Did you/will you take a year off between undergrad and LS? Forum

[Flips88]

Certainly it is personal, but there are really NO drawbacks to taking time off (unless you can't defer your loans) while there are drawbacks to going straight through (as the above poster has eloquently addressed).

I disagree with the bolded; there definitely can be drawbacks to taking time off. For example, I applied this 2011-2012 cycle while I am in my senior year and am heading to a T6. If I chose to apply next year instead, my GPA would actually have decreased.

Personally, UG has been very easy. I do not feel strained mentally. I worked during the first 3 years of undergrad at a cell phone company working sales with mostly 23+ college grads, so I feel like I can define what I have as reasonable work experience. I also clowned on the LSAT the first time around so taking time off to study doesnt pertain to me.

On the other hand, I have friends who scored poorly on the LSAT but still plan to go to law school this cycle. I plead with them and try to convince them to take time off, study, and retake.

Well prepare to say goodbye to that feeling

[parsi]

Certainly it is personal, but there are really NO drawbacks to taking time off (unless you can't defer your loans) while there are drawbacks to going straight through (as the above poster has eloquently addressed).

I disagree with the bolded; there definitely can be drawbacks to taking time off. For example, I applied this 2011-2012 cycle while I am in my senior year and am heading to a T6. If I chose to apply next year instead, my GPA would actually have decreased.

Personally, UG has been very easy. I do not feel strained mentally. I worked during the first 3 years of undergrad at a cell phone company working sales with mostly 23+ college grads, so I feel like I can define what I have as reasonable work experience. I also clowned on the LSAT the first time around so taking time off to study doesnt pertain to me.

On the other hand, I have friends who scored poorly on the LSAT but still plan to go to law school this cycle. I plead with them and try to convince them to take time off, study, and retake.

Well prepare to say goodbye to that feeling

Thats what Im hoping for...

However much I would love to take time off to see the world, F beezies, and do other adultolescent things, neither I nor my parents have any money. The sooner I get out of law school, the sooner I can help mom and dad with their mortgage

[alumniguy]

Certainly it is personal, but there are really NO drawbacks to taking time off (unless you can't defer your loans) while there are drawbacks to going straight through (as the above poster has eloquently addressed).

I disagree with the bolded; there definitely can be drawbacks to taking time off. For example, I applied this 2011-2012 cycle while I am in my senior year and am heading to a T6. If I chose to apply next year instead, my GPA would actually have decreased.

Personally, UG has been very easy. I do not feel strained mentally. I worked during the first 3 years of undergrad at a cell phone company working sales with mostly 23+ college grads, so I feel like I can define what I have as reasonable work experience. I also clowned on the LSAT the first time around so taking time off to study doesnt pertain to me.

On the other hand, I have friends who scored poorly on the LSAT but still plan to go to law school this cycle. I plead with them and try to convince them to take time off, study, and retake.

I'm not sure that many of your fellow T6s (or even up to the T50s) find that law school is mentally straining. Law is not rocket science. Being successful at law school requires either (i) natural talent, (ii) hard work or (iii) a combination of the two. Law school is a marathon - it is about studying and memorization and getting yourself comfortable with legal theories so that when you see them in a crazy hypothetical, you know exactly how to answer the question. There are few, if any, truly difficult concepts to master.

The point that I was making regarding taking time off is that after you've been practicing for upwards of 5 years, you are undoubtedly going to wish you took time off. I would encourage anyone to ask practicing attorney's that went straight through and have actually worked for several years whether taking time off between UG and law school would have been a good thing. Most would probably say yes.

[Flips88]

Out of UG, you can work to live. Out of LS, you live to work.

[Ssushi]

The bolded is not necessarily true. Another benefit of waiting is to wait out ITE and this horrible legal job market. Yes, the job market in general is bad, but the legal job market is ESPECIALLY bad. Going into law school thinking that you're just going to ace your classes and do well in interviews and score a 6 figure entry level job is nooooot a good idea, my friend.

I know it's not a guarantee but realize i don't plan on acing my classes. Not to get sidetracked, my original point was simply that it will be easier to get a job and a better paying one at that if you enter the job market with a top JD as opposed to just your bachelors. Again i know it's not a guarantee but I'm willing to bet a significant amount that the average salary out of a top law school is higher than that out of undergrad. Thus it would seem you are losing money by working prior to getting your degree.

I know it seems trivial but to me that 2 more years of saving for retirement, 2 more years of income my parents could use, 2 more years of income to help my brother with college. Not that these things are a necessity to me, it just seems like if you go into the job market you are leaving potentially 100,000k on the table for every year you take off. That's a ton of money.

makes it seem like you already have decided you'd rather not take time off. If that's true, why bother to ask us? Just do what feels best for you, and don't take time off--go into LS directly. (:

My question was more in regards to weather a school will accept you and then allow you to defer your start date for a year or two. I know if i cannot do that i certainly won't take a year off, but if it is a possibility then I may look at the options. The two comments about why one shouldn't take a year off were just things that popped into my mind as i was typing. I honestly have no clue i just wanted to bring up a few point i didn't think had been addressed yet.

[alumniguy]

The bolded is not necessarily true. Another benefit of waiting is to wait out ITE and this horrible legal job market. Yes, the job market in general is bad, but the legal job market is ESPECIALLY bad. Going into law school thinking that you're just going to ace your classes and do well in interviews and score a 6 figure entry level job is nooooot a good idea, my friend.

I know it's not a guarantee but realize i don't plan on acing my classes. Not to get sidetracked, my original point was simply that it will be easier to get a job and a better paying one at that if you enter the job market with a top JD as opposed to just your bachelors. Again i know it's not a guarantee but I'm willing to bet a significant amount that the average salary out of a top law school is higher than that out of undergrad. Thus it would seem you are losing money by working prior to getting your degree.

I know it seems trivial but to me that 2 more years of saving for retirement, 2 more years of income my parents could use, 2 more years of income to help my brother with college. Not that these things are a necessity to me, it just seems like if you go into the job market you are leaving potentially 100,000k on the table for every year you take off. That's a ton of money.

makes it seem like you already have decided you'd rather not take time off. If that's true, why bother to ask us? Just do what feels best for you, and don't take time off--go into LS directly. (:

My question was more in regards to weather a school will accept you and then allow you to defer your start date for a year or two. I know if i cannot do that i certainly won't take a year off, but if it is a possibility then I may look at the options. The two comments about why one shouldn't take a year off were just things that popped into my mind as i was typing. I honestly have no clue i just wanted to bring up a few point i didn't think had been addressed yet.

Two years 40 years down the line should NOT be driving your decisions made today. Your concern for your parents and brother are driving factors. However, you do realize that there are also negative opportunity costs to law school, right? You're taking three years of earning potential off the table to go to school straight through. I have no idea what your scholarship situation is, but let's just use 100k in debt to finance your legal education. That is money that will need to be paid back immediately upon graduating from law school. So three years out of law school you are 100k in debt, have no savings and make 160k. You'll be taxed at a high tax rate and be saddled with debt service payments.

If you could find a 50k job now, you would make $150k during your time it takes you to go to law school. You'll have no debt. Likely you'll get raises so that you'll probably make about 60-70k after 3 years. It will take you several years in biglaw to reach the same "net worth" position than if you didn't go to law school. Of course you'll be making more money, but you'll have to service your debt payments. You'll need to buy an expensive wardrobe, you'll need to live in an expensive city as this is where most of the 160k jobs are located.

Add to that the fact that most biglaw associates don't make it past 4-5 years and it is certainly questionable whether going to law school was a better financial decision in the long term. You need to look past the 160k starting salary. What happens to the majority who end up not making partner? Undoubtedly less money. An associate may move in-house at a bank or hedge fund and earn 160-200k (whereas by year 5 in biglaw you are pulling in 230k + bonus). Sure you get a better lifestyle to go with the reduced salary, but had you been working for 8 years (the three years of law school plus the 5 years in biglaw) you would likely have a comparable salary. Biglaw may offer that eye popping $160k early in life, but most associates probably make more money as an associate then they ever make the rest of their lives. Starting in biglaw offers tremendous upside potential, but the fact is that a very small number of associates ever realize that potential - we are talking like 5-10%.

Regarding deferrals, one year deferrals are probably doable (you'll need to ask for it, but provided you have some compelling reason as to why you want to defer, a law school will likely accommodate). I would imagine this should be requested sooner rather than later so that the law school can find a replacement student with similar credentials. I've never heard of a two year deferral before.

[bk1]

my original point was simply that it will be easier to get a job and a better paying one at that if you enter the job market with a top JD as opposed to just your bachelors.

You realize that there are costs associated with going to law school? Time, money, that sort of thing.

Not that these things are a necessity to me, it just seems like if you go into the job market you are leaving potentially 100,000k on the table for every year you take off. That's a ton of money.

I'm hoping that you understand that this only applies to about 50% of T14 grads. The other half will be surviving just fine but not making this kind of money, though they may also be drowning in soulcrushing debt if they paid sticker.

[Non-Chalant1]

I like all the people saying they don't regret going straight from UG, lol.

I'm with bk- for the majority of people there are nothing but positives to taking a year off+. Not only do you get full time work experience, you gain a different perspective, and your lsat score goes up. Sure, its a personal decision.

These are all assumptions. What if your LSAT was already higher than most people and you are well aware of what working full time is like? What if you already had humble upbringings? How is it that all these people claim that they hummed around in UG with bad habits are also claiming they were burned out? Maybe if you were immature in the first place you need that time or if you're uncertain about law. But the entire that one year off made me more mature is about as cliche ad the entire studying abroad made you understand the world shtick. Mind you I know and respect the various reasons people take time off for. Many of my friends are.

[alumniguy]

I like all the people saying they don't regret going straight from UG, lol.

I'm with bk- for the majority of people there are nothing but positives to taking a year off+. Not only do you get full time work experience, you gain a different perspective, and your lsat score goes up. Sure, its a personal decision.

These are all assumptions. What if your LSAT was already higher than most people and you are well aware of what working full time is like? What if you already had humble upbringings? How is it that all these people claim that they hummed around in UG with bad habits are also claiming they were burned out? Maybe if you were immature in the first place you need that time or if you're uncertain about law. But the entire that one year off made me more mature is about as cliche ad the entire studying abroad made you understand the world shtick. Mind you I know and respect the various reasons people take time off for. Many of my friends are.

Again, the MAJORITY of 0Ls on this board have probably NOT worked full time. It is precisely about immaturity - not so much in the negative sense of the word, but more of the lack of perspective sense.

The main issue I have with people saying "I know I want to be a lawyer" is that being a lawyer is NOT like most other professions in this world in so far as non-lawyers have no idea what lawyers actually do for a living. It isn't like being a teacher or an airline pilot or a policeman. These professions are generally known to most lay people. Being a lawyer, especially a biglaw lawyer, is not like most people believe. You're telling me you really want to do document review for 70 hours a week, followed by a 60 hour week of creating a privilege log, followed by 70 hours of redacting producible documents? No, people don't think of these tasks when they think of being a lawyer. Being a lawyer isn't about debating others and crafting arguments. A portion of the job is about this, but the majority of the job is not. It the above scenario or it is reading and drafting contract language, negotiating over provisions that many of have never even considered, etc. The only thing people do know about being a biglaw lawyer is that they are well paid.

Also, the time demands are another factor students don't understand. Unlike school, if you pull an all-nighter you can usually sleep in late on the following day. If you pull an all-nighter in biglaw, you are still expected to show up at your desk by 9:30 and work like it is a normal day. You don't get to show up late or go home early. It is the day-in and day-out time demands that drive most associates to quit biglaw within 4 years.

And about gaining perspective - the kid who went on the semester at sea will still most likely have a far better understanding of the world than the kid who never went abroad. Semester at sea, like a the one year gap period, isn't meant to provide any "answers." It is about gaining perspective, whether it is a small dose or a large helping.

[Stanford4Me]

I like all the people saying they don't regret going straight from UG, lol.

I'm with bk- for the majority of people there are nothing but positives to taking a year off+. Not only do you get full time work experience, you gain a different perspective, and your lsat score goes up. Sure, its a personal decision.

These are all assumptions. What if your LSAT was already higher than most people and you are well aware of what working full time is like? What if you already had humble upbringings? How is it that all these people claim that they hummed around in UG with bad habits are also claiming they were burned out? Maybe if you were immature in the first place you need that time or if you're uncertain about law. But the entire that one year off made me more mature is about as cliche ad the entire studying abroad made you understand the world shtick. Mind you I know and respect the various reasons people take time off for. Many of my friends are.

Again, the MAJORITY of 0Ls on this board have probably NOT worked full time. It is precisely about immaturity - not so much in the negative sense of the word, but more of the lack of perspective sense.

The main issue I have with people saying "I know I want to be a lawyer" is that being a lawyer is NOT like most other professions in this world in so far as non-lawyers have no idea what lawyers actually do for a living. It isn't like being a teacher or an airline pilot or a policeman. These professions are generally known to most lay people. Being a lawyer, especially a biglaw lawyer, is not like most people believe. You're telling me you really want to do document review for 70 hours a week, followed by a 60 hour week of creating a privilege log, followed by 70 hours of redacting producible documents? No, people don't think of these tasks when they think of being a lawyer. Being a lawyer isn't about debating others and crafting arguments. A portion of the job is about this, but the majority of the job is not. It the above scenario or it is reading and drafting contract language, negotiating over provisions that many of have never even considered, etc. The only thing people do know about being a biglaw lawyer is that they are well paid.

Also, the time demands are another factor students don't understand. Unlike school, if you pull an all-nighter you can usually sleep in late on the following day. If you pull an all-nighter in biglaw, you are still expected to show up at your desk by 9:30 and work like it is a normal day. You don't get to show up late or go home early. It is the day-in and day-out time demands that drive most associates to quit biglaw within 4 years.

And about gaining perspective - the kid who went on the semester at sea will still most likely have a far better understanding of the world than the kid who never went abroad. Semester at sea, like a the one year gap period, isn't meant to provide any "answers." It is about gaining perspective, whether it is a small dose or a large helping.

I'm failing to see how traveling the world, working as a teacher, working in DC for a politician, or working in most of the other non-law related jobs that the majority of law students work in will give one perspective on whether or not they want to be a lawyer.

[alumniguy]

I'm failing to see how traveling the world, working as a teacher, working in DC for a politician, or working in most of the other non-law related jobs that the majority of law students work in will give one perspective on whether or not they want to be a lawyer.

Well, it will give them perspective on what they are actually passionate about in life. Very few people are "passionate" about law (and in my opinion, it is the main reason for why many leave the law altogether after only a relatively short stint). My perspective argument was less about figuring out what a lawyer does and more about growing up. Too many students become lawyers because they don't know what else to do in life. That is a recipe for a quick departure from practicing law.

Anyone can figure out what a lawyer does by asking their school's career service office to put them in contact with an alum who is an attorney. This is the perspective of what a lawyer does, which differs from life perspective discussed above.

[prezidentv8]

my original point was simply that it will be easier to get a job and a better paying one at that if you enter the job market with a top JD as opposed to just your bachelors.

You realize that there are costs associated with going to law school? Time, money, that sort of thing.

And that "easier to get a job and a better paying one at that" is by no means necessarily true.

Again, the MAJORITY of 0Ls on this board have probably NOT worked full time. It is precisely about immaturity - not so much in the negative sense of the word, but more of the lack of perspective sense.

As much as I agree that time off and regular work is a good thing, this is not why. To me, its more about making and saving money, enjoying life, giving yourself time to really think about what you want to do, and going after other opportunities that you might have to put off for a number of years if you do go to law school (not just career related, but volunteering, sports, travel, whatever). Service jobs are fine for these purposes, but so is beginning another career track. Although...then again, I've met an odd amount of very immature people who are in law school somewhere (in the lacking any and all perspective sense), so maybe you're right.

[prezidentv8]

I'm failing to see how traveling the world, working as a teacher, working in DC for a politician, or working in most of the other non-law related jobs that the majority of law students work in will give one perspective on whether or not they want to be a lawyer.

Well, it will give them perspective on what they are actually passionate about in life. Very few people are "passionate" about law (and in my opinion, it is the main reason for why many leave the law altogether after only a relatively short stint). My perspective argument was less about figuring out what a lawyer does and more about growing up. Too many students become lawyers because they don't know what else to do in life. That is a recipe for a quick departure from practicing law.

Anyone can figure out what a lawyer does by asking their school's career service office to put them in contact with an alum who is an attorney. This is the perspective of what a lawyer does, which differs from life perspective discussed above.

Ah, I see...we might be of a similar mind then.

[northwood]

I think if you are considering law- one of the best things you should do first is shadow a lawyer for a week or so. Then decide if you want to bother with the LSAT. if you cant do those 2 things ( and be able and willing to put your social life on hold for the duration of your lsat prep) then maybe you need to reasses your career path.

Most enlightening week ever. And i was able to take vacation from my job for the week so i still was able to get paid!

[99.9luft]

I'm failing to see how traveling the world, working as a teacher, working in DC for a politician, or working in most of the other non-law related jobs that the majority of law students work in will give one perspective on whether or not they want to be a lawyer.

Well, it will give them perspective on what they are actually passionate about in life. Very few people are "passionate" about law (and in my opinion, it is the main reason for why many leave the law altogether after only a relatively short stint). My perspective argument was less about figuring out what a lawyer does and more about growing up. Too many students become lawyers because they don't know what else to do in life. That is a recipe for a quick departure from practicing law.

Anyone can figure out what a lawyer does by asking their school's career service office to put them in contact with an alum who is an attorney. This is the perspective of what a lawyer does, which differs from life perspective discussed above.

Plus, there is also the benefit of psychological maturity. Hung out with law students in the past couple of years (t15 school) and cannot emphasize enough how many times they complained of an unexpectedly high # of their classmates being immature, incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts. The consensus was that the most interesting ppl in LS are older not because of intellectual wisdom necessarily, but mostly because of psychological maturity.

[bk1]

Plus, there is also the benefit of psychological maturity. Hung out with law students in the past couple of years (t15 school) and cannot emphasize enough how many times they complained of an unexpectedly high # of their classmates being immature, incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts. The consensus was that the most interesting ppl in LS are older not because of intellectual wisdom necessarily, but mostly because of psychological maturity.

Do you know what that word means?

[Flips88]

Plus, there is also the benefit of psychological maturity. Hung out with law students in the past couple of years (t15 school) and cannot emphasize enough how many times they complained of an unexpectedly high # of their classmates being immature, incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts. The consensus was that the most interesting ppl in LS are older not because of intellectual wisdom necessarily, but mostly because of psychological maturity.

This wouldn't happen in Europe!

[prezidentv8]

the most interesting ppl in LS are older not because of intellectual wisdom necessarily, butmostly because of psychological maturity they've done stuff that isn't school.

FTFMe

[99.9luft]

Plus, there is also the benefit of psychological maturity. Hung out with law students in the past couple of years (t15 school) and cannot emphasize enough how many times they complained of an unexpectedly high # of their classmates being immature, incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts. The consensus was that the most interesting ppl in LS are older not because of intellectual wisdom necessarily, but mostly because of psychological maturity.

Do you know what that word means?

Metaphorically speaking: LS felt like a family to them, hence people hooking up, cross-dating each other perpetuated an incestuous atmosphere.

[99.9luft]

Plus, there is also the benefit of psychological maturity. Hung out with law students in the past couple of years (t15 school) and cannot emphasize enough how many times they complained of an unexpectedly high # of their classmates being immature, incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts. The consensus was that the most interesting ppl in LS are older not because of intellectual wisdom necessarily, but mostly because of psychological maturity.

This wouldn't happen in Europe!

troll better.

[alumniguy]

The fact that most law schools function like junior high schools doesn't help matters either. The structure of dividing the class into sections and having the same classes with the same 75 students leads to a certain immaturity in general. I would agree that 90% of the time the more compelling people had taken some time off (although I fully admit I am likely biased in the matter).

[Stanford4Me]

Plus, there is also the benefit of psychological maturity. Hung out with law students in the past couple of years (t15 school) and cannot emphasize enough how many times they complained of an unexpectedly high # of their classmates being immature, incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts. The consensus was that the most interesting ppl in LS are older not because of intellectual wisdom necessarily, but mostly because of psychological maturity.

Do you know what that word means?

Haha,

I'll also say that if you venture to an NYU Bar Review on a Thursday night, you'll see plenty of "mature" and "experienced" students acting like little college frat stars. First semester the two people I went out with every weekend (at their insistence) were 32 and 35. Honestly, I think (a significant number, but not a majority of) people who take time off presume they're more prepared for law school and come in with some superiority complex which causes them to point out when people who came straight through do immature things while simultaneously ignoring when they, or their "peers," are being obnoxious.

[bk1]

Plus, there is also the benefit of psychological maturity. Hung out with law students in the past couple of years (t15 school) and cannot emphasize enough how many times they complained of an unexpectedly high # of their classmates being immature, incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts. The consensus was that the most interesting ppl in LS are older not because of intellectual wisdom necessarily, but mostly because of psychological maturity.

Do you know what that word means?

Metaphorically speaking: LS felt like a family to them, hence people hooking up, cross-dating each other perpetuated an incestuous atmosphere.

In that case it seems like the benefit is actually to not take time off since you will fit in better with all the "incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts" and won't be pissed off by them like you would had you taken time off. Plus according to your comment it seems like those who went straight through are more likely to get laid and that has got to be worth it, especially as a stress reliever.

[minnbills]

I'm sort of taking a year off.

I have one class left, and could graduate in the fall. However, I have another year of eligibility to play my sport, and I have a good thing going with coaching a local sports team.

If I graudated in the fall, I would look for some type of office job for my (part) year off. Instead, I'm going to take an internship for credit in the fall and take my last class in the spring. Plus I'll coach and play my sport.

I figure this is a better option than rolling the dice with the job market. Given that I don't have a major that translates into anything, I think there's a stronger chance I'll sit on my parents couch for a year rather than find job more worthwhile than my current plan.

[crumpetsandtea]

In that case it seems like the benefit is actually to not take time off since you will fit in better with all the "incestuous fratastic/soristitute douches/sluts" and won't be pissed off by them like you would had you taken time off. Plus according to your comment it seems like those who went straight through are more likely to get laid and that has got to be worth it, especially as a stress reliever.

ILU bk.