Retraining in law at 36 with young kids - possible or not?

[WomenShouldWinWomensSports]

So the background is, I'm currently not working (technically self employed as an editor), I was supposed to return to work as a biology teacher in September but couldn't actually afford the childcare bill and it was a job I don't really love and don't feel I'm doing my best work in.

BA Archaeology. Conversion course. PGCE Biology. MSc Bioarchaeology. Damn good at research and writing essays.

I've been at a career junction for a while now, and out of teaching for the last 8 years. I have mild bipolar disorder and ADHD.

Today it struck me that I have a lot to offer to the legal profession. I am drawn to the GC threads, even though I don't know everything people are talking about (gardening??), I am horrified by injustice and am thinking I'd like to retrain as a lawyer.

But I don't know where to start. The Law Society have recently changed it so you don't do a GDL/LPC anymore (that's how my now-retired aunt qualified years ago), you now seem to learn "on the job" then take an exam.

I don't really understand how to now get the experience to become the type of lawyer I'd like to be. I dream of working in corporate law and scrutinising contracts (I'm that person who DOES read the T&Cs).

As a mother I am solely responsible for two children under three years of age, one starts school this coming September. DH is on the scene 1 day and 1 evening a week due to his own work schedule. No family to watch the babies etc.

Would volunteering for the CAB get me to where I'm looking to go anytime soon as that's the only thing I can think of? Or is it the "wrong" area of law and therefore no good to get into corporate law? With my age (36), is corporate an unrealistic goal?

I'm within 1hr commuting distance of London but only recently moved here so no idea what's available.

Can anyone advise me on this at all please? I've posted in this topic specifically because I know there's quite a few practising lawyers in here who might have current info about this.

I didn't want to be the one who said this but I wholeheartedly agree. It is so competitive and as far as I can see, full of young trainees and NQs. The costs of qualifying are ridiculous and once you qualify you're in a high pressured environment. Throw young children into the mix makes it even more so.

I don't know many lawyers who haven't been anxious messes at various stages of their career.

I've always struggled to recommend law to anyone.

OP nave a read of 'roll on Friday'.

That's the "beauty" of the SQE - if they have passed both 1 and 2 and have 2 years qualifying experience as a paralegal they are then solicitors. Hence there should no longer overqualified paralegals. Ie. ones who have done the academics but can't progress to being a solicitor through lack of training contract.

Maybe look at a job as a legal expense claims handler? A lot of the big firms will be willing to take on someone with the right skills even if you have no legal experience. Whilst you are dealing with insurance claims, you do get a real oversight of the litigation process from first notification to court settlement. Might give you an idea if you like the sector or not. A large firm may also help with the cost of legal exams. Often they have links with solicitor firms and you can transfer across to work as a paralegal once you have built up some experience.

@SeasonFinale I have to admit the new route to qualification is an unknown to me. Our current trainees are still those who've done the LPC route.

I think when the SRA suggested this route, the feedback from the industry was pretty negative. Isn't it just going to create more qualified people competing with others for a relatively small number of jobs?

Yes it will force the bottleneck at a different point ie. NQE rather than at TC but it should mean that some who may never have gotten a TC but who are still good lawyers will make it. It will be even more important than ever to stress that law firms will still be looking for decent grades at A level and for good degree choices at decent unis and that anyone self funding shouldn't undergo it lightly. However it will definitely be a good route for mature students or excellent applicants who merely didn't hit the jackpot when applying for TCs.

@kirinm I'm an NHS clinician wanting to move into medicolegal roles, and it's helpful for that. Not essential, but definitely makes you a more desirable candidate. And I have, in fact, secured such a role, and was told that one of the things that made me attractive as a candidate was that I was working on the PGDL. So it's paid off already.

Plus it's generally fascinating, so I'm enjoying it in it's own right.

Yes, SQE moves the bottleneck to NQ roles. So it is important people realise what kind of courses and 2 years QWE/TC are likely to land them a qualified job. My twins did the BPP PGDL (2 terms) in 2020/21 (and LPC 2021/22) so I hav a bit of recent experiences and that is why I know a bit about SQE too (although they are still under the "old"/ LPC system).

SQE is not necessarily that much cheaper as the SQE exam fees paid to Kaplan are abhout £4000. Most people will need to do a PGDL or LLB too just to know enough law to be taken on as NQ or at the least will need an SQE1 and 2 course; although in theory you could self teach yourself SQE1 and 2 so just have to pay £4k exam fees I suppose.
The choices under SQE make it more complicated for potential solicitors as they might make the wrong choice (eg of not doing a course an employer might prefer or doing a course they do not need).

As for doing a PDGL, some paralegal roles want people with an LLB and LPC (or at least a PGDL) so even just get a paralegal job some kind of law course completed tends to be useful to obtain that role. Some people find once they do the LPC it is easier to get a good paralegal job.

@TheWayTheLightFalls and @kirinm Thank you for that perspective. That’s exactly what my aunt was saying which is why I hadn’t rushed into it so far. As you say my understanding of the profession isn’t very deep and I do want to make a measured decision here.

The careers advice I received for my first degree was ‘you are bright with great grades, go to a good university, do any degree in a subject you love, employers look for grades, not what you’ve studied.’

I thought it was as simple as applying for a job and getting an interview, like a CV was some sort of Top Trumps card as that’s what we were told at school. 🤣🤦‍♀️

It was frustrating as all hell to be stuck at McDonald’s for 2 years after graduation, as I came from a single parent council flat and my dad had no idea about careers as he never worked a day in his life. I didn’t have money to move to anywhere with jobs or to take days off for interviews and nowhere actually wanted an archaeologist without a masters which was impossible for me before the new loans came out.

Doing the wrong degree has been my biggest regret in life and really I’m looking to put it right with retraining and finally feel challenged by my work. I wish I’d had realistic advice in the first place telling me there is a pool of ‘useful’ degrees and that I should pick from that list and that while plenty of people do obscure degrees in art history or archaeology, they largely get places in careers due to connections or parental funding/housing to enable them to do underpaid/unpaid entry level work.

I went into teaching largely because at the time it was the only funded option that directly led to a job and I find it really boring. I did my MSc as a formal qualification in biology to be more employable but then realised I am still not happy teaching.

I don’t want to mess up again.

@Xenia thank you, this is why I posted, to find out which route would offer the best chance of success. I am a little bit reticent to undertake further study without a clear end goal of employment in mind, which is why the training contracts leading to qualification appeal more to me than other routes. Do A-level results really make a difference for grad schemes?

I've been qualified for 10 years and I still have to state my A Level results - most firms have career websites that insist on that information. It's totally ridiculous.

Ah that makes perfect sense. Glad you're enjoying it.

This. I was a corporate lawyer and it is intensely hard work with very long hours. Think double all nighters and never finishing until at least about 9pm.

There is also incredible stress. I found it impossible to do with kids. The pay is good if you get the right role, but workload is punishing. It’s also incredibly competitive in England- very many people with law degrees who can’t get traineeships. In fact I think it’s a minority of those with law degrees who will ever be solicitors. Also outside of big corporate firms or a few well paid in house roles, pay is not great- likely to be lower or similar to a teacher for many roles.

it’s not impossible but it is important to be realistic. If you are interested in corporate law, experience in business and finance would be much more useful than cab.

Absolutely. Law firms are generally pretty elitist and want to see stellar academics even if they are not relevant to the job. Also I suppose it’s a way to sift when they get so many applications.

Lawyer here. Wouldn't necessarily recommend it as if you want to make decent money you have to work long hours, at least for the first few years. Getting a training contract is very competitive. Academics absolutely will count - A-levels and degree (anything below a 2:1 will mean it isn't worth it). I do think that candidates with different backgrounds will be considered by some law firms. I don't think you could know now what area of law would interest you. If you do a training contract generally you will get exposure to four different areas so you can see what you like. If you want to make big money you would want to work in a large corporate law firm. If you want to make ok money you can go to eg a west end firm. I would try to get experience by paralegalling and not commit to any funding of fees yourself unless you get a training contract. Do not underestimate the competition - there are places online that will tell you how many applicants there are for each place. Look at that and look at the online profiles for their trainees and be realistic.

This might be useful

www.chambersstudent.co.uk/law-firms/getting-a-training-contract/application-and-selection-criteria

Working with huge amounts of complex information is my superpower. I just don't know how to point that in the direction of a satisfying and stable career.

What about taxation? Whether as a tax lawyer or tax adviser, that's about wrestling with complex legislation / case law and how it meets the real world far more than it ever is about numbers.

Tax law is constantly changing, often highly complex, comes with ethical conundrums as well as commercial ones, and can be used to help people. There wouldn't be any chance of running out of new challenges.

The CTA qualification from The Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) is considered the "gold standard" but there are other routes into the profession.

A career in tax is generally much more family-friendly than some of the paths you're looking at but does seem to tick some of your key boxes. It's also not a field that's over-saturated with people trying to enter the profession in the way law tends to be.

Just a thought reading your posts.

I’d just flag that law can be incredibly boring and tedious, I’ve been a lawyer for 20 odd years and it’s not at all like you see on TV. Commuting into London for an hour (plus stick another 30 mins to tube it to the office) and then home again at the end of the day with young kids would be hell unless you can afford a nanny or have grandparents who can offer free childcare. The big firms tend to be quite traditional and look for law as the first profession of recruitees so you may need to think outside the box and work as a paralegal in a more local firm to allow you to decide whether it’s something for you. Local councils and other public sectors also have Legal departments and tend to be more family friendly and better hours as well as people from more diverse backgrounds.

I also took bad decisions for my degree, doing a BA and MA in English despite being fundamentally uncreative. I have experience working as a legal secretary in a corporate law department of a well-regarded London firm (think top-100, not magic circle). I am male and don't have children, but was in my mid/late 30s at the time, and had done similar work in my 20s though on-and-off, and always temp or contract.

I found the corporate department was a very public/private school environment, both stuffy and dull but also clearly high-pressured for the lawyers. There were female associates but they were young, well-presented, and with good, uncomplicated backgrounds. And it was very hierarchical and you absolutely would know your place!

I was just doing maternity cover and I got bored since it became very routine for me (amending documents, doing their typing, opening up new matters, sending out engagement letters, etc). The hours were regular apart from a few times when I had to be around until late when a deal was being signed. The money was quite good - about £30k - though I'd been on more in 2006!

I actually left at the end of my contract, even though I could have kept going as a pool temp in the firm. The admin work had just become too routine and my brain wasn't used.

There are a lot less legal secretarial jobs out there than there used to be, now that any lawyer under the age of 40 can be expected to know how to do their own typing! That's a shame as that used to be a good and well-paid career.

After I left this firm, I spent a while as a legal recruiter. I was actually poached by the agency that had placed me as a secretary in the law firm, to go and work for them as a recruiter). That was definitely challenging and involved different challenges - my interpersonal skills and knowledge, and ability to build relationships from nothing, were crucial in a way they never were as a legal secretary.

However this also didn't last, the firm shut down the department and also I'd run up against that most lawyers would value reputation and pedigree and while mining me for information, would go to the more established firms when it came to actually making their move.

I also looked into Company Secretarial work as an interesting alternative, and that is something I may look into in future, although to obtain the qualification there is a lot of studying and exams to pass, and as always a lot of competition if you are looking for roles within firms. Perhaps going down the Company Secretarial route could also be of interest to you, OP? You would be involved in work related to the running of businesses, and it would satisfy your thirst for knowledge, too.

Anyway, good luck!

I am solely responsible for two children under three years of age, one starts school this coming September. DH is on the scene 1 day and 1 evening a week due to his own work schedule. No family to watch the babies etc

If your children are both under 3, are you definite that one will start school in September? Surely the oldest will turn 3 at some point before August 31st and then start school in September 2024?

I would use that time to choose schools wisely-if you have no real childcare support from your DH or family-you’ll need somewhere offering solid before/after school care or a school with local childminders that offer this.

It sounds just the sort of candidate a firm ought to be encouraging - bright, from a working class background, female, a mother.

If you can get a training contract the firm will pay for your post grad courses and exams Perhaps starting with that aim (including doing a paid vacation scheme) but all of these are very competitive. 50% of lawyers do not have a law degree and they do no then get into law firms because of connections - they get in because they have the minimum A levels (usuall AAB), , a 2/1, do well int he Watson Glaser online tests and pass various interviews and an assessment held over a day and do better on all that than others. There are lots of youtube videos by people about how to get a training contract by the way.

I agree with the comment above about getting good childcare and back up of back up of childcare. My daughters are also solicitors and that is key for them (as well as it was for me when I was working full time with 3 children under 4 at one point).

As a lawyer I am grateful to have an excellent primary school which offers childcare 7.45 and 6pm as wrap around school. However unless the law firm is les than a 15 min walk from the school you would need longer, we generally didn’t leave the office til 7pm at the earliest when I was in private practice and that’s when there wasn’t a big deal or case on, when you were expected to work into the night on occasions. I saw the wood from the trees when I got pregnant with my first child and moved in house which has, in my experience, much more family friendly generally and less macho.

I qualified into 'corporate' law as I think you mean it (actually banking) when I was 35, with two young kids. I don't regret it but it was hard work and I (being honest and under a name change) am exceptionally academically strong (Oxbridge first) - the academic side was really easy for me. The hours I needed to work to prove myself worthy of a training contract, and the stress of not knowing if I had one, combined with studying part time with two under two nearly killed me and DH and I came very close to divorce.

Now I am the main breadwinner (luckily as DH spent a long period of work over Covid) and work in-house (but in the sort of in-house team that works pretty much private practice hours - ultimately I'm a workaholic).

It continues to be tough as a trainee/NQ - the areas you're looking at are very competitive and attract very bright and very competitive people. You need rock solid childcare.

In your position, I would apply for vacation schemes to get some work experience on your CV and see if you like it. These are themselves very competitive and used as a recruitment method.

What part of teaching didn't you like?

Finally, I don't see you having mentioned where you are. That will limit your options, assuming you can't move.

Also, I think the stress in law doesn't come from aggressive clients but from unreasonably demanding clients/partners in terms of turnaround times, never being off (which has only gotten worse since Covid), and chargeable hour targets (you have to record everything you do in 6 minute units). For me the worst part of private practice was being stressed with too much work in the busy periods, and then being stressed with having to find work in the quiet periods. There was never downtime between the two.

That's what people mean when they say high stress - in big law you're not going to (often) get clients shouting at you, the stress of different to call centres/MacDonalds stress. I would struggle with a call centre, but I'm ok with big law.

Look at the SQE. My partner has recently completed SQE2 while doing a training contract with a boutique firm, and prepared for SQE1 while a paralegal at the same firm.

However, he only got the paralegal position because he'd worked in the non-legal side of the industry his chosen firm represent, and so was known to them. They gave him the training contract based on his performance/knowledge/skills.

What I would also say is that both sets of exams involved a lot of studying. Fine last year but this year we had a tiny baby, and him taking 5 weeks to study (all weekends, around work) was utter hell. Consider whether you want to do that to your family!