Top Law Schools

.

There is no way you should write about this topic. It's much better to have a half-assed PS that your heart is not in than to write something that might hurt you.

The PS matters too little in the application process to do something risky with it. Just write something boring and let your numbers do the talking.

You're afraid of controversey & yet you want to be a lawyer ?

Your topic is interesting & appropriate, but your courage is questionable. Persuasive writing skills are valued in this profession.

P.S. Great chances at Notre Dame & Pepperdine. Even on the most liberal campuses, law schools look for diversity in all forms.

P.P.S. I really wanted to write "Grow a pair", but thought that that might be a bit too crude. Nobody likes a wimpy lawyer---except opposing counsel.

.

My advice above is serious. If you can't write a persuasive piece on a controversial topic, then your essays aren't likely to be much of a factor in the law school admissions process & you need to avoid litigation & lobbying practice areas. Consider transactional work. Or consider the ministry.

just don't talk about morality and youll be ok. and dont mention 'abortion,' use some generic word for conservative

Write and post.

Your parents are right. You should write about your Armenian heritage -- in a Diversity Statement.

No one can tell you how to organize your personal statement. You need to figure that out. With that being said, as a starting point it might help to explain why you feel so passionately about the topic in the first place. Now, I don't mean just tell the reader your views on abortion. I mean connecting an event, memory to your current inclinations. Is there a reason you've taken on these pro-life causes? Establishing that is crucial I think, although I see how it might be tricky, given your objectives (namely, not coming off as a "right-wing nutjob").

You shouldn't be worrying about making sure it's non-controversial. You should be worrying about making sure it's well-written.

That PS is not controversial. Point of fact, your position on the issue is the least controversial one you can take. You think abortion should be rare and you want to help women in crisis. Whooo. You are a real revolutionary.

Your problem is you act like an immature ideologue, despite the fact that you see yourself as so enlightened. Your judgement seems to be stronger against one side of the issue (pro-lifers) than the other, which makes you a douche for ingratiating yourself with them. IMO, terms like "right wing nut job" and "starting a dialogue" are indicative of a progressive ideologue. Maybe you are not, but are you sure you did not hijack a conversative group for you own use?

I would not worry about using the word abortion if you are writing about abortion. I am pretty sure AdComs have heard it before. It sounds more like you do not want to admit you oppose abortion, even though you supposedly do. This makes you seem like a spineless dipshit.

FWIW, I think this could be a terrific PS.

kublaikahn wrote:That PS is not controversial. Point of fact, your position on the issue is the least controversial one you can take. You think abortion should be rare and you want to help women in crisis. Whooo. You are a real revolutionary.

Your problem is you act like an immature ideologue, despite the fact that you see yourself as so enlightened. Your judgement seems to be stronger against one side of the issue (pro-lifers) than the other, which makes you a douche for ingratiating yourself with them. IMO, terms like "right wing nut job" and "starting a dialogue" are indicative of a progressive ideologue. Maybe you are not, but are you sure you did not hijack a conversative group for you own use?

I would not worry about using the word abortion if you are writing about abortion. I am pretty sure AdComs have heard it before. It sounds more like you do not want to admit you oppose abortion, even though you supposedly do. This makes you seem like a spineless dipshit.

FWIW, I think this could be a terrific PS.

the OP is still in UG. In fact, i might bet OP is a rising senior. And, if my memory serves me correctly, UG campuses are teeming with immature ideologues. Basically: cut her some slack, she's young.

The problem is not that she is an idealogue, it is the immaturity and self-aggandizement. It may be common, but I would venture the applicants that are not self-important and childish fair better.

If you can put what's in your post into a PS you should do well. Your post is about a controversial subject but it didn't come off as harsh. Adcomms should appreciate your sincerity and pursuit to help society in a specific way (if it's not specific and just "save the world" they'll think you're naive.)

You have what could be a great PS. Run with it.

I don't see it as controversial. You are working with other groups who don't agree with your view for a common goal...how is that controversial?
Also, use the word "abortion" if you want to, it's not like it's some dirty word. I remember when I was writting mine that some people thought I was beating on religion and it was an anti-religion PS while others thought I was walking on egg shells so I wouldn't offend anyone who might be religious so don't compromise what you want to say, everyone has their own biases.
I actually think yours is a pretty good idea (I still have to read it though), so go ahead and write it and then you can go from there or scrap it (you still have plenty of time)

.

'hye'-mart

I think this could be a compelling PS that appeals to people with differing political views. If you don't want it to be controversial, then don't write about the issues of contention - i.e., whether abortion is right or wrong, the conduct of people on the fringes, etc.

But you said "I don't intend to SIMPLY spit out a PS that preaches about why abortion is immoral..." which makes me think you will write about how "abortion is immoral" anyway. Maybe you shouldn't do that. You don't even necessarily have to elaborate since your position as President makes your stance on the issue obvious. Maybe you could focus on how you did something that was unexpected given precisely your position as President of that club. And also how that is relevant to your decision to go to law school.

kapital98 wrote:If you can put what's in your post into a PS you should do well. Your post is about a controversial subject but it didn't come off as harsh. Adcomms should appreciate your sincerity and pursuit to help society in a specific way (if it's not specific and just "save the world" they'll think you're naive.)

You have what could be a great PS. Run with it.

This is about right. I'm not sure how you could turn it into a personal statement but it seems interesting. Either way, no adcomm is going to ding you just for being pro-life. Just don't use the PS to preach and focus instead on how you made your message more effective by taking specific actions and how you were willing to work with those that disagreed with you over your common goals.

In all fairness, it's not that your view point is controversial as much as the topic of abortion is polarizing. Writing a PS on a polarizing topic you are passionate about may not be inappropriate, but such a PS would certainly be risky.

My only advice is that you should not attempt to write about the case law surrounding the topic, because you will likely come off sounding uninformed. Rather, focus on your beliefs, how you've designed your goals to further them, and how you plan to achieve them.

memphisbelle wrote:Write and post.

This is the most credited response. How are we going to be able to determine if a PS is controversial in the first place if we don't have it before us? Let alone tell you how to make it less controversial? Write it out and let us read it.

I think a lot of people are missing the point here... OP, if you decide to stick with this topic, simply focus on your leadership role and the things you've done with your organization rather than the ideological/political aspects of the pro-life/pro-choice debate. No one will blame you for taking a stand on the issue, but that in itself also won't win the adcoms over. What might win them over is the story of how you *acted* on your convictions and demonstrated the qualities of a great leader in the process. I personally think your focus on transferring the debate to a less political and more practical level is a sober-minded approach to defending your beliefs without preaching. Maybe the adcoms will agree as well, and will appreciate you for your commitment and leadership, not for your specific beliefs.

Lots of elitist replies here, but hatas gonna hate. Personally, I think you've got a good idea here. Controversy can grab attention in the right way in a stack full of PS submissions, and if you do it in the right way, I am sure an adcom will appreciate a refreshing topic. I don't think you come across as immature, you in fact have evaluated your beliefs to see if you can find common ground with others to get things done and that shows that you look at the merits of what you feel passionately about. As someone coming from the other side of the aisle on this issue, I think your topic comes across very non-douch-like and like. As you write, think about these things:

1. Where was the program before you took over and were it's activities ones you agreed with (good place to say "I supported some things, but I wanted to see if there were issues that could be agreed upon across campus groups that would create less partisanship...)
2. How did you decide on the idea to help pregnant women on campus and what groups did you work with to do so?
3. Where there any big events that you sponsored or awareness campaigns? With who?
4. Throughout the whole thing talk about your decisions as a leader. Talk about any problems you came up against or big decisions for organizing that had to be made or how many people you had to harness to get things going.

Good luck as you get going and if you'd like a reader, I'd be happy to read yours if you read mine.

.