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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

/ physician mom

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

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

/ physician mom

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

/ physician mom

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

/ physician mom

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a horrid profession....

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

6. Be responsive at all times.

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

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

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

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

Anonymous wrote:


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

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