will look for the columm</p>

<p><a href="http://iparenting.com/dad/1003.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://iparenting.com/dad/1003.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Thanks Dr.</p>

<p>Isn't there a Bar society which regulates the supply of lawyers? An over supply of lawyers will never kill the profession, it will simply lead to ups and downs. The availablitity of work for lawyers depends largely on the economy---there are many professions where this is the case...</p>

<p>I don't think lawyers will ever go away, and they will always have a level of prestige attached to them. As long as the law is comlex, as it will always be, lawyers will be needed and will thus have much leverage...</p>

<p>Regarding the first post: "All agreed that they got into the field because they wanted to "better society" and "fight for justice" but have now become burned out and are in it for the money."</p>

<p>...this makes the two options sound antipodal, but they are not. Essentially, going into law to "better society" and for "the greater good" and going into law for the money is rooted in the same mistake: being an altruist and collectivist instead of an egoist and individualist. Yes, this is perfect Ayn Rand material... You should only go into law for selfish reasons, in the purest sense of the word: if you love it, and IT as an end, not as a means to something else, like prestige (money) and "justice." It sounds so cliche but it is true. If you don't, you will inevitably "burn out," and will not be happy.</p>

<p>On a national level, the ABA is strictly a voluntary organization that has no control over the number of lawyers practicing. On a state level, the state bar assoc. control on the means of become a lawyer, i.e, the bar exam, but ultimately the number of prospective lawyers who pass the bar become lawyers. I have never seen empirical evidence that state bars actually control the number of lawyers produced in a given year. I think, to a large extent, the economy dictaes the number of lawyers practicing.</p>

<p>Or- in the case of California, the bar exam is very hard and the passing rate is low.</p>