<p>I’m an English major contemplating a possible career in environmental law or some form of public interest law. But I’m sort of worried that my personality isn’t exactly what others would say a suitable lawyer-type personality should be. I’ve never been the assertive, competitive type. I’m very introspective and I would say I’m very sensitive as well. I usually avoid conflict - I never put myself in the middle of things. But also my friends come to me with advice and I enjoy listening to them and trying to help if I can. But I never directly involve myself with conflict. According to the myers-briggs test (and I don’t know how much I should read into these tests, but anyway), I’m an INFJ. I’m highly idealistic and I always have been. I’m not a strong public speaker - I’m definitely more of the quiet type. I have strong opinions but I’m not sure I can make them heard, so this is obviously my biggest concern. Then again, there are other things about me that I think could help me in law. I enjoy analyzing information. I feel an urge to help people and I’m socially conscious. But people who know me well would probably characterise me as sort of a meek person, and people say lawyers have to be incredibly headstrong. I’m strong in my convictions but am not sure I could persuade others to see things my way. I would like to know beforehand if I’m not really cut out for this field because I sure don’t want to make the wrong decision. My parents think I’m more cut out for a career in medicine which is of course an entirely different field in which I could apply who I am and make a world of difference, but obviously I don’t want to choose a life course based on their opinion, so I’d like to explore things for myself. I’d like to know what you all think. Thanks!</p>
<p>It’s a common misconception that lawyers are always people who “love to argue.” It may be true in the sense that they enjoy crafting arguments and picking apart their opponent’s position, but not in the sense that they love shouting matches and trying to intimidate people. Additionally, most lawyers spend very little time in trials, so public speaking isn’t a huge deal and it’s something you’ll invariably get better at with practice. And you won’t be speaking extemporaneously; you’ll be well-prepared before you face questions from a judge, take a deposition or address a jury. So if you don’t feel like you could, right now, ad lib some Johnny Cochran-esque closing argument, don’t worry so much. Plenty of lawyers are not super-outgoing, or even socially competent (seriously; try meeting some of them).</p>
<p>Network and find someone that has similar interests and qualifcations as you but 10-15 years along in their career. Trail them for a day. Mentors are a very important way of learning about yourself and what you want.</p>
<p>Be a mentor <em>The More You Know</em></p>
<p>the fact of the matter is that many lawyers have what you could call very strong personalities. if you are not able to be assertive with clients, colleagues, and adversaries i think it could be a problem. now by assertive, i do not mean that you have to be argumentative, obnoxious, or act like you are always right. but it does mean having the confidence to assert what you believe is the “right” course of action and to back up what you say. sometimes the people that you have to be most assertive with are the ones supposedly on your side!! – ie the senior attorney who questions your conclusions, the client who isn’t thrilled with you answers.</p>
<p>also while public interest law is a very noble goal - realize that it is not as easy to get such jobs as you might think. also they don’t pay as well as law firm jobs (where the practice will be far less noble 
) – it can make it tough to pay off those law school loans. (yes some schools have a forgiveness program for those in the public interest, but look at the terms of those carefully before you assume it will be your way out of this problem).</p>
<p>i knew several people in law school who were interested in environmental law – they ended up rudely surprised to find that most of the job openings were with firms that represented the “bad guys.” and sometimes the higher level jobs in gov’t agencies or public interest groups go to the attorney who comes in after years of private firm experience, not the attorney who started there right out of law school.</p>
<p>the suggestion of finding someone who is doing what you think you want to be doing and learning from them is a great idea – too many people go to law school not really knowing what it will be like to be a practicing lawyer.</p>
<p>Law is an excellent career in part because there are many different career paths and jobs that you can pursue with a law degree. Very few lawyers do the kind of work that you see on Law and Order or shows like that. In addition, almost everyone that went to law school in my generation wanted to be a criminal defense attorney or a public interest lawyer, but few ended up in those fields. There aren’t that many jobs in these areas and they typically aren’t as rewarding (in money or results) as they seem from afar.</p>
<p>You did an excellent job analyzing your personality and which qualities are well-suited to a legal career and which are not. That, in itself, is a plus. No one is perfectly suited to be an attorney, and some of the best attorneys know their strengths and weaknesses and are better attorneys as a result. However, I don’t think your personality affects whether you will be a good lawyer as much as it affects whether you will be a happy lawyer. If your job requires you to do things you hate day-in and day-out, you probably won’t be happy. </p>
<p>Having said that, though, not many young people like to speak publicly or be the focus of attention - and those that do sometimes don’t like to do detail work, which is also a part of being a good lawyer. You can learn to speak publicly and to cultivate a public persona, although it may be very uncomfortable if you are truly introspective. FWIW, I think young people often describe themselves as shy and introspective when they are really young and inexperienced. Age and experience enable most people to feel more confident.</p>
<p>
This is the part of your post that sends up the most red flags for me. First, you will never know if you made the “right” decision so that’s a non-issue for me. I probably made hundreds of “wrong” decisions in my life but all we can do is the best we can. </p>
<p>Second, it’s ironic that you are considering careers in law and medicine, both of which require you to counsel people. I suspect the collaborative aspect of those professions appeals to you but basically it means that you will be specially educated to provide expert opinions to people who will rely on your judgment. In some respects, this is the same thing your parents are trying to do for you now. So no matter what career you choose, use this opportunity to take advantage of your parents’ insights into your character and their knowledge. It doesn’t mean you should do what they say just because they are your parents but, if they know something about the legal and medical fields, I urge you to seriously consider their advice. After all, they know you almost as well as you know yourself.</p>
<p>Thanks, that was really helpful. My parents don’t have experience with either law or medicine. What they know is likely much more than I know regarding either of these fields, but it’s still based on what they think to be true of lawyers, not what they know from personal experience. They are urging me to consider medicine because they know I’ve got this rosy, save-the-world mentality that they think would be squashed in the legal field. I for one think I would have to muster up a great deal of courage to pursue either of these fields. Medicine isn’t exactly for the faint of heart either. And a kind doctor may never be appreciated by his patients in the way that he would like. I am guessing that it takes a strong person to pursue any occupation that would serve other people. Right now I’m leaning towards law because I am more confident in my verbal capabilities than in the sciences. I lean more towards abstract, big-picture type stuff than hard logic.</p>
<p>Pink,</p>
<p>I’m impressed with your thoughtful response. Let me add a couple more thoughts that come to mind in reading your posts:</p>
<p>First, almost all of us start out liking abstract thinking more than hard logic because it’s easier. It takes work, time, experience, and even a few hard knocks to get comfortable with a career in law or medicine because neither one is an abstract profession. It may seem like law involves coming up with grand ideas and giving eloquent speeches, and sometimes it is, but usually it involves grinding detail work and long hours.</p>
<p>Second, ask you parents and don’t assume you know their reasoning. Have they always wanted a doctor in the family and do they see you as a modern-day Marcus Welby (in case you don’t know who he is, he was a TV character who was the ultimate caring, compassionate doctor)? If so, then I agree that these might not be the best reasons to become a doctor. However, it could also be that they know you won’t be happy in an adversarial career - and being a lawyer frequently means being a zealous advocate for a client against another person or entity.</p>
<p>Third, we can never have too many hard-working, kind doctors or lawyers. These traits may not be appreciated by every patient or client, but most will be very appreciative.</p>
<p>People who talk about wanting to become either a lawyer or doctor often make logical leaps to defend wanting to become both. Really people, the only reason is because you want to make money and those 2 professions are the only way you know how to so don’t try to lie to yourself.</p>
<p>Neither Law or Medicine is as abstract as you make it out to be. Both are huge grinds. It depends on you finding those moments in the grind where you enjoy yourself or can at least stand the career enough to keep continuing.</p>
<p>Go get an internship and get some real experience before descendin into abstract platitudes.</p>
<p>Lots of thoughts…</p>
<p>-A lot of people think that they are “suited” for law because they love to argue and think they are great at proving points to the people against whom they are arguing. They think that, since they are so opinionated and it’s so hard to convince them to see other points, that they will be great lawyers. This isn’t the case. In trials, it doesn’t matter whether you think you are right, or your opponent thinks they are right - it matters whether or not the judge or jury thinks you are right. I’m trying to say that there’s a lot of people who go into law but don’t understand that their opinion isn’t the final answer. </p>
<p>In any type of law, though, what you THINK doesn’t matter. What matters is what the law says, what your client did, what the opponent did, and who has the money & the guts to actually litigate through the issue.</p>
<p>-Re: being quiet/introspective. Yes, good lawyers can be quiet people. If you are writing contracts for people or working as a tax attorney or a wills & trusts person, you don’t need to be loud. Nevertheless, you might run into problems in two key areas:
- Socratic method in the classroom; and
- hiring.
Watch The Paper Chase and you’ll get an idea of what really good law professors do to their students. Yes, you can get through law school, be quiet, and not really like to speak in public, but it will be a long, rough three years. I would not recommend going unless you are either comfortable with those or have a strong desire to learn public speaking in a boot-camp type manner. (I’m in the latter group. Was called on the first class, first day, and shook for an hour and a half while I answered questions. No softball questions, even for the newbie 1L; the prof threw out a hypothetical and said, “In the time of xx case, how would this issue be decided?”)</p>
<p>The other thing is that being quiet can make (very judgmental) employers think that you are passive or unassertive. I know someone who was told that he would go through hell to get his foot into a firm, but they would love him once he was there. (Both turned out to be true.) I know someone else who was turned down at a callback because of a weak handshake.</p>
<p>There’s a lot of ego going around in the law. It’s not unlike high school. </p>
<p>-Obviously, your parents don’t have much experience with medicine; otherwise, they wouldn’t suggest it to an idealistic person. Most of what doctors can and cannot do is dictated by HMOs. Your educated medical judgment will be overruled, frequently, by bean-counters over at the insurance place. </p>
<p>Oh, yeah, and the malpractice suits & “defensive medicine” will be enough to drive any idealistic person mad.</p>
<p>-I disagree with Shiboing re: doctor/lawyer as being ways to make money. I’ve seriously considered both professions. Most of the thing is that I want to be in the sciences but not in a lab. That limits my options to things like doctor, patent attorney, or, um, yeah. Not much else. I’ve had some amazing accidents/health issues, and seeing bad doctors has made me realise that I can do a helluva lot better. Ultimately, though, that isn’t the profession for me (although many people have said that my temperment would be good for a doctor - someone even said that I should consider leaving law school and practice medicine), mostly because of what I’ve mentioned above. That’s my idealistic side. My economics/capitalist/conservative side is just as happy doing politics or patents. Different parts of my personality. </p>
<p>I’ve also considered (briefly) teaching, although the politics of that would make me mental. Also, doing the same thing over and over - no new challenges - wouldn’t work. </p>
<p>-I’ve appreciated my good doctors. I’ve cursed out the bad ones. There’s been a lot of both. I’m eternally thankful for the good ones, who have been accurate in their diagnoses, fought insurance companies to get (life-saving, sometimes) care, and done it with a lot of compassion for my situation.</p>
<p>Somewhere I read that most lawyers will never work a courtroom. Also that a law degree is in essence a general graduate degree, hence it can get you into any kind of profession in most industries (barring highly specialized ones such as engineering, laboratorial research, or medicine). Is this all true?</p>
<p>Yes, most lawyers don’t go to court. </p>
<p>Yes and no. A law degree does open a lot of doors, but
- i t’s not a good idea to go to law school without knowing what you want to do; and
- a lot of industries might not have that much use for the law degree and might not be willing to pay you for having it. </p>
<p>I know that a lot of law people go into insurance or real estate, where having the degree is a bonus. I’ve heard that, in many cases, having the law degree can make it difficult to get an unrelated job, as the employer won’t get much use out of your degree (many companies have in-house counsel for this type of thing and don’t have the ability to train new grads) and don’t want to pay you for having it when it isn’t of use to them. </p>
<p>Those are my thoughts. Now, there may be lawyers who aren’t practicing law who can be of more help on the latter topic.</p>
<p>That generalization is not true for several reasons. A law degree will open doors but only if you graduate from a top school. A lower tiered school will only open the door to you being a lawyer (also know that a law degree isn’t even necessary to practice the law in a state like California). </p>
<p>Even if you graduate from a top school it is likely you will have to practice law at a big firm in order to gain useful skills (only top students are desired by alternative employers such as McKinsey or Investment banking firms).</p>
<p>Most top schools don’t teach the technical aspects of law itself but rather how to think like a lawyer. Most of your training will be on the job, which is why doing well and getting that first well-paid position at a top firm is so important. They are the ones that will give you real experience. If you fail to land a good job in the first place, your skillset might not be quite as developed and it will be very difficult for you to lateral to a better firm since there are always new, smart law school grads each year.</p>
<p>Thats only for the top elite lawyers. If you care about the other types of “lawyering” available, the law field has a large variety of sub-specialities and you would do well to seek people currently in those fields and get some sort of internship.</p>
<p>I’m not sure that top law firms give you more experience than other jobs. In fact, the opposite may be true. If you are working for a top firm, you may spend your first years doing grunt work, “due diligence” type things. At a smaller firm, you get more responsibilities, more client interaction, and more interaction with the experienced partners. Furthermore, something like a position as a prosecutor will give you far more court time than you’ll see in your first six years in a firm. The prosecutors that I know all went to court within months of starting the job. If you want to litigate, that’s a great way to start your career.</p>
<p>Despite all this, it is difficult to lateral into a big firm from a small firm, or lateral into a big city from a small city.</p>
<p>Pink, you don’t seem to feel strongly about law or medicine as a career. Why not psychology, social work, teaching? From your description of your personality, those seem to fit better. You “could apply who you are and make a world of difference” in those fields. My daughter’s English teacher made a huge impact on her high school years and that continues now that she has graduated.</p>
<p>I’ve always found that lawyers coming out of the top law firms do receive excellent training and experience during their tenure at these firms. First, these top firms all have significant and detailed formal training on a wide variety of topics, so that their young associates learn over firm or departmental breakfasts and lunches a tremendous amount about the practice areas, industries, regulations/laws and current developments that they may encounter in their careers. In addition, while young associates may have significant responsibilities doing due diligence or discovery, this work forms the basis for much of what comes later in their careers. For example, in corporate practice, during due diligence a young attorney may encounter for the first time, for example, certificates of incorporation, stockholders agreements, SEC filings and credit facility agreements. Reading these agreements, learning what is important about them and figuring out how these agreements fit into the bigger picture are all very important learning exercises. Though I agree that a young litigator in a big firm will likely not see much time in coiurt, a young transactional lawyer is likely to have drafting and negotiating resopnsibilities very early on in a complex deal where tasks can be separated and delegated. Of course, in some sense, working 80 or more hours a week certainly gives you two years of experience for every one where young attorneys are working fewer hours. At smaller firms, young attorneys are rarely exposed to the kinds of complex transactions or given the formal training that big firm associates receive. </p>
<p>So, how does someone know if he or she is cut out for practicing law? My best advice would be to get in there and try it out before committing to three years of law school. Work as a paralegal for a couple of years, perhaps. Take an internship at a law firm or with a public interest law group. Talk extensively to practicing lawyers. If you are someone who is diligent, does well in school, likes to do research and is a stickler for doing things the “right” way, law may be a fantastic career path for you. If, on the other hand, you are someone who does well in school, but has always taken the easy road or tried to find the least challenging way to pump up your GPA (taking Rocks for Jocks or Chemistry for Poets instead of Geology 101 or Chemistry 101, for example), law may not be for you. You know yourself best.</p>
<p>I have the same reaction as ThreeKids–give some consideration to psychology/psychiatry/counseling, social work, teaching. Especially the first three, IMHO.</p>
<p>Pink, what do you really like to do now? What brings or has brought you the greatest satisfaction?</p>
<p>I have looked into psychology, and my fear is what my aunt (who was a clinical psychologist) has told me regarding the profession. The nature of the work is such that you end up internalizing a great deal of the conflict you are exposed to on a daily basis, and she said it soon becomes very difficult to separate personal from professional life for that reason. Burnout seems to be extremely high in this profession because the severe cases become a very real part of your life. She told me that psychologists in the profession are themselves urged to seek counseling after working with these types of cases.</p>
<p>I have always really enjoyed art and writing. I always find myself observing what is around me and I think creative expression in these kinds of outlets is very meaningful. People have suggested graduate programs in architecture to me, so I am looking into that too now. I am taking a near eastern architecture course and I really enjoy it. I never thought of architecture before, but I think it would be amazing to be able to shape the visual landscape the way architects do. They seem to be true visionaries. I guess I do not have to enter a profession that is directly humanitarian in order to have an influence over the lives of other people.</p>