Art Prior wrote:People don't typically start doing drugs at 45, they start younger 20s even if its softer drugs. I don't know when this guy started, his wife does but she didn't talk about his addiction at all nor seem to know about it.
The guy listened to hendrix and was into philosophy as a grad student and into chemistry the article says, suggestive of an interest in drugs.
Both of your posts ITT are bad, mostly because they make all kinds of unsubstantiated assumptions in an effort to assume biglaw had nothing to do with it, this guy already had problems. I mean, her whole point was that law/biglaw changed him. And I'm pretty sure there's no age limit on when people start doing drugs, especially if they end up in a culture where it's acceptable (biglaw, according to this article, and, frankly, you). Also he'd been in law for 20 years, so lots of time to have started in law.
And whatever distinctions make you feel better aside, there isn't any legitimate reason to be using drugs in biglaw. The legitimate medical reason thing doesn't fly (unless you mean smoking pot while on chemo or the like, which is completely outside the circumstances we've been discussing), and using it as a tool to work long hours? Good luck with that. Someone who does that has a problem (and probably is at the earlier stages of where the guy in the article ended up). There is no such thing as a "good" work drug, dude.