oxford/Cambridge/Durham/lse

[MommyOfATeen]

Hi
Dd is interested in studying law and then wants a career in politics.
She has being researching lately about alevels and what's best to choose as she will be entering for cheltenham ladies college scholarship exam.
Dd has being researching the law courses and can't seem to answer these questions she has
Why should you study law
What qualities are best suited to law
What books/articles can she read to read around law
And finally..
The colleges at Oxford does it matter which one you go to?

It is an issue for all parents - to what extent should the baker's son become a baker and the woman at home's children housewives in their time etc etc. My father and brother are/were psychiatrists. My daughters and I are solicitors. Perhaps my graduate post man son (and the fact I have to write that word graduate because I clearly think being a post man is not that great a career..... ) is the innovating interesting one (and he is interesting). What his younger brothers will do remains to be seen.

I am sure most of us want our children to get good exam results and at least start in a decent career as it's easier to fall lower but much harder to rise higher later in most careers.

Yes for solicitors vacation schemes are worth applying to although plenty of students cannot get a place on them as they can be as competitive as getting that first job/sponsorship for post grade law school. My daughter was lucky to manage without one.

Absolutely Word

I am always very when the usual suspects come on here and peddle the you have to go to particular Oxford College /Oxbridge / Bristol / wherever and study STEM /Law / whatever and then quote how their DCs were only employed, usually as a Lawyer at £100k +, because of that, or alternatively studied something terribly self indulgent like French or Mandarin (because of course the whole world talks English and acts in British ways) and so of course were completely unemployable. So many more careers , so many more sources of employability especially the talents and motivations of the individual, and so many other routes into them...... Perhaps if those posters had a bit wider perspective on the world than a few but by no means all, City Law Firms they might appreciate that

This is a case in point. Whilst Parliament might have a few politicians who have come via the Oxbridge / Law route, at most it may be in the 100s, and how many tried that route and are now settled for sub QC Barristers, or lobbyists etc.? Not many decades ago the Eton / Oxbridge route into politics was seen as insidious, and those in power tended to come from solid middle class Grammar School backgrounds, who knows if that worm might turn again post Cameron / Osbourne? Plenty of other routes into politics, the Nadine Dorries already mentioned, the John Denhams, Eastleigh MP via SU President at Southampton University (just as much a career politician but via a local route), the Peter Hains, long time activist turned mainstream, Sebastian Coe even, if you have the capability to be national athlete and national politician

I am just concerned a school is feeding the OPs daughter stereotypes under the guise of careers advice. I am absolutely sure CLC won't do that Op. I know a few parental noses put out of joint by the school encouraging their pupils to follow their own interests and aptitudes and broadening their minds about the options available, based on the real world, not their parent's narrow perspective. www.cheltladiescollege.org/academic/professional-guidance/

And whilst we are on postmen, that's another case in point. Royal Mail have a long running and well developed graduate entry scheme, it has seeded many graduates in to Director and Board Member level roles, maybe not £100k and some who think the City, or failing that Medicine, is the sine qua non, and anything else a terrible shame to bear at dinner parties, might turn their nose up, but a senior management role in one of the countries largest organisations is not actually something anyone should sneer at. Having already gained an understanding of one of the customer facing roles would be seen as an advantage to anyone applying with all the other qualities they seek, motivation, intellectual ability, interpersonal skills etc.

TBF op's DD wants to read law, at a highly selective university and become a barrister then a politician.

OP hasn't come up with this plan!

So posters respond accordingly poison.

Back to the more specific question of books, I'd recommend Causing Deaths and Saving Lives by Jonathan Glover - highly readable yet rigorous, Justice by Michael Sandel (not read myself but comes highly recommended for that age group) and perhaps??? the longer and more challenging Anarchy State and Utopia by Robert Nozick - this is pretty libertarian so I'd hope she wouldn't agree with all of it but it's very readable and immensely fun to fight with - although it's a fight against Rawls to some extent so she'd be coming in half way through so to speak.

It seems to me that information about career options and training is actually easier to get hold of for this generation. The internet has opened doors. At one point finding out about careers was about access to advisers and reference books and writing off for information including stamped addressed envelopes.

However, society has moved in odd ways. I think there was greater social mobility and less income inequality thirty or forty years ago. (Although racism and sexism were pretty much unchallenged. There was a greater supply of social housing, more secure tenancies and it was easier to get on the housing ladder. There were no zero hours contracts, and a well-unionised work force meant that many jobs were more secure. There is now a casualisation and de-skilling of certain traditional jobs (law, teaching in schools and universities, librarianship) that mean the relative security such work used to offer suitably qualified people has gone. So those who are employed in such fields are now supposed to be giving it the proverbial 110%.

And parents are understandably anxious about the world their children are growing up in. It's as if we're all muttering magical spells and charms. ('Oxbridge.' 'Training contract'. 'Graduate entry scheme' to try and keep harm away.)

There's a level on which there are certain opportunities that I do not want for my daughter - though if she wanted them for herself, I'd just have to cross my fingers and hope for the best. A mate's daughter got taken on by one of the big city law firms which have been under discussion here. My friend is actually quite worried about her child - basically she's done nothing but work for about the last 10 years. She's paid well and can afford decent holidays. She's simply not terribly happy and wonders what she's doing with her life....

Host TBH there are people who are unhappy in every industry. There are people who don't work who are unhappy.

Some people just are.

But if the job in the city is what's making that young woman unhappy then why the hell does she stay? There's no rule. You're not shot at dawn for leaving . I have little patience for people with lots of options (and that sort of job opens a hell of a lot of doors) who don't take them.

But I think we also need to be careful about extrapolating from this woman that everyone in City law firms are unhappy. They're not. DH is perfectly content with his job.

You're right though about the disappearance of the world traditionally held by the middle classes.

Increasingly, there are jobs that pay very well and jobs that pay fuck all...

word Op s DD came up with the plan in response to advice from the Head of Careers at her school that this was the route she should take. Very narrow advice to a pupil who has primarily asked for advice about equipping herself for a possible ambition to be selectable and electable as an MP with a possible specialist interest in Edication. The Careers Advice my DDs have always had has been to investigate their areas of interest via work experience and voluntary work etc. keeping their options open to all the possible ways their ambitions might develop. So given an interest in the areas of politics, education, law , there are plenty of ways she might persue her interests and ambitions which will develop the knowledge, self knowledge , maturity, interpersonal skills and all the other qualities to choose the path that is right for her. I am not the only one here saying she should keep her options open. I have a DD who wanted to be a lawyer from Year 4 partly because of so many of our friends who have been influential in her life being Lawyers and Ally McNeal, thankfully spending two weeks in Chambers made her realise it wasn't for her, and it really wasn't due to a very low boredom thresholdand thankfully an inspiring teacher opened her eyes to an entirely different and more appropriate track. Ironically one that with growing awareness of and strong feelings about the issues around policy and communication in Science might actually send her into the political sphere. Who knows?

OP says her DD 'has always wanted to be a lawyer'. Plus she's done some work experience in a law firm, I thought.

I missed that later post but what I say stands for any Year 10. We just had to get together another activist group locally to challenge a local Council proposal There was a 16 year old involved in that, not just delivering leaflets etc. but with a fresh perhaps naive perspective, speaking up to inspire us to speak up for the principles of the democratic process whatever the cynical ploys of the Council as well as getting the lawyers involved in fighting fire with fire it is exactly the sort of thing a would be lawyer / politician should be getting involved with at a young age. Focusing her on a conveyor belt of reading this, that and the other to attain a place at the right college in a top uni to gain a place in the right Law School /Chambers to gain the credibility to get selected feels very cynical and narrow especially in the context of political ambitions, when she would learn a lot more about what she believes in and stands for by also following her own interests and getting involved with Civil Society at whatever level. I saw the LSE students March across Russel Square the other day, in a show of political passion I haven't seen in a long time, I wonder how many were Law students

Yes and comments let them be post men as they could work their way up.... that is utterly stupid advice to give a child. Let them aim high. The partners in my daughter's firm earn £1m - £2m a year. The £65k daughterj ust called me to tell me how much she adores her work by the way! We said we should form the happy lawyers' club or a group of women who actually love their work as there are too many whingers around - if you don't like something change it, don't moan, act.

However I am the mother of the graduate postman - I've always been open to the children picking what they want. I am the one who owned the pacific island for 10 years. I think happiness and how you live your life can be found in all kinds of guises from life as a contemplative nun to walking mountains. Just find what you like and then choose. The point though is if you earn a lot you have more choices so it's good to start high and move to a lower paid job later if you want to. (And not everyone at my £100k daughter's level is on that including bonus - she is getting £20k more than others because she is good I think and works hard and has the family stoicism, determination etc.

Slight diversion here but surely being a barrister is a disadvantage for an aspiring MP however articulate and well -meaning. Many of the potential electorate even Conservatives would not view a high earning barrister as being in touch with their reality. The graduate postman turned MP would have much more credibility for attracting voters .

Think it depends on the barrister. Also they aren't all exceedingly high earners.

Host I expect quite a few mothers out there feel the same. All those years ago my mentor in the same firm as Word spoke of little other than that at 38years old she was facing a life as a single childless person with no prospect of becoming a partner. She was very capable, but very downbeat and she certainly freaked me. I can't attribute jumping ship, going to California and having eight kids solely to her but her warnings had some influence, of that I'm sure. Not that I regret it for a minute. I'm very content with my life, just as Lotus is with hers: as Word says, twenty ways to skin a cat. But today working hours at these Magic Circle firms seems worse than ever. My father, who worked his entire career in the City, was a staunch believer in people only ever needing to work sensible hours, compatible with a normal and manageable life. 23 year olds in long term relationships, getting home at 2am or later on a regular basis isn't something that lovely holidays can make up for, not long term. I'm not sure why the fact that Word's DH likes his job is relevant here, since he must be forty or fifty something, has a wife who gave up work when her kids were little, doesn't need to keep house, bear children or cook a meal (this all from Word's own posts) - not exactly a predicament is it? Just more of the same old patriarchy. His experience has nothing to do with young women working crazy hours and wondering how to fit the relationship in, let alone kids, and that predicament is far more complex if the partner has an equally demanding job and nigh on impossible if one or other is asked to go overseas. I have no idea why these firms ask their very clever employees to work such daft hours. I'm convinced from all I know that many associates would far rather reduce their hours for slightly less heady pay and be able to sort their work-life balance. It's such a shame that so much talent is lost by the insistence on such punitive hours, but years on we still see the same gender taking the hit, once the child factor kicks in.

I don't think the fact that DH is happy in his work and has maintained a very happy family life too, is any less relevant than the fact that lotus and her DD are both happy.

He wanted a relationship, a marriage, a family. He wanted to be a fully active part of his DC's lives, every bit as much as me .

molio you make it sound as if I gave up work to be a housewife and he cracked on with his work like some 1950s throwback but it hasn't been like that at all. I've always worked.

I didn't give up working in the city to have babies and support the big man. I gave up te city to work in crime/human rights law. And lemme tell ya, the hours were worse. You spend far more time working through the night in that area of law.

DH would say, and often does, that one of the best decisions he ever took was specialising in anything other than transactional work. That is the big killer regarding hours. Okay, it's meant he's a £1m partner rather than £2m but hey ho...

He'd also say, and often does, that there are a lot of folk working every bit as hard for crap money and conditions. Maybe that's a big difference. He's working class. He's worked in steel factories. He's seen his Mum and Dad work in shifts, one day, one night. In comparison he sees himself as really bloody lucky and not having it particularly hard.

True he doesn't do housework. Neither do I. We pay.

And yes, he didn't give birth to the DC. I'll give you that .

As for associates wanting to work fewer hours, well possibly they've chosen badly.

If they've avoided transactional work, then the hours are really part of the job and not that horrendous. If they don't like it, then wrong job perhaps?

A bit like midwives and coppers not liking to work through the night.

Some jobs are what they are.

Yes, Molio that's it. I am sure that if my friend's child is sufficiently unhappy for a sufficiently long time she will look at alternative options and make her move. I don't have an update.

But I suspect it is a bit harder to leave high-flying prestitigious jobs. If your social life is limited by long hours, a lot of you mates will be colleagues. It will seem to devalue all the hard work done, and money spent to get to the point where you currently are. Family may be very proud, 'My daughter the lawyer. She was head-hunted. This is how much she earns.' So there'd be a sense of letting them down.

You might ideally want a sabbatical - time to get some perspective - but this might be regarded as flaky if other people are willing to keep putting in the long days, week after month after year.

Also if you're living in London where rents and mortgages are high, the option of staying where you are (and where you know people) while you find the next thing probably isn't viable. The last I heard, my friend's daughter was considering a year in Australia.

Perhaps another thing that bothers me about all sorts of jobs - both high-flying and some of the less well-rewarded ones - is the tendency to regard finding it hard to cope year after year with very difficult working conditions as a sign of 'weakness.' You shouldn't have taken the job. If you don't like it go.

It's a waste of resources when people who are trained and motivated leave because there is so little acknowledgement that people function best when they are a) supported at work and b) have working conditions that enable them to have a meaningful life outside work.

host I find the portrayal of these people as victims a little odd to be honest.

They're some of the most intelligent, best educated people out there. Their skill set will give them an embarrassment of choice.

They can leave and do something different any time they chose. And most do! The pyramid shape means most young lawyers will not become partners. They will, at some point leave. It's more common than staying the course. No one feels bad about that, and if they do because of some misplaced concern for what their parents think (at 30????) then they need to take a long look at themselves.

Also I work with lots of young 'uns. They're different to my generation. They don't expect or even want things to be forever. Like the OP's Dd they see life as an ever evolving organism. First barrister, then MP, then who knows?

I'd not be the least concerned if either of mine wanted to give the city a whirl, nor in the least concerned if they found it wasn't for them.

OP, getting back to your question... Cambridge is just as good as Oxford for law, so don't necessarily focus only on Oxford. Any college is fine really, Trinity Hall is indeed well known but Trinity is also very good despite a pp warning you off it for some reason. I went there so know of what I speak...

Politics is all about contacts. One of the reasons that a lot of barristers go into it (in addition to the intellectual training) is because of who they rub shoulders with in that environment. Your DD sounds like she is already making those contacts but it's important that she get involved in local party activities and gets into student politics at university. She should read a few autobiographies of politicians she admires to get an understanding of how early they started moving in the right circles.

I would suggest that she keep quiet in interview about any ambitions to use law as a springboard to something else.

You say you're from the UK- so why did you say "your Michael Gove" then?

I am contributing to a thread about career choices saying that as a parent I think some of the 'desirable' choices have drawbacks.

There's an ideology of that says we live in a marketplace where what we all enjoy is individual freedom of choice - and that those who are fortunate whether as a result of income or parental background or education are particularly well-placed to take advantage of that freedom.

That has a particular kind of truth. But what I'm making is a point that - I hope - is not blindingly difficult to grasp. Human beings have a variety of needs - for intimacy perhaps, for stability and emotional security and for conditions which will help them to bring up the next generation. The demands of high-flying capitalism/globalisation etc don't necessarily sit very well with these needs.

Of course these careers have drawbacks. Nothing is perfect.

Certainly DH and I went into it with our eyes wide open and I would hope any DC of mine would understand the reality. They, like lotus DC, have lived with it. Seen it up close. Warts and all .

But you know, most careers have drawbacks, don't they? My editor, for example, works few hours, many (most?) at home. Regularly boozy lunches curtesy of agents. She spends her life working with authors on their books which is something she adores. The drawback is she makes fuck all money. She can't afford to give her child what she had as a child (her Dad was a lawyer ).

Life is a compromise, but that's okay.

I think it behoves those of us with opportunities and meaningful choices to make the very best of things.

My profession (not law) is currently quite concerned about the fact that the millenials (apparently that's what we have to call them) won't be prepared to work the sort of hours that gen x and gen y put up with. This is a real Thing at the moment, not just in this country but internationally. I'd be surprised if those people in similar international roles to me in the legal profession didn't have the same concerns.

Yes, change, don't moan. In general in life if you can take responsibility and think well actually at lot of the time it is mea culpa and I might well be at fault and I have huge power to control my own destiny and make my own life that tends to make you happier than feeling you are some awful weak victim of a huge system which is attacking you.

I was reading my 1984 diary recently from when I was a trainee solicitor and pregnant. There were some long hours but as WF's husband above in the same way I did not go into an area which has the longest of hours so it has never been too much.Now I work for myself it's dead easy as I'm here behind a screen at home even if sometimes the hours are long.

My advice to the chidlren is do what you will enjoy for the rest of your life and try to ensure it's not dull work, that's it is intellectually challenging and varied over the years; secondly try to pick something where you can own the business not just be a PAYE worker. We all might know lawyers on £500k to £1m a year but it is the clients who are selling a business for £10m a time who are the ones making the real money - we are only a service industry albeit quite a well paid one. So eg daughter 1 (now a lawyer) considered advertising as you can ultimately set up your own agency.

Thirdly try to pick something well paid as even if you hate it at least the money is good whereas plenty work very hard for low pay and hate their work anyway.

On long hours I don't think you get the best out of people by making them work too long. I was telling a client yesterday if we have a meeting on our thing I will make sure it starts at 9am not 5pm for exactly that reason. I always try nowadays to get tons of sleep now there are no small babies around although even now I was woken by one iGCSE teenager briefly who was having a shower at midnight and the departing postman after 5am so we have a kind of continuous cycle of people up - probably why we have never had a break in.