<p>[News:</a> New Scrutiny on Law School Data - Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/10/06/plans_announced_to_sue_15_law_schools_over_placement_data]News:”>http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/10/06/plans_announced_to_sue_15_law_schools_over_placement_data)</p>
<p>I’ve noticed in the last 2-3 years that a lot of ancillary professionals in the big law firms (practice support directors, marketing directors, human resources directors, and particularly information service directors) have JDs.</p>
<p>My personal belief is that law school is a wonderful thing and if you can afford it without crippling debt, then it’s only a blessing. Floridadad is absolutely right that in law firms, the career trajectory is “up or out” and most people get to around 35, have been making good money for a few years, and are suddenly unemployable.</p>
<p>One of the most promising attorneys in my firm is leaving to become a nurse practitioner.</p>
<p>Actually, I think most of the law student had a misconcept, they think practice law is all technical. You need to study hard on this and that. In my view, lawyers are sales persons. Lawyers are no different from realtors, insurance agents, mortgage brokers, CPA or even bankers. Sales and street smart are everything for a lawyer and the law schools, however expensive, do not teach.</p>
<p>Those became top lawyers in a firm are good sales person, they are not technical. Obama is one of the top lawyer, he sold you his believes, that is important. Whether he is succeeding is another story. Think about it!</p>
<p>^^ You are incorrect. It really depends on the field of law how “technical” it is. Much of my practice (in-house) required reasoning, business judgment and diplomacy. There were times I needed technical legal knowledge (statutes, regulations, etc) and a few times (negotiations) when I needed to be a sales person. It’s a mix. If you need to bring in business, yes, you need to sell yourself and your firm. If you are doing tax law, you better be pretty technical!</p>
<p>My prior firm did scientific patent work. Many of the attorneys had PhDs in the hard sciences.</p>
<p>^^I was not talking about lawyers working as employees, I was talking about TOP Partners in national or regional top law firms. They have to be the top sales persons to bring back the mega contracts to feed those slobs… Think BIG…</p>
<p>I am a graduate of KPMG and was working in their WW headquaters, I interacted with the division heads of the firms and I have not seen them fill out any tax forms in the 10 years of being employeed there.</p>
<p>Yeah, but this thread is discussing young people who are about to become lawyers. They won’t become TOP partners or headas of firm for decades, if ever, and in the meantime, they may indeed need technical expertise to work in the field they want (or in the one where they can find work).</p>
<p>Sales and street smarts might be assets, but especially when starting out they will actually also need a basic knowledge of law, which is exactly what they teach in law school.</p>
<p>How do you think those top guys came about to where they are now? Do you think they just jump into the the stardom from no where? Yes, they were techinical in the beginning, but as soon as they entered the arena, they differentiated themselves with telent in sales and marketing. I beleive that is the only way to survive in the profession yet NONE of the schools are teaching that.</p>
<p>Actually, the Public CPA companies have the most attritions in any profession. We at the KPMG headquaters project that 1/3 of the first year hires will be leaving the company after the first 12 month, another 1/3 will be leaving in their 2nd year and by the time they are in the 3rd year they will be in the superviory position and they had better be able to start selling the service. The managing partners of each office has to write a yearly report to show which supervior and above has the potential to be promoted to partnership and the line is always drawn on the sales and marketing side. If they are not of partnership quality in the 4th or 5th year, they will be showing the door.</p>
<p>^^ I think this thread is about lawyers.</p>
<p>I got my BSN, worked for 6 years at Vandy, then went back to law school. Have worked both careers continuously since. I would suggest mediation (alternative dispute resolution) for your son. Any degree will do, but I highly discourage “pre law”. Pick something. Psychology, anything. Or the FBI after law school, their special agents don’t need to pass any bar to work the job. I would have been off to Quantico if I hadn’t been married and older.</p>
<p>I am doing the happy dance since my daughter decided not to go to law school last week.
She is currently in Washington DC at an internship with a lawyers group. This non profit has lots of law school interns —she is the only undergrad (senior) intern. Her big boss had a great chat with her about her future. I think he realized that he can’t “save” the kids already in law school, but he could save her. So yes, Mr Big time lawyer talked her out of going to law school.
He explained, that ultimately, IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. It just costs way too much for an uncertain future. And that 20 years out of law school he is still paying off his student loans…which were only $40,000 at the time. The reality of $150,000+ in debt without a guaranteed high paying job to repay it is just crazy. And yes, I believe with her high GPA she could have cracked a T14 school.</p>
<p>So yes those with a JD do not have to practice law. But those graduating from law school today do have to pay back BIG LOANS. She is no trust fund baby so what ever grad school she chooses is on her dime. I am glad she is thinking about all of this seriously.
She loves what she is doing at this law group—absolutely hands on work that is making a difference in peoples lives. Just a great opportunity. So now to figure out what to do with her life? Clearly she is great with people and detailed oriented—so she too will look for jobs in and around the law–without being a layer.
The journey continues…</p>
<p>Ilovedcollege, OP here. What kind of responsibilities has your D had at the internship? What was her undergrad degree in? (or will be in) Very curious!</p>
<p>
This doesn’t add up. Unless this ‘big time lawyer’ is making peanuts, which seems doubtful if he’s been a big time lawyer for 20 years, he certainly should have been able to pay off that $40K in loans well before now since that’s only $2K/year (not accounting for interest - another reason not to stretch it out). It shouldn’t take more than 20 years to pay off unless he simply is stretching it out as long as possible or he has other big financial issues. My guess is that in that timeframe he’s probably already paid off multiple new cars that sum to well over the $40K. Given this, I don’t think this statement he made has any relevance.</p>
<p>Abasket- she will graduate with a double major in International Relations and Spanish. She is working on a prisoners rights project. Reviews and responds to correspondence from prisoners requesting help from this organization. DC jails are run by the feds so she is dealing with clients all over the country. Actually she went to prison last week to interview an inmate. (Trust me…not a mother’s dream.) She actually translated some prison related manual info into Spanish today! Very interesting stuff with opportunities for her daily activities to change a little bit of someone’s life. </p>
<p>UC dad-- this big time (my description- not his I am sure) lawyer works for a NON PROFIT. As in, only exists because of donations and lots of lawyers doing pro bono work. So I am thinking those 6 figure salaries are not his. If I misquoted his #'s I’m sorry…but it hardly matters. Where I come from $150,000 in loans is a lot of money. That is a house in most parts of the country. And that will take time to pay back. </p>
<p>And I respectfully disagree…debt is always relevant.</p>
<p>^^ Debt is relevant, but usually necessary at times (house, sometimes a car, sometimes college) and not always something to be avoided at all costs (but I can tell you that I’m debt averse myself). My point was that if a professional has been paying on a $40K loan for 20 years or more there’s something unusual about it. Sure, if a person decides to take on some debt and then gets a low paying job and decides to stick with that low paying job for over 20 years, then they shouldn’t be surprised or complaining about it - it was their decision. But they shouldn’t advise a new person to not pursue an avenue they might have been stongly considering only because of their own decisions. I can see the validity of him suggesting to your D to not take on a $40K loan (or today’s equivalent) and then work for 20 years at a very low paying job since paying the loan back will be difficult but that advice isn’t unique to lawyers but to imply that his situation was the norm (since he used himself as an example) and therefore advise her against the entire profession is what I consider to have no relevance.</p>
<p>It’s also not a given that the debt to become a lawyer will always be $150K since I think virtually all law schools are somewhat (but not much) less than that and some are substantially less. It’s possible for some students to get full scholarships and partial scholarships at some decent law schools so it’s possible to have virtually no debt. If someone had their eye on law, but didn’t want to carry the debt, then they could at least apply and see if they end up with any offers.</p>
<p>I think that kids are wise to inform themselves about a career in the law if it interests them, and that includes being aware of the potential debt, the job situation, and what they hope to pursue in their career. To look realistically at the schools where they are likely to be accepted, to explore the possibility of scholarships, to get to know the varied types of law and of practices, is a good idea. Law school isn’t for everyone, even in a good economy. However, to state that no kid should pursue law school is, frankly, just silly. </p>
<p>There are options for kids to go to law school without ending up in $150,000 in debt. If a student can get into a good law school, and they’re a good student, they will have options upon graduation. I agree that incurring a large debt isn’t wise, for law school or for undergrad, but that doesn’t mean that no one should be considering law school. </p>
<p>Ilovedcollege, I hope that that lawyer didn’t do your D a disservice with his advice. I hope that he actually knows what her grades are like, her LSAT score if she has taken the test, what type of law she’s interested in, what schools she was looking at, etc. If that wasn’t the case, then he was being irresponsible, in my opinion. There’s nothing wrong with getting the opinion of practicing lawyers but to allow one individual to change your mind completely is probably not a good thing.</p>