The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: JeffK
Is going back to Law an impossibility???
[8D]

This made me laugh.

Ironically, this past week I've been helping somebody work through a legal situation. Not as an official lawyer, mind you, as I'm no longer an active member of the bar. But doing three hours of legal analysis with some opinion and advice reminds me just how much I detested being a lawyer. I sometimes have nightmares that I'm practicing law. Our legal system may be the best possible system on earth, but some folks do not thrive in adversarial environments.

[Cribtop]

80% of practicing attorneys would change professions if they could. I was one who never wanted to be in the profession in the first place, so I hear you.

It didn't have to be this way. I enjoyed much of the work, but billable hours requirements left me without a vacation for 7 years. Lame.

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: JeffK
Is going back to Law an impossibility???
[8D]

This made me laugh.

Ironically, this past week I've been helping somebody work through a legal situation. Not as an official lawyer, mind you, as I'm no longer an active member of the bar. But doing three hours of legal analysis with some opinion and advice reminds me just how much I detested being a lawyer. I sometimes have nightmares that I'm practicing law. Our legal system may be the best possible system on earth, but some folks do not thrive in adversarial environments.

But being a lawyer isn't always "thrive in adversarial environments"... Most of the times i live our job as a way to help people to solve their problems...and, i can tell you, there's no bill that can make me happier (and proud) than a client who, thanks to your advice or work, has solved his problem.
I believe there are different kinds of lawyers... there are those who always seek for a fight, for an opponent...who always push the client towards a trial...and there are those who sees their profession as a way to make clients' life easier, which is as to say a way to AVOID fights and arguments

[Canoerebel]

My opinion of billable hours: 
 
 

 
 

[Canoerebel]

2/18/42
 
NoPac:  All the chickens (transports) have returned to the roost (Seattle).  The carrier TFs are at SF, with some combat ships upgrading for a few days.  I'm still stuck with a bunch of F3F and F3FA fighters for now.  John is indeed reinforcing Umnak.  This will be an exercise in futility, either because I'll bypass the island or invade it with overwhelming force.
 
Pacific:  Peaceful.
 
John aint got no schwerpunkt!  SigInt that IJA 6th Div. is aboard transports bound for Rabaul.  This is further indication that John has his divisions spread hither and yon.  I don't think he can gather a credible major invasion force anytime in the near future.  He can commit a division or two here and there, but nothing that would cause true angst (the kind an Allied player gets when India or Oz or Hawaii or ConUS is on the line.
 
DEI:  One of the forlorn hopes cargo ships bound for Singers got sighted as soon as she entered the Java Sea.  Her days should be number in the low single digits.  But I gotta give it the ol' college try, right?
 
India:  An xAK trying to provide succor to Port Blair is anhilited by a DD TF.  But I gotta give it the ol' college try, right?  The Allied defenses in NE India are beginning to take shape.  I've always run like a scalded dog when my opponent engaged in a major invasion of this area, but not this time.
 
China:  MLR intact.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

2/18/42
 
NoPac:  All the chickens (transports) have returned to the roost (Seattle).  The carrier TFs are at SF, with some combat ships upgrading for a few days.  I'm still stuck with a bunch of F3F and F3FA fighters for now.  John is indeed reinforcing Umnak.  This will be an exercise in futility, either because I'll bypass the island or invade it with overwhelming force.

Pacific:  Peaceful.

John aint got no schwerpunkt!  SigInt that IJA 6th Div. is aboard transports bound for Rabaul.  This is further indication that John has his divisions spread hither and yon.  I don't think he can gather a credible major invasion force anytime in the near future.  He can commit a division or two here and there, but nothing that would cause true angst (the kind an Allied player gets when India or Oz or Hawaii or ConUS is on the line.

DEI:  One of the forlorn hopes cargo ships bound for Singers got sighted as soon as she entered the Java Sea.  Her days should be number in the low single digits.  But I gotta give it the ol' college try, right?

India:  An xAK trying to provide succor to Port Blair is anhilited by a DD TF.  But I gotta give it the ol' college try, right?  The Allied defenses in NE India are beginning to take shape.  I've always run like a scalded dog when my opponent engaged in a major invasion of this area, but not this time.

China:  MLR intact.

Which college would that be? Neptune College? Davy Jone's? Deepwater?

[Capt. Harlock]

80% of practicing attorneys would change professions if they could.

That's interesting -- from what I hear, 50% of today's Law students are going to get that wish whether they have articulated it or not. The prediction is that there will be jobs for only half of the students currently in the system.

[Cribtop]

IMHO our too many lawyers and not enough STEM graduates problems are directly related. Around 10th grade, math and science get hard. Johnny thinks, hmm, what can I do that pays well and doesn't involve math? Answer - Lawyer!

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

80% of practicing attorneys would change professions if they could.

That's interesting -- from what I hear, 50% of today's Law students are going to get that wish whether they have articulated it or not. The prediction is that there will be jobs for only half of the students currently in the system.

I know first-hand what the situation is here in the TC.

Paralegal grad: two years post high school. Little to no debt. Starting wage about $13-$15/hr with no benefits. Five years in, age 25, no debt, salary about $40-45k, with benefits. Ten years in, if good and have kept up with education and paralegal technology, easy to make $65-70k in metro.

Law school grad: seven years post high school. Law school debt often in six-figures. Starting salary about $45-50k with benefits unless employed at top firm. Partnership track 5-10 years. If fail, on the bench at age 30-35 with few prospects. Average MN lawyer earnings last year I looked them up: $68,000.

[princep01]

Moose, does that average include all law grads (even the ones not practicing law) or is it limited to persons actively practicing?
 
I was fortunate enough to practice in a firm that did not have a set billable hour requirement and a 5-7 partnership tract that allowed 65% of our 45 lawyers to make partner.  Nonetheless, my sentiments are very similar to those of CR and Crib.  I did very well, but really got burned out and stopped practicing at 55.  Now I work for the hated IRS full time, seasonal, with full benefits, never take a care one home with me, receive no calls in the night from upset/desparate clients, don't have to hustle for clients and take 2 months a year off just to loaf around.
 
Not a bad gig for someone that realized soon enough that life is alot more than money.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: princep01

Moose, does that average include all law grads (even the ones not practicing law) or is it limited to persons actively practicing?

Not sure. Probably a bar association survey, so I'd guess more the latter.

Biggest problem here is that MN is an odd state in that there is really only one metro. It has four ABA law schools and about half the state populaiton. It's where the good restaurants, public schools, theaters, and international airport are located. Law grads dump out into the local economy by the hundreds every year and want to stay, more so if they have a high-status spouse who wants a sexy job. Same problem we have with doctors and dentists out-state. There's a need, there's a living, but most of them don't want to live in the woods or look out at prairie.

Funny to see all the unhappy lawyers and ex-lawyers. I consider the second biggest mistake of my life was not going to law school and going to B-school instead when I got out of the Navy. I think I would have liked being a lawyer.

[Cribtop]

Hmm, I am surprised at those low salary figures, Moose. I used to say "as a lawyer, I was only happy two days out of every month." [;)]

Then again, we were doing hot shot high tech early stage intellectual property law in Austin during the Internet boom. I was lucky to leave the racket when I did. My buddy who stayed said they all became bankruptcy attorneys with the tech crash. Yikes.

[corbon]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I sometimes have nightmares that I'm practicing law. Our legal system may be the best possible system on earth, but some folks do not thrive in adversarial environments.

But being a lawyer isn't always "thrive in adversarial environments"... Most of the times i live our job as a way to help people to solve their problems...and, i can tell you, there's no bill that can make me happier (and proud) than a client who, thanks to your advice or work, has solved his problem.
I believe there are different kinds of lawyers... there are those who always seek for a fight, for an opponent...who always push the client towards a trial...and there are those who sees their profession as a way to make clients' life easier, which is as to say a way to AVOID fights and arguments

Greyjoy, thats the beauty of being an american. You can insist that you have the best systems on earth despite having terrible results from them and miserable lifestyles.

Newsnight, or whatever it is called, from HBO, for all its faults said it beautifully. Its (America) not the best place on earth, but it can be. Things can happen there that would never happen, or work, in Italy, right? (Thats your stoping ground, yes? - my brother lives there, so I know of some of the issues, and also many of the great things from my visits). Or in Singapore, where I live, or in New Zealand, where I'm from.

[Canoerebel]

Like any small town lawyer, I had the incredibly gratifying experiences of helping people in desperate or important situations. There are some cases I look back on with tremendous satisfaction.

Like most of the sentiments expressed here, though, I found the law "a jealous mistress" that required too much time, too much attention, and too much adversarial stuff (I love debating; I love exchanging ideas; I love fighting for "the right," but I grew to detest ill will). But there was one case that, for me, broke the camel's back....

Back around 2002, I had burned out on practicing law after about 16 years of general practice in a great town. I wanted to address my attitude, so I decided to look for more opportunities to do pro bono work (I was already doing a fair bit). Lo and behold, a nice, elderly grandma who worked at a restaurant owned by friends had an important legal matter and couldn't afford a lawyer. Her 20-something daughter, who was a mess (drugs, alcohol, promiscuity, no job, no life) had given grandma custody of a baby girl. The grandma was doing her best to raise the child when, out of the blue, daughter decides she wants her daughter back. Grandma knows its not for the best and decides to contest the case.

So, I agree to represent grandma at no cost. Here's a case I can sink my teeth into - try to work with the biological mom or the court to keep that child in a safe environment. Bio mom refuses to be reasonable and so we go to court to decide if she can get back the child she had voluntarily given to grandma. The law is against us, but the facts are with us; as every lawyer knows, that can be an acceptable situation.

Long story short, I do my job at the hearing. I do it well. Bio mom takes the stand. I cross examine her vigorously, eliciting testimony that proves she is unfit in every way to have custody of her child. Clearly, that infant girl is better left in the custody of grandma.

....and, all the while, I know that the last thing that horrible excuse for a young mother needs is some stranger humiliating her (in a good cause, of course) in front of an entire courtroom. What she needs is good people to surround her and do their best to help her. I was doing the worst thing I could possibly be doing. And that severed the last shred of desire I had to practice law.

I was doing right. Most lawyers strive to do what's right. Some lawyers really like the profession. But at that point I was done.

[Canoerebel]

2/19/42 and 2/20/42

NoPac: I think John is reinforcing Umnak, Adak and Amchitka. No signs of the KB, drat it. A USN sub torpedoed an IJN fleet sub near Adak.

Pacific: QE is down to 16 SYS damage. She'll be ready to go in a few days. The American carriers likely depart SF tomorrow.

Oz: That enemy unit one hex from Geraldton has retired. Good! I'm glad John didn't sniff Geraldton, because there I have four CD units and not much else posted. The assembly line for aircraft heading from Capetown to Oz is under way.

Moose Nuggets in the DEI: The "forlorn hope" transports trying to sneak their way to Singapore are still afloat, one nearing Pontianak and one about to depart Soerabaja. John has good detection levels, but there's a small chance he is dismissing them. The series of MLs that have recently departed Singers to make it to the east may be throwing him off. He sees ship icons, but assumes each is a harmless "gnat." Anyhow, it was the Moose who suggested I try something to get some supply to Singers (which is now down to 8K). Thanks Moose (whether or not it works). A Dutch sub put three torps into an AO north of Balikpapan (that's two AOs in ten days).

India: Oops, thought I ordered the Oz division transports at Socatra to weigh anchor and move to Cochin to unload there and begin prep for Cocos Island. Instead, they unloaded at Cocos. So they'll begin prep now and then load for the trip to India (if John were to go crazy and deep to invade Socatra right now, wouldn't 500 AV come as a shock?).

China: MLR looks good.

[ny59giants]

While Dan was dealing with the legal side of the grandparents raising their grandchildren, I deal with the emotional consequences of the parents not being there for their children. I just saw a 14 year old boy over the weekend whose mother failed to show up at court to take custody back from the grandmother after 8 years. He had been depressed for years, but now had become suicidal and had to be sent to a psychiatric hospital. While America has multiple issues to deal with, the status of the family is a big issue from my counseling perspective.

[Canoerebel]

Wow, Mike, thanks for offering that. While we lawyers fight (or suffer angst), it's the people caught up in the legal system who are often the real sufferers.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Wow, Mike, thanks for offering that. While we lawyers fight (or suffer angst), it's the people caught up in the legal system who are often the real sufferers.

I wonder if John Edwards feels any remorse? The system with his single handed effort with dramtic portrayals of babies screaming for air and through a series of very lucrative [for him] PI law suits :
Campbell v. Pitt County Memorial Hosp.
(Pitt County, NC, 1985)

Griffin v. Teague, et al.
(Mecklenburg Co. Superior Ct., NC, 1997)

Wiggs v. Glover, et al.

Cooper v. Craven Regional Med. Ctr., et al

Dixon v. Pitt County Memorial Hospital
(Pitt County, NC)

Sawyer v. St. Joseph's Hospital

(http://news.findlaw.com/newsmakers/john.edwards.html)

Corrlelates with the changed the rate of Cesarean births in the United States:

"Cesarean rates increased for births to mothers in all U.S. states, and by more than 70% in six states from 1996 to 2007" (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db35.pdf, p. 1)

Certainly mothers giving birth at an older age can be a confoudning factor, but I propose these lawsuits changed EBP of the judgement call risk to the mother of the proceedure vs. risk to the baby. In the emotion of the court room it is very hard to reason with facts. So ... there is an increase in Cesarean births at a greater short term risk to the mother [infection/bleeding] and long term utrine scaring, utrine rupture ....

On a much bigger scale .. the concept of a "Just Culture"

The single greatest impediment to error prevention in the medical industry is “that we punish people for making mistakes.”

Dr. Lucian Leape
Professor, Harvard School of Public Health
Testimony before Congress on Health Care Quality Improvement
(http://www.health.ny.gov/professionals/ ... ulture.pdf, slide 4).

Ahhh Lawyers ..

The consequinces of transfering wealth from one economic sector to another is far more than simple "punishment of mistakes" .. the direct and indirect consequinces make a less safe and more costly healthcare system ....



Ok back to the AAR [8D]

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Like any small town lawyer, I had the incredibly gratifying experiences of helping people in desperate or important situations. There are some cases I look back on with tremendous satisfaction.

Like most of the sentiments expressed here, though, I found the law "a jealous mistress" that required too much time, too much attention, and too much adversarial stuff (I love debating; I love exchanging ideas; I love fighting for "the right," but I grew to detest ill will). But there was one case that, for me, broke the camel's back....

Back around 2002, I had burned out on practicing law after about 16 years of general practice in a great town. I wanted to address my attitude, so I decided to look for more opportunities to do pro bono work (I was already doing a fair bit). Lo and behold, a nice, elderly grandma who worked at a restaurant owned by friends had an important legal matter and couldn't afford a lawyer. Her 20-something daughter, who was a mess (drugs, alcohol, promiscuity, no job, no life) had given grandma custody of a baby girl. The grandma was doing her best to raise the child when, out of the blue, daughter decides she wants her daughter back. Grandma knows its not for the best and decides to contest the case.

So, I agree to represent grandma at no cost. Here's a case I can sink my teeth into - try to work with the biological mom or the court to keep that child in a safe environment. Bio mom refuses to be reasonable and so we go to court to decide if she can get back the child she had voluntarily given to grandma. The law is against us, but the facts are with us; as every lawyer knows, that can be an acceptable situation.

Long story short, I do my job at the hearing. I do it well. Bio mom takes the stand. I cross examine her vigorously, eliciting testimony that proves she is unfit in every way to have custody of her child. Clearly, that infant girl is better left in the custody of grandma.

....and, all the while, I know that the last thing that horrible excuse for a young mother needs is some stranger humiliating her (in a good cause, of course) in front of an entire courtroom. What she needs is good people to surround her and do their best to help her. I was doing the worst thing I could possibly be doing. And that severed the last shred of desire I had to practice law.

I was doing right. Most lawyers strive to do what's right. Some lawyers really like the profession. But at that point I was done.

Professor Morris Massey had a thesis that nobody permanently changes their behaviour unless they have a "significant emotional event". For an addict, this usually occurs when they hit "rock bottom", and decide that their life really is more important than their addiction. [Those who do not make this decision are doomed anyway.] Your attack on the addicted mother may have been the push she needed to realize that if she wanted to have a life with her child, she needed to first get clear of the addictions and other lifestyle habits. Either way, adults are accountable for what they do with their lives and you just called her on the failure to be a true mother. The situation called for it and you must put aside your empathy for the child's and the mother's sake.
I had similar feelings when laying off people who were in jobs they hated [and did poorly] but stayed because they "needed the work". In most cases they found work they enjoyed much better, often at better pay. And my workplace became better for everyone too!

[artuitus_slith]

It's not just lawyers who come to this conclusion Canoe. I am professional fisherman, I have commercial fished, charter fished, recreational fished and occasionally private guided for over 14 years in the Destin area. One of my favorite types of fishing has always been long-lining. Despite its limitations, long lining is much more environmentally sound than any type of net fishing, and with the new 'weak hook' development, should become even more so. However, there was one aspect of long lining that finally turned me off of ling lining, and that was shark fishing. Don't get me wrong, populations of many sharks in the Gulf of Mexico are doing pretty well comparatively, and I believe culling of the population isn't always a bad thing. But I became disillusioned with shark fishing when I was told to keep every shark we caught, no matter the size, or whether it was alive or dead. This type of fishing is unsustainable, and the fact is a 2 or 3 foot shark has no real monetary value to me as a fisherman. The fins aren't big enough to be sold as fins and instead are sold as 'chips' at a much lower value than a full size fin, and there is virtually no meat on a 3 foot shark after we dress it. Compound this with the fact that we only get 50 cents to a max of 75 cents per lb (excluding mako sharks-they sell for around 2.00-275 lb, but are not caught when long lining coastal waters). After being 'reprimanded-fancy talk for cussed out) several times for releasing smaller sharks alive, I told my captain that I was done fishing with him. He called me several times over the years to see if I would come back, but since that day I have never long lined again. It was tough to say on to him too, since when he first hired me I was living in my car, and working with him helped me get myself back on track, and i respect him immensely (he is hands down the best swordfisherman I have ever met), but I just can't go back. Even recent changes in shark long-lining laws can't change my mind. I do miss it from time to time, especially the comradarie you experience on a long line boat, but not enough to change my mind.

I didn't mean to change your subject or derail the thread, I just wanted to state that lawyers aren't the only ones who give up what they like/love due to the realization that what they are doing may be hurting someone or something else.