To consider retraining as a barrister?

[princessglitter]

I am a teacher in middle management with a fairly secure, reasonably satisfying career. I have always dreamed of a career in the law. Originally I considered becoming a solicitor, doing a conversion course and going down the LPC route.

However, at the last minute, I lost my nerve and pulled out of my college course. The idea of that amount of debt was horrifying to me.

I trained as a teacher, but has always felt unfulfilled if I'm honest. As I've got older, the idea of retraining as a barrister has become more appealing, but I am acutely aware that so many fall by the wayside. I have secured a mini-pupillage this summer, which I am extremely excited about. I am also going to apply for vacation schemes at solicitors' firms to enable me to make an informed decision.

I do have a strong academic background and an Oxbridge 2.1 - but I know that that alone will not be enough.

Am I unreasonable to take a risk (with my husband's support) and consider a career in the law? Possibly as a barrister, but I intend to research this thoroughly with some real experience in both areas and different specialisms.

I would hope things have moved on somewhat since the 1970's, Andrew.

at working

They have moved on. But self-employment is still self-employment.

If you stop practicing for months or years the solicitors will go elsewhere - they must, the work will not wait. When you come back, the solicitors who used to instruct you may or may not remember you. After a number of years they probably won't. Even if they do they may prefer the person they have been briefing in the meantime. And you have no remedy.

And as I pointed out the sort of work you used to do may have dried up for external reasons.

Most women don't stop work so they don't have these issues. Most women in the UK with under 5s work (and men for that matter).

I am jus tnot sure most women understand when they take a decision to stop work how much of a sacrifice they make which does not really benefit their families, their children never thank them and then the chidlren leave and they don't have a nice career left whereas their other half has a lovely family and none of that sacrifice. Far too many women end up regretting it.

if you nkow you reall want to be a housewife most of your life then you might as well not work 14 hour days in your early 20s and instead do what you need to go to snare a rich husband (if you can live with yourself as someone who lives off male earnings which many women cannot)

Andrewofgg I am not sure I agree. I can think of a number of excellent barristers who my firm instructs regularly. If they disappeared for a few years, then came back (having refreshed their legal knowledge) would we instruct them? I am sure we would. Once we have found a barrister they know to be great to work with, we will go back to them. (It is not that easy to find replacements!)

Yes of course there may be structural changes in the law (or any industry) which mean your skills are rendered obsolete. But that would be a risk even if you stayed in work all the time.

Your posts seem to me an excellent example of people finding "reasons" why it is difficult to go back to work after time away - even where in fact such reasons don't exist.

Minipie - if a barrister of five years' call disappears for ten years and then comes back she has fifteen years' call but five years' experience and the ones who did not disappear have fifteen years' experience. Not prejudice - arithmetic!

And when she tries to come back some of "her" solicitors will themselves have moved on, retired, given up litigation, gone to other firms who have their own connections and favourite barristers.

And even within chambers: if Ann goes on maternity leave and Bill and Carol inherit her work they can keep it when Ann returns if the briefs arrive in chambers with their names and not hers. They are under no obligation to do otherwise.

I too speak from experience!

No one would want it otherwise unless we lived in a non capitalist cloud cuckoo land. However there is nothing to stop people on maternity or paternity leave keeping up to date. I keep up to date every day wherever I am in the world. It's not every hard even if you've tiny baby twins as I had at one point. It's just reading compared say to staying in peak fitness if your career were sport. We're very lucky.

Xenia - who looked after your twins then?

Yes of course she has 5 years' experience and should expect to be given appropriate work for that level. It would be daft if she were given work for a 15 years' call junior. What's prejudice is if she's seen as having 0 years experience when actually she has 5.

It all varied over a long period. I am lucky enough to be in year 26 of motherhood and still have the youngest at prep school. With the first 3 c hilren we had little money or power or control (as I was early 20s) and we hired a nanny (never I - always ensure the father does as much as the mother with childhood or you've only yourself to blame). Then we had a daily nanny and I took two week's annual leave when I gave birth which suited us all fine and is better for the baby as it gets to bond from birth with mother, father and nanny. I'm not saying it was easy (babies never are) and I much preferred breastfeeding to the expressing of milk I did at work but it was a good compromise which 26 years on has benefited everyone so much. There were no paid maternity leaves then unless you'd worked for the same employer.

With the twins I managed for the 4th/5th time to give birth without many maternity rights as I worked for myself. Although you could say the reason I earn what I do in my 40s is precisiely because I had no such rights so I never ended up being muggins at home earning pin money whilst husband's glittering career continued because I'd been the one got used to that by 3- 6 months on full pay from a law firm. In other words discriminatory parental rights may actually shoot women in the foot.

Anyway with the twins we hired a daily nanny and my office rooms are in the house when I'm here so that was so much easier as I was in my 30s and had more money and power and control. So although I was certainly taking business calls the day after they were born and happy to, in the week they could be brought to me for feeding or usually I went into them and then back into my office after. It worked out very well and I would never want not to be up to date. it's a huge enthusiasm in my life and makes me want to get up every day to know more law, to apply it. It's as fun as watching the development of a large family and most adults of sense of either gender seek to incorporate both elements into their lives and ensure they never play second fiddle to a man.

The trouble is, Minipie, that a member of the independent self-employed Bar has no enforceable right to be expect to be given or rather sent any work at all. The instructions come in - or they don't. Unless a solicitor is stupid enough to ring the clerks and say "this one needs a (wo)man's touch" - or "no bloody suntans" - there is simply nothing to be done about it.

And IME no matter how hard you try to keep in touch with changes in the law, there is no substitute for the daily grind of practising it. You will be rusty when you come back even if you don't notice it. Might be something to be said for making returners do a short further pupillage before they are let loose on the paying public again.

Xenia, I cannot believe you are for real.

I have had, so far, 3 careers + motherhood. I do not regard myself as having 'made a sacrifice' (made a choice, certainly, but a sacrifice, no), and my other half has equally made choices related to having a family. The decision we have made to be family-centred (rather than self-centred) in the choices we make has been of huge benefit to all of us.

First career - research scientist. Intellectually very satisfying (I have a 1st class Cambridge degree, the research led to a PhD from the same university) in a narrow sense. However I was lucky enough to be funded to go on an 'Insight into Management' course, loved it and saw that I had more skills than the purely intellectual that I could use more fully in a different line of work.

Second career - management within a multinational company. Enjoyed it. Travelled a lot. Earned a lot. Intellectually satisfying, but perhaps in hindsight not a perfect fit with the values I had been brought up with.

Motherhood - I am not good at doing things by halves, and having been brought up by a mother who did motherhood almost exclusively and extremely well, intended to do the same for my children. Had a wobble when first child was between 0 and 6 months old - but as we were abroad with husband's work at the time, didn't get to act on the wobble and ended up as a SAHM (doing all the things that SAHMs do, like chairing committees running pre-schools, and some things that SAHMs don't always do, like temporary home education) until younger child started school.

Third career - primary teaching. Enjoy it. Intellectually satisfying, physically and in terms of stamina very challenging. Allows me to put my own children first for very much more of the time than many other careers would (I don't work between gettting home and the children being asleep, I then work antisocial hours late into the night). Don't earn very much, but have steady earning potential into the future. Uses a surprising number of skills from all my previous careers and experience.

DH has equally made career and job choices that bring him home at relatively civilised hours (so 7-8 rather than 9-10), that have kept us in the same place for several years at a time, that enable him to take occasional days off. He too could be somewhere different if we didn't have children - but having children was a joint choice, so the consequences are also joint.

I can't believe how you have managed, Xenia, to hijack this thread.

Off you pop now to your perfect little world! Enjoy. And perhaps stop insulting those mothers who have chosen to stay at home- you have stealth boasted enough and generalised outrageously. My mother worked full time and regretted missing out on our childhoods. People regret all manner of things. I suggest you accept that different people have different priorities - and for what's it worth your blinkered views in the reality of publicly funded legal work demonstrates you clearly have your head stuck up your arse in the clouds.

Strikethrough didn't work but you surely catch my drift.

There is nothing to stop anyone who may disagree with my views to ignore what I write. Until more men than woen make career sacrifice for children I will continue to help ensure women do not take second place all the time.

Different priorities... well why is it always the women with the different priorities who have the less full life, who compromise and serve and clean? Let's make it all fairer and you make it fairer for your daughters every time you put a female career ahead of a man's.

I am lucky that I like my life but I would put that down more to brain chemistry issues as much as any external factor. All parents balance children and home but it'sa pity women seem to sacrifice more as they will never help their daughters into having fair balanced lives as long as they present a role model of man big provider, woman who works for relative pin money. Thankfully this is all dying out anyway so all will be well.

It's only a less full life in your opinion Xenia! For many women it's not a compromise or a sacrifice to WOH less or not at all - it's what they want.

I have an extremely full life - much fuller than my husband who it has been our choice to make the main wage earner. He has just worked. I have done soooooooo much more.

I am bringing my daughter and son up, as I was brought up, to recognise that all career options are open to them both, but also that children are a priviledge and a joy and absolutely worth both mother and father taking into full consideration when making choices in their lives...

And as I thought all well-brought-up children had drummed into them from pre-nursery age - 'fair' does not mean 'exactly the same for everyone'.

It is fair that I have been the SAHP for some of my life, because it took my strong wishes and all other circumstances into account and was a decision arrived at in partnership. I HAVE had a balanced life - one that has balanced fulfilling careers with a fulfilling time as a full-time parent. I trust that both my son and my daughter will have equally fair balanced and sane lives in which they balance selflessness and selfishness and balance the needs of others with their own needs....

Xenia you do seem to think that yours is the only road to take for everybody to be happy. That is patently not true. I would love to hear your children's version of their childhood and upbringing it I am sure would be fascinating.

xenia - have you never noticed the irony of your argument...the fact that you persistently call on women to make changes to their behaviour? The irony is in fact double - not only do you focus on women making changes, but you want them to behave like men do in the current (unequal) set up. It's just bonkers.

The most significant thing that needs to happen in order for their to be true equality is not for women to flock to the work place so that everyone - men and women - are in f-t brilliant careers/chained to their desks (delete depending on your mindset). It's for men to move more firmly into the home, iyswim. Not only is this the most significant thing - it's more realistic. It chimes so much more with so many societal and personal values about bringing up children. It's a direct route to equality rather than one involving your rather unnecessary stepping stone. You seem trapped in a late 20th century version of equality where equality meant women "having it all" (women, note, not men and women). Most of us have moved on from that model - not far enough, I admit. But most people have recognised its deep flaws.

I know many many couples where neither work full-time (in fact in my circle of university friends they are as common as other working patterns). On having children they have forged paths involving both parents in parenting and leaving both parents in interesting jobs. imo they - both the men and women - are doing far more for equality than you in your high-flying well paid career.

Xenia you are full of shit.

I don't have 'pin' money thank you very much. As a feminist who married her DP on a humanist ceremony which focused very much on the importance of equality and respect between us our finances are arranged so that dh's wages and bonuses go into our joint account. From there goes mortgage bills etc. Standing orders fly out to joint current account for shopping, eating out and joint socialising and baby expenses; to joint savings; then an equal amount into our own personal accounts to do as we wish. We both term those payments as 'our own allowance'. We are a family. A team. So get a grip and stop using 70s throwback feminism to justify you droning on and on about utter shit.

Asking women to spend less time on paid ft employment is like preaching to the converted.

It is important for women to hear views like Xenia's that ft work can be very intellectually stimulating, well paid and done very well together with raising a family (like men have been doing for millennia without criticism). It also give a woman financial independence and options, which is another way of looking out for her children.

Xenia I'm a SAHM with lots of children. The three oldest are girls, all at or with an offer from a top uni and the eldest has with a TC at a MC firm. None are pushovers nor ever will be. The fourth is a son, also sparky but very helpful and kind. Your stereotypes don't chime with what happens in the real world. And can you honestly say that you yourself have it all? Is your life utterly complete or have you had to make any sacrifices or compromises of your own?

blueshoes (and Xenia ) - yeessss... it's, erm, nice to know that f/t work can be stimulating. It's even nicer to have work which is both well paid and stimulating.
And perhaps there is still something to be said for Xenia's views...
But Xenia - presumably whilst you were/are forging ahead at the vanguard of feminist liberation, enjoying your wonderful career, you gave some thought to your DCs and the quality of care they were receiving while you were working (or did you just assume that it was irrelevant who was caring for/teaching them, since your offspring were sure to succeed anyway?)
If you did in fact care about childcare, did you have any respect for those people who provided it? Did you consider that there was any skill involved in their work? That it had any value?
Who was providing that care?

Actually, financial independence, from a well paid job, can give women better choices. If your partner/husband is able to support you as a SAHM - and provide all the financial support for the family - then great - well done you.

But for some us, our partners/husbands are not in that position - and in my case is never likely to be. So, we (my DP and I) could choose to be broke - or I could go out to work. And if I have to work why shouldn't I get the best rate possible for my services - and possibly work less than I would do in a less well paid area.

Now, just to be clear, I have absolutely no beef with people choosing whichever career path they want - in law or in any other field. And if you are able to get into a "worthy" field and you enjoy the work then all the best of luck to you. But for me the only way in which I was ever going to be able to get into the law (with no financial support from anyone) was by getting a full sponsorship from a city firm.

I should also add that having a very well paid job for a number of years has enabled me to make choices and do things which wouldn't have been possible otherwise - such as helping out my disabled parents financially when they had to move house.

And yes - when I was working I agonised all the time over the quality of care my daughter was getting. And I felt bad that I wasn't as home as much as I could be (even though DP was at home 1 day a week and I was usually home 1 day a week). But now I am not working and our income has dropped significantly, I worry that I am depriving her of things she could have had otherwise.

No doubt Xenia is a bit extreme - and I don't agree with all that she says - but there is no particular moral high ground in being a SAHM over a career woman either. And for some of us being a SAHM isn't really a viable option anyway.