Junior associate at Big Law -- help!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

YES. As the also-working wife of a mid-level big law associate, I couldn't agree more. Partners have stay at home spouses, which means they see no issue committing to fast (typically overnight or weekend) turnarounds of things the client doesn't even care about (especially easy since they aren't the ones actually doing the work!) The solution isn't more stay at home spouses of either gender, it's partners who understand that making everything a firedrill 1. makes any kind of work-life balance impossible and pushes out any associate who wants needs that kind of balance and 2. doesn't really buy you that much with the clients anyway.

Women have been graduating in greater numbers than men for more than two decades and there have been minimal changes in firm culture. Better to develop a plan that is based on reality. Law firm culture isn’t going to change because it is client driven and because big law partners can afford to have spouses who aren’t breadwinners. I say this as someone who spent over a decade in biglaw. There are other options for people who want more balance, those options can still be prestigious but will pay less.

[Anonymous]

OP, I'm sorry that you didn't fully understand the position before you took it. I spent 6 years at a firm, the last with a child. I actually enjoyed it, but not at all once I had a child. I am now happily in government.

1. Keep applying to USA Jobs. Even though I was happy most of the time, there were many 2am nights over the years in which I sent out resumes. It took about 100 before I actually focused, expanded my search greatly, was serious about it and got my current job, which I never would have considered years earlier. 6 months is nothing.

2. Keep your eyes open for any possibility. This will not be your long-term job, so try to learn as much as you can about other options while you are there.

3. Keep non-billables to a minimum, but then again, you can't avoid them completely. Just don't go volunteering for extra. No pro bono unless asked directly - you will have time in your future to volunteer, this isn't it.

4. If you aren't getting enough work, figure out why.

5. If you are turning down any work, stop. That is not permitted. You must do all work asked of you. Your schedule is irrelevant. If you need to go home for an hour to put your kids to bed, do it, but then get back on your computer and pull an all nighter if necessary (and I can't believe that it isn't necessary ever).

6. Be responsive at all times.

7. Understand that you are expected to work 7 days a week. Mirror the hours of those around you. For me, that meant that I worked 9:30-8 three n ights a week. 2 nights a week until at least 11, often more like 3am. And, anywhere from 10-24 hours on the weekend. Never a day off. I did a lot of non-billables during the day though. I know someone who worked from 6am to 5pm consistently, and it worked for her. She did go in every day at 6, and she also did some work at home occasionally after. That wouldn't have worked in my group, but she lasted a while and landed well, so it was good for her.

8. Reevaluate your child care. Stagger schedules. Get an au pair and a nanny. You make a lot of money, but child care is expensive, especially in the quantity that you need it. Don't kid yourself into thinking that you will be saving much now.

9. Understand part time isn't made for you. You can ask. They might say yes. But you are asking to be fired. And, you will be. Part time is for people like me - I was a consistent 2300+ hour biller for years with a very strong backing from powerful partners. I went part time, although still billing about 1800 and working a much more flexible schedule than you seem willing to do. But they knew they could count on me to never let anything drop, it would look bad if they didn't, and there was a chance that I would jump back in with even more force. You don't have any of that.

10. Staying at least two years will give you much more flexibility in the future. This too will pass. Hang on for the ride. And, whatever you do, don't get golden handcuffs!!! (ex. do not let your spouse downgrade positions right now)

Anonymous wrote:I'm a rising 3rd year at big law but just finished my first year at the firm because I did a clerkship. I have two very young childe ren (both under 5!). I'm drowning. What do I do

1. Ask for reduced hours? If so, 50, 60, 70, 80? What is ideal?
2. Go in-house?
3. Go to a non-profit?
4. Go to a smaller firm?
5. Tell my husband to quit his job (I noticed that the male associates with children have SAHM or part-time working wives)

It's gotten harder throughout the year and at this point, I am expecting to be fired even though I do good work. I just have too many other responsibilities and even with a full-time nanny, I need to be home at a decent hour at least 50% of the time to relieve her. DH does relieve her half the time too but we are both exhausted.

I'm on track for 1800 hours and the firm min is 2000 so I will not make my hours. I think the most hours that I can do and lead a normal life is 1600 (80%) because this year was very difficult. My firm also has mandatory training during the year and none of those hours count toward the billable requirement. And then there is an expectation to participate in recruiting and pitching -- neither count toward billable. Plus, there is pro bono and those hours only partially count. If all my work counted, I would bill 2500+ hours. I did not take vacation and I worked every day.

I need help navigating where I should be trying to go in the next year. I'm not in a rush but I do not want to be in this position next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm sorry that you didn't fully understand the position before you took it. I spent 6 years at a firm, the last with a child. I actually enjoyed it, but not at all once I had a child. I am now happily in government.

1. Keep applying to USA Jobs. Even though I was happy most of the time, there were many 2am nights over the years in which I sent out resumes. It took about 100 before I actually focused, expanded my search greatly, was serious about it and got my current job, which I never would have considered years earlier. 6 months is nothing.

2. Keep your eyes open for any possibility. This will not be your long-term job, so try to learn as much as you can about other options while you are there.

3. Keep non-billables to a minimum, but then again, you can't avoid them completely. Just don't go volunteering for extra. No pro bono unless asked directly - you will have time in your future to volunteer, this isn't it.

4. If you aren't getting enough work, figure out why.

5. If you are turning down any work, stop. That is not permitted. You must do all work asked of you. Your schedule is irrelevant. If you need to go home for an hour to put your kids to bed, do it, but then get back on your computer and pull an all nighter if necessary (and I can't believe that it isn't necessary ever).

6. Be responsive at all times.

7. Understand that you are expected to work 7 days a week. Mirror the hours of those around you. For me, that meant that I worked 9:30-8 three n ights a week. 2 nights a week until at least 11, often more like 3am. And, anywhere from 10-24 hours on the weekend. Never a day off. I did a lot of non-billables during the day though. I know someone who worked from 6am to 5pm consistently, and it worked for her. She did go in every day at 6, and she also did some work at home occasionally after. That wouldn't have worked in my group, but she lasted a while and landed well, so it was good for her.

8. Reevaluate your child care. Stagger schedules. Get an au pair and a nanny. You make a lot of money, but child care is expensive, especially in the quantity that you need it. Don't kid yourself into thinking that you will be saving much now.

9. Understand part time isn't made for you. You can ask. They might say yes. But you are asking to be fired. And, you will be. Part time is for people like me - I was a consistent 2300+ hour biller for years with a very strong backing from powerful partners. I went part time, although still billing about 1800 and working a much more flexible schedule than you seem willing to do. But they knew they could count on me to never let anything drop, it would look bad if they didn't, and there was a chance that I would jump back in with even more force. You don't have any of that.

10. Staying at least two years will give you much more flexibility in the future. This too will pass. Hang on for the ride. And, whatever you do, don't get golden handcuffs!!! (ex. do not let your spouse downgrade positions right now)

Anonymous wrote:


Jesus, what firm did you work at? And what law school did you go to? I'm so sorry you suffered so, but I wouldn't assume that everyone else must do the same.

OP, you need to talk to people at your firm. There are firms where part-time is truly acceptable, and the happiest (and most successful) attorneys I know DO in fact say no to work because they know how to set boundaries. Pro-bono hours often count partially towards billables and are encouraged for junior associates when they help you build appropriate skills (sorry if you mentioned this OP I didn't scroll back to check). Take all the information you read here and go get coffee with a senior associate AT YOUR FIRM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a horrid profession....

It's really not as dire as many on here make it sound.

I don't know, but I feel so sad for the kids. These little ones need you and want you. My daughter is 12 and she still loves when I come home - one hour after she gets home from school. I took the day off last week and was home when she got home. First thing she said was "Mom, I love when you are home and I can talk about my day with you".

Unless both you and your DH are home one hour after school, and there when she leaves for school (in which case - awesome, those jobs are hard to come by in the DC area), please stop with your sympathy.

Not everyone finds themselves in a position where both parents can work 9 am to 4 pm everyday.

We are talking to people who earn a very healthy income here. Thus seeing your kids at a minimum of an hour a day are career choices not choices of survival.

Totally agree. And I have zero reason to believe that someone working in big law can't see their kids a minimum of an hour a day!! It might be a challenge to BOTH drop them off at 8:45 and get home an hour after school lets out at 3:00. But the person who feels "so sad for the kids" is really confused about what big law jobs are really like (for those who are successful at them).

THIS. If the spouse is a high earning attorney, you can't cut back a little and make do on his/her salary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

boy you're just not that bright are you. The PP was talking about demanding jobs. She said that ideally a woman with a really time intensive job like BigLaw would have a SAHD OR work a really flexible job (like teaching or nursing).

It just doesn't work well when both parents have hugely demanding jobs and no family help nearby. I speak from experience.

/ physician mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

boy you're just not that bright are you. The PP was talking about demanding jobs. She said that ideally a woman with a really time intensive job like BigLaw would have a SAHD OR work a really flexible job (like teaching or nursing).

It just doesn't work well when both parents have hugely demanding jobs and no family help nearby. I speak from experience.

/ physician mom

Um, teaching is about the least flexible job there is.
- not a teacher

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

boy you're just not that bright are you. The PP was talking about demanding jobs. She said that ideally a woman with a really time intensive job like BigLaw would have a SAHD OR work a really flexible job (like teaching or nursing).

It just doesn't work well when both parents have hugely demanding jobs and no family help nearby. I speak from experience.

/ physician mom

Um, teaching is about the least flexible job there is.
- not a teacher

Teaching is not flexible, but it is fewer hours. Being an associate in big law can be, bizarrely, far more flexible than teaching, but it is longer hours. I certainly understood what PP meant by teaching or nursing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

I was a big law attorney, dh is a surgeon. I have seen zero people successfully juggle two hours intensive careers without one spouse downsizing their career or the parents outsourcing tbe childcare almost entirely. I have seen many men take the less demanding job or stay home. Having two parents work 60 hours plus a week is not compatible with a positive environment for kids.

I am the PP above. Yes I agree it is not compatible with a positive environment for kids. But what I think would be ideal is a work culture that supports 2 parents working more manageable schedules. It may not happen but that is where I think our culture should aspire, not forcing one person--male or female--to stay home. My dream is not for my husband to have to put his career aspirations aside so I can survive professionally (although ultimately we have to do that, but I wouldn't call that what women should aspire to).

you again. My god you live in a fantasy land. THIS IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. It's just never going to be the case that a BigLaw partner can be married to a surgeon and still be hands on involved parents without family help. Not gonna happen.

The actual, realistic thing that would help this woman was if her husband worked a part time or flexible job and could take on more childcare duties. OR they had a grandparent around to help with early evening hours after the nanny leaves or day care pickup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

boy you're just not that bright are you. The PP was talking about demanding jobs. She said that ideally a woman with a really time intensive job like BigLaw would have a SAHD OR work a really flexible job (like teaching or nursing).

It just doesn't work well when both parents have hugely demanding jobs and no family help nearby. I speak from experience.

/ physician mom

Um, teaching is about the least flexible job there is.
- not a teacher

you're not that bright either. Teachers go in early and leave early. The OP said she's struggling with early evening when she needs to stay at work but also needs someone to pick up the kids/make them dinner/etc. etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

boy you're just not that bright are you. The PP was talking about demanding jobs. She said that ideally a woman with a really time intensive job like BigLaw would have a SAHD OR work a really flexible job (like teaching or nursing).

It just doesn't work well when both parents have hugely demanding jobs and no family help nearby. I speak from experience.

/ physician mom

Um, teaching is about the least flexible job there is.
- not a teacher

you're not that bright either. Teachers go in early and leave early. The OP said she's struggling with early evening when she needs to stay at work but also needs someone to pick up the kids/make them dinner/etc. etc.

Why so bitchy? Teachers can't run out midday like many other jobs. That's what I meant. They often can't even pee. Chill.

[Anonymous]

New to this thread and not even sure if op is still checking but my two cents - as a former associate with young kids (though I didn’t have kids until I was more senior, around seventh year):

I would focus less on hours and what your firm’s “requirements” are. Focus instead on what gives YOU more experience/makes YOU more marketable for an in house or government job. It’s every man/Woman for himself/herself in big Law, and either you are in it for the long haul (trimming to make partner, etc., which was not appealing to me at all), or you’re in it for the shorter term — ie, to save money, pay off debts, get good experience.

If you have a good judicial clerkship under your belt I’m sure that will be helpful. Network and develop your skill areas. It really helps to specialize these days — energy, telecom, whatever. Focus on getting the experience you need to get out of there.

As a mom of young kids, now in government, just here to say there’s ought at the end of the tunnel...

[Anonymous]

Light at the end of the tunnel, not ought. Oops.

[Anonymous]

Agree. Please specialize, stat. Hang in there, make lots of money, and work on an exit strategy. Remember, you don’t need to be a perfect associate. Build up some skills that you can take elsewhere. If you’re not planning to try for Partner, don’t sacrifice your life going above and beyond. After my kid, I became perfectly fine with being less than perfect.

I had my first child as a fourth year and was a single mom (gasp!). The ONLY way I survived (and am now a 9th year) is because my mother is a retired saint and kept my daughter full time the first year. It didn’t matter that I needed to work a 16 hour day or leave for a week or two, she took care of everything. By age 1.5, I was dropping off at daycare in the morning, my mother would pick him up from daycare, and then and I would get him every evening around 7 pm. I would work every morning before work and every evening after dinner. I also frequently worked on weekends and asked my mom to watch the baby on weekends too. I could NOT have kept this job without her help. And now I have a husband who is also a major help and awesome.

Good luck. So many of us have gone through this. You’re just going to be tired, exhausted, and feel like a terrible mom and a horrible lawyer. It gets better in a few years.

[Anonymous]

This sounds just like 18th century indentured servitude. Someone loans you a tremendous amount of money to start a life and then you spend 7 years paying it back with your labor. The only difference is, back then you were free after 7 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This sounds just like 18th century indentured servitude. Someone loans you a tremendous amount of money to start a life and then you spend 7 years paying it back with your labor. The only difference is, back then you were free after 7 years.

If it takes you 7 years of biglaw salary to pay back your loans you're doing something wrong.