Accommodation Nation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

Medical insurance does often provide coverage. My kid's testing was covered because it was connected to a neurological disorder.

You realize it takes with it together parents with good insurance to do this, right? I paid $5K for my daughter’s testing because it wasn’t covered.

Being in the military? I'm not saying every insurer covers it or in every instance. But it's not like we got fancy jobs to get coverage.

You think there might not be a correlation with parent wealth and diagnoses resulting in accommodations? If you think that, you’re wrong.

I never said that? I said when you have certain underlying conditions, such as a neurological disorder, you can often get coverage from medical insurance. That includes Medicaid. If you don't have that medical tie, you'll probably be stuck paying out of pocket.

Well, that’s the point. The types of diagnoses a lot of these kids have are not going to qualify them for Medicaid. I did psychoeducational testing and we found low processing speed and ADHD but no learning disabilities. I’m sure I could get my daughter extra time on tests if I wanted to but haven’t gone that route yet. We paid out of pocket like a lot of people do.

Do you know how Medicaid works?

Why would I need to? My insurance didn’t cover the testing so I paid out of pocket.

Medicaid is an income-based program (i.e. for low-income people). So people without any disabilities can qualify for it. They can also get coverage for neuropsychological testing in defined circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

Be sure to let your colleagues know you refuse to participate in any joint defense group with David Boies.

Why do you keep bringing up Boies? He didn’t get extra time on tests, yet he succeeded anyway.

“Boies learned to compensate for his disability by developing outstanding powers of concentration and a keen memory.”

“The way Boies processes written information is by first skimming a text to pick out the salient points. Then, by slowing down and focusing exclusively on these, he is able to analyze them critically and grasp the essence of the text. It is this unique ability that enables Boies to handle the large volume of reading required for his work, and that helped him excel in college and law school, despite his poor performance on timed tests.”

https://dyslexia.yale.edu/story/david-boies/

Because he's almost universally recognized as one of the best litigators of the modern day, he struggled in school, and continues to struggle to read quickly to this day. The ADA and IDEA didn't exist when he was a kid because he's too old. He has obvious deficits and extraordinary strengths. You think people who need accommodations (for which he would have qualified had been born a few decades later) would mean he couldn't possibly be a great lawyer.

Feel free to check out younger folks on the success stories page who were identified at earlier ages.

Yet he didn’t need extra time to succeed. You are no Boies.

I never said I was David Boies? You're just being an a**hole.

If David Boies got accommodations (to which he would be entitled) would you refuse to work with him? There are plenty of successful doctors, lawyers, and business executives with disabilities that impose real deficits. As the ADA and IDEA get older, more have received accommodations and special education services. If they are competent professionals, they are competent professionals.

So your shining example is a man who overcame his disability to get where he is and now you want him to be the posterboy for people who need accommodations? Something he didn’t use or need to get where he is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

Medical insurance does often provide coverage. My kid's testing was covered because it was connected to a neurological disorder.

You realize it takes with it together parents with good insurance to do this, right? I paid $5K for my daughter’s testing because it wasn’t covered.

Being in the military? I'm not saying every insurer covers it or in every instance. But it's not like we got fancy jobs to get coverage.

You think there might not be a correlation with parent wealth and diagnoses resulting in accommodations? If you think that, you’re wrong.

I never said that? I said when you have certain underlying conditions, such as a neurological disorder, you can often get coverage from medical insurance. That includes Medicaid. If you don't have that medical tie, you'll probably be stuck paying out of pocket.

Well, that’s the point. The types of diagnoses a lot of these kids have are not going to qualify them for Medicaid. I did psychoeducational testing and we found low processing speed and ADHD but no learning disabilities. I’m sure I could get my daughter extra time on tests if I wanted to but haven’t gone that route yet. We paid out of pocket like a lot of people do.

Do you know how Medicaid works?

Why would I need to? My insurance didn’t cover the testing so I paid out of pocket.

Medicaid is an income-based program (i.e. for low-income people). So people without any disabilities can qualify for it. They can also get coverage for neuropsychological testing in defined circumstances.

How great for low income people. What about the rest of us?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

Medical insurance does often provide coverage. My kid's testing was covered because it was connected to a neurological disorder.

You realize it takes with it together parents with good insurance to do this, right? I paid $5K for my daughter’s testing because it wasn’t covered.

Being in the military? I'm not saying every insurer covers it or in every instance. But it's not like we got fancy jobs to get coverage.

You think there might not be a correlation with parent wealth and diagnoses resulting in accommodations? If you think that, you’re wrong.

I never said that? I said when you have certain underlying conditions, such as a neurological disorder, you can often get coverage from medical insurance. That includes Medicaid. If you don't have that medical tie, you'll probably be stuck paying out of pocket.

Well, that’s the point. The types of diagnoses a lot of these kids have are not going to qualify them for Medicaid. I did psychoeducational testing and we found low processing speed and ADHD but no learning disabilities. I’m sure I could get my daughter extra time on tests if I wanted to but haven’t gone that route yet. We paid out of pocket like a lot of people do.

Do you know how Medicaid works?

Why would I need to? My insurance didn’t cover the testing so I paid out of pocket.

Medicaid is an income-based program (i.e. for low-income people). So people without any disabilities can qualify for it. They can also get coverage for neuropsychological testing in defined circumstances.

How great for low income people. What about the rest of us?

Tricare and FEHB also cover neuropsychological testing in many circumstances. The issue whether you have a qualifying medical condition, typically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

Medical insurance does often provide coverage. My kid's testing was covered because it was connected to a neurological disorder.

You realize it takes with it together parents with good insurance to do this, right? I paid $5K for my daughter’s testing because it wasn’t covered.

Being in the military? I'm not saying every insurer covers it or in every instance. But it's not like we got fancy jobs to get coverage.

You think there might not be a correlation with parent wealth and diagnoses resulting in accommodations? If you think that, you’re wrong.

I never said that? I said when you have certain underlying conditions, such as a neurological disorder, you can often get coverage from medical insurance. That includes Medicaid. If you don't have that medical tie, you'll probably be stuck paying out of pocket.

Well, that’s the point. The types of diagnoses a lot of these kids have are not going to qualify them for Medicaid. I did psychoeducational testing and we found low processing speed and ADHD but no learning disabilities. I’m sure I could get my daughter extra time on tests if I wanted to but haven’t gone that route yet. We paid out of pocket like a lot of people do.

Do you know how Medicaid works?

DP. I don’t know the ins and outs of Medicaid in detail but I definitely know that the “disability” of kids getting extra time on college exams is would almost never rise to the level of qualifying for Medicare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

Medical insurance does often provide coverage. My kid's testing was covered because it was connected to a neurological disorder.

You realize it takes with it together parents with good insurance to do this, right? I paid $5K for my daughter’s testing because it wasn’t covered.

Being in the military? I'm not saying every insurer covers it or in every instance. But it's not like we got fancy jobs to get coverage.

You think there might not be a correlation with parent wealth and diagnoses resulting in accommodations? If you think that, you’re wrong.

I never said that? I said when you have certain underlying conditions, such as a neurological disorder, you can often get coverage from medical insurance. That includes Medicaid. If you don't have that medical tie, you'll probably be stuck paying out of pocket.

Well, that’s the point. The types of diagnoses a lot of these kids have are not going to qualify them for Medicaid. I did psychoeducational testing and we found low processing speed and ADHD but no learning disabilities. I’m sure I could get my daughter extra time on tests if I wanted to but haven’t gone that route yet. We paid out of pocket like a lot of people do.

Do you know how Medicaid works?

Why would I need to? My insurance didn’t cover the testing so I paid out of pocket.

Medicaid is an income-based program (i.e. for low-income people). So people without any disabilities can qualify for it. They can also get coverage for neuropsychological testing in defined circumstances.

How great for low income people. What about the rest of us?

Tricare and FEHB also cover neuropsychological testing in many circumstances. The issue whether you have a qualifying medical condition, typically.

Which does not encompass ADHD or anxiety or autism. It’s for actual brain diseases like epilepsy or tumors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

Medical insurance does often provide coverage. My kid's testing was covered because it was connected to a neurological disorder.

You realize it takes with it together parents with good insurance to do this, right? I paid $5K for my daughter’s testing because it wasn’t covered.

Being in the military? I'm not saying every insurer covers it or in every instance. But it's not like we got fancy jobs to get coverage.

You think there might not be a correlation with parent wealth and diagnoses resulting in accommodations? If you think that, you’re wrong.

I never said that? I said when you have certain underlying conditions, such as a neurological disorder, you can often get coverage from medical insurance. That includes Medicaid. If you don't have that medical tie, you'll probably be stuck paying out of pocket.

Well, that’s the point. The types of diagnoses a lot of these kids have are not going to qualify them for Medicaid. I did psychoeducational testing and we found low processing speed and ADHD but no learning disabilities. I’m sure I could get my daughter extra time on tests if I wanted to but haven’t gone that route yet. We paid out of pocket like a lot of people do.

Do you know how Medicaid works?

Why would I need to? My insurance didn’t cover the testing so I paid out of pocket.

Medicaid is an income-based program (i.e. for low-income people). So people without any disabilities can qualify for it. They can also get coverage for neuropsychological testing in defined circumstances.

How great for low income people. What about the rest of us?

Tricare and FEHB also cover neuropsychological testing in many circumstances. The issue whether you have a qualifying medical condition, typically.

I said we got psychoeducational testing. Not sure why you’re so confused. It wasn’t covered. If you think loads of families can just shell out $5K for this then you might be out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

Be sure to let your colleagues know you refuse to participate in any joint defense group with David Boies.

Why do you keep bringing up Boies? He didn’t get extra time on tests, yet he succeeded anyway.

“Boies learned to compensate for his disability by developing outstanding powers of concentration and a keen memory.”

“The way Boies processes written information is by first skimming a text to pick out the salient points. Then, by slowing down and focusing exclusively on these, he is able to analyze them critically and grasp the essence of the text. It is this unique ability that enables Boies to handle the large volume of reading required for his work, and that helped him excel in college and law school, despite his poor performance on timed tests.”

https://dyslexia.yale.edu/story/david-boies/

Because he's almost universally recognized as one of the best litigators of the modern day, he struggled in school, and continues to struggle to read quickly to this day. The ADA and IDEA didn't exist when he was a kid because he's too old. He has obvious deficits and extraordinary strengths. You think people who need accommodations (for which he would have qualified had been born a few decades later) would mean he couldn't possibly be a great lawyer.

Feel free to check out younger folks on the success stories page who were identified at earlier ages.

Yet he didn’t need extra time to succeed. You are no Boies.

I never said I was David Boies? You're just being an a**hole.

If David Boies got accommodations (to which he would be entitled) would you refuse to work with him? There are plenty of successful doctors, lawyers, and business executives with disabilities that impose real deficits. As the ADA and IDEA get older, more have received accommodations and special education services. If they are competent professionals, they are competent professionals.

So your shining example is a man who overcame his disability to get where he is and now you want him to be the posterboy for people who need accommodations? Something he didn’t use or need to get where he is?

No need to repeat myself, but I'll do it again. He's an example of a person with serious deficits in particular areas, including in the present (he can't read notes passed to him in hearings with fluency), who manages to be one of the greatest litigators of all time. He's too old to have gotten accommodations in school but would've gotten them today. Had he gotten accommodations, he should not be looked down upon a lesser lawyer.

There are other litigators of a younger generation who have been getting accommodations from a young age because of the ADA and IDEA. Lawyers with the same brilliance at Boies. They should not be discounted because they have deficits in a particular area when they can have compensatory levels of brilliance that make them uniquely outstanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

Medical insurance does often provide coverage. My kid's testing was covered because it was connected to a neurological disorder.

You realize it takes with it together parents with good insurance to do this, right? I paid $5K for my daughter’s testing because it wasn’t covered.

Being in the military? I'm not saying every insurer covers it or in every instance. But it's not like we got fancy jobs to get coverage.

You think there might not be a correlation with parent wealth and diagnoses resulting in accommodations? If you think that, you’re wrong.

I never said that? I said when you have certain underlying conditions, such as a neurological disorder, you can often get coverage from medical insurance. That includes Medicaid. If you don't have that medical tie, you'll probably be stuck paying out of pocket.

Well, that’s the point. The types of diagnoses a lot of these kids have are not going to qualify them for Medicaid. I did psychoeducational testing and we found low processing speed and ADHD but no learning disabilities. I’m sure I could get my daughter extra time on tests if I wanted to but haven’t gone that route yet. We paid out of pocket like a lot of people do.

Do you know how Medicaid works?

Why would I need to? My insurance didn’t cover the testing so I paid out of pocket.

Medicaid is an income-based program (i.e. for low-income people). So people without any disabilities can qualify for it. They can also get coverage for neuropsychological testing in defined circumstances.

How great for low income people. What about the rest of us?

Tricare and FEHB also cover neuropsychological testing in many circumstances. The issue whether you have a qualifying medical condition, typically.

I said we got psychoeducational testing. Not sure why you’re so confused. It wasn’t covered. If you think loads of families can just shell out $5K for this then you might be out of touch.

Not every family has to pay money to get a neuropsychological evaluation. Many families have their evaluations covered by insurance, and they aren't just rich ones.

[Anonymous]

Basketball analogy. I have bad knees, lack coordination, and am under six feet. Do I get a step-stool and 10 seconds extar with no interference from other players when I'm under the net?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a professor in the humanities, I find that my students tend to do worse psychologically with assignments hanging over their heads. Because they have a syllabus with due dates, they report being better off planning in advance and not taking advantage of extended times. This avoids having a pile of assignments due at the end of the semester from multiple classes. I also give a lot of time for in-class quizzes, so students generally don't need to go to the disability center to take their quizzes.
And, yes, processing speed is part of an overall picture of intelligence, but not all of it. If you have two children who have the same verbal and math reasoning "scores" on intelligence tests, but one is able to complete the same questions in half the time as another student is at an distinct advantage. The quicker child can simply take in far more data in a given amount of time than the other.

I agree with this. I'm a psychologist who has been treating teens and young adults with anxiety and mood problems (and yes, often co-occurring AD/HD or learning disabilities) for twenty-five years. A topic that wasn't mentioned in the Atlantic article or elsewhere much here is that well-intentioned accommodations can worsen problems over time. Those that backfire most often in my experience are extended deadlines on assignments (not necessarily tests), and housing accommodations related to anxiety or mood problems. For kids with anxiety and/or AD/HD, extended deadlines on assignments often backfire because they set the stage for procrastination, which kids with these disorders are at greater risk for. This leads to more anxiety throughout the term as assignments pile up and then panic and often shutdown at the end of the term when everything comes due. Sometimes kids even get additional extensions beyond the end of term, and then spend their breaks still stuck in the cycle. When deadlines are firm, I see my clients have increased willingness to use the external supports that are usually offered in the college (writing centers, tutoring, executive function coaching). For housing accommodations, the most common requests I get are for single rooms. In theory, this would make sense for a young person with anxiety, but in practice this living arrangement often leads to more avoidance, isolation, and opportunity for rumination. I've disappointed a lot of clients over the years by declining to prescribe these specific types of accommodations when I think they're contraindicated. I've then see one of two things happen: 1) families go elsewhere, get someone else to prescribe these, and students struggle, or 2) students are accepting, go off to college, initially face high discomfort, but see themselves do more than they thought they could and ultimately grow.

*Please note: I'm not talking about all types of accommodations or disabilities. Just these two specific examples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:99.9 percent of parents posting here did not get "special accommodations" when they went to college. And somehow they managed.

Now we have a good percentage of students at Yale, Brown, and Stanford getting all this extra special attention so they can take a very normal test.

Fragile students who will undoubtedly be a nightmare for any company that hires them.

This isn’t a new thing - I remember one of my brothers talking about how his rich friends got add diagnoses for more time on the SAT in the late 90s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99.9 percent of parents posting here did not get "special accommodations" when they went to college. And somehow they managed.

Now we have a good percentage of students at Yale, Brown, and Stanford getting all this extra special attention so they can take a very normal test.

Fragile students who will undoubtedly be a nightmare for any company that hires them.

This isn’t a new thing - I remember one of my brothers talking about how his rich friends got add diagnoses for more time on the SAT in the late 90s.

Difference is that, in the late 1990s, the College Board would mark any test taken with accommodations "Score achieved under special conditions" so the admissions officers would know that a disability had been declared. For kids of rich donors, this probably wasn't a problem, as admissions could accept the high score.

For typical applicants, having your score so labeled would be disadvantageous. That's why requests for accommodations skyrocketd after the Obama Justice Dept letter telling testing companies that they weren't allowed to disclose accommodations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99.9 percent of parents posting here did not get "special accommodations" when they went to college. And somehow they managed.

Now we have a good percentage of students at Yale, Brown, and Stanford getting all this extra special attention so they can take a very normal test.

Fragile students who will undoubtedly be a nightmare for any company that hires them.

This isn’t a new thing - I remember one of my brothers talking about how his rich friends got add diagnoses for more time on the SAT in the late 90s.

Difference is that, in the late 1990s, the College Board would mark any test taken with accommodations "Score achieved under special conditions" so the admissions officers would know that a disability had been declared. For kids of rich donors, this probably wasn't a problem, as admissions could accept the high score.

For typical applicants, having your score so labeled would be disadvantageous. That's why requests for accommodations skyrocketd after the Obama Justice Dept letter telling testing companies that they weren't allowed to disclose accommodations.

It wasn't the Obama administration that caused this. College Board and the ACT stopped the practice in 2003.

https://www.educationnext.org/disablingthesat/

I think you're thinking of when LSAC entered into a consent decree with the Department of Justice.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/law-school-admission-council-agrees-systemic-reforms-and-773-million-payment-settle-justice

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

Medical insurance does often provide coverage. My kid's testing was covered because it was connected to a neurological disorder.

You realize it takes with it together parents with good insurance to do this, right? I paid $5K for my daughter’s testing because it wasn’t covered.

Being in the military? I'm not saying every insurer covers it or in every instance. But it's not like we got fancy jobs to get coverage.

You think there might not be a correlation with parent wealth and diagnoses resulting in accommodations? If you think that, you’re wrong.

I never said that? I said when you have certain underlying conditions, such as a neurological disorder, you can often get coverage from medical insurance. That includes Medicaid. If you don't have that medical tie, you'll probably be stuck paying out of pocket.

Well, that’s the point. The types of diagnoses a lot of these kids have are not going to qualify them for Medicaid. I did psychoeducational testing and we found low processing speed and ADHD but no learning disabilities. I’m sure I could get my daughter extra time on tests if I wanted to but haven’t gone that route yet. We paid out of pocket like a lot of people do.

Do you know how Medicaid works?

Why would I need to? My insurance didn’t cover the testing so I paid out of pocket.

Medicaid is an income-based program (i.e. for low-income people). So people without any disabilities can qualify for it. They can also get coverage for neuropsychological testing in defined circumstances.

How great for low income people. What about the rest of us?

Tricare and FEHB also cover neuropsychological testing in many circumstances. The issue whether you have a qualifying medical condition, typically.

I said we got psychoeducational testing. Not sure why you’re so confused. It wasn’t covered. If you think loads of families can just shell out $5K for this then you might be out of touch.

Not every family has to pay money to get a neuropsychological evaluation. Many families have their evaluations covered by insurance, and they aren't just rich ones.

Awesome but for everyone else $5K is a bitter pill to swallow. So you might imagine they don’t get the diagnosis they need to get accommodations.