Non-helpful PhD and employment Forum

[lawls]

I've read some things on this forum that suggest a PhD in, say, Philosophy or History will hurt your chances at biglaw (and other employment? not sure). I suspect this is true, but I am wondering how much a PhD will come into play for someone who does the JD after the PhD and has solid credentials. Is it a huge detriment or can it be explained away if you have a solid enough resume?

[Series70]

I'm in a similar position, getting the JD after a B.S. PhD (that is, if my sponsor ever decides my intro is nuanced enough for me to finally defend). I plan on leaving the PhD off my resume, and will instead stress that I was teaching at a university before going to law school, if it comes up during interviews.

I have a colleague who got her PhD in the same field as me and then went on to Fordham law. She's just been offered her first law job now, 3 years after getting her JD. But she was hesitating between law and academia, and made the mistake of not going through her school's OCS to help with the job hunt.

[spondee]

I think it's only potentially detrimental, but it depends on the rest of your resume and your interview. As a nontrad, you'll have to have very good answers for the (1) why go to law school and (2) why work for us kind of interview questions.

Unfortunately, a History PhD on the resume suggests the answers are (1) I went to law school to break into academia because doing so in history alone was too hard and (2) I don't really want to work for a firm, but I need to bide some time before I get hired into academia. But I'd think you can counter this with other information on your resume and good answers during interviews.

[Anonymous User]

I'm in a similar position, getting the JD after a B.S. PhD (that is, if my sponsor ever decides my intro is nuanced enough for me to finally defend). I plan on leaving the PhD off my resume, and will instead stress that I was teaching at a university before going to law school, if it comes up during interviews.

I have a colleague who got her PhD in the same field as me and then went on to Fordham law. She's just been offered her first law job now, 3 years after getting her JD. But she was hesitating between law and academia, and made the mistake of not going through her school's OCS to help with the job hunt.

Please don't do that.

There is no such thing as a "non-helpful PhD." Whoever gave you that idea doesn't know what they're talking about.

Showing intellectual skill, dedication, and experience with research and writing is unequivocally not a bad thing. There are certainly some firms that look for younger candidates, but as a non-trad you're hurt at those places / wouldn't want to go to those places anyway.

My biggest recommendation to 1Ls is go to every firm reception you can, and you will meet partners who have PhDs in all kinds of fields who have done well.

Also, PhDs generally vastly over-estimate the importance of the "Why Law?" question. As researchers, it's important for us to justify why we are pursuing particular research questions and topics, and I think we get trained into feeling like you would then have to answer a 'why law?' or 'why firm?' question. I've learned to just roughly leave it at "I was always interested in the law, and while I also had an academic interest I wanted to pursue, I wanted to be a professional in law, and I've loved my first year. Best decision I ever made." And, as for a firm, I mean, you want to make money and actually work as a professional and in a team working to help people and corporations on actual practical issues. How hard is that to justify?

Oh, I would advise not being a professor's RA for your 1L summer job of course, but that's partly for your benefit in learning what the legal profession's like. You should be pleasantly surprised at the opportunities you get ahead of those of your peers, as long as you remember that nothing will just come to you, you have to be aggressive, network, study hard to get at least decent grades, etc.

[lawls]

I'm in a similar position, getting the JD after a B.S. PhD (that is, if my sponsor ever decides my intro is nuanced enough for me to finally defend). I plan on leaving the PhD off my resume, and will instead stress that I was teaching at a university before going to law school, if it comes up during interviews.

I have a colleague who got her PhD in the same field as me and then went on to Fordham law. She's just been offered her first law job now, 3 years after getting her JD. But she was hesitating between law and academia, and made the mistake of not going through her school's OCS to help with the job hunt.

Please don't do that.

There is no such thing as a "non-helpful PhD." Whoever gave you that idea doesn't know what they're talking about.

Showing intellectual skill, dedication, and experience with research and writing is unequivocally not a bad thing. There are certainly some firms that look for younger candidates, but as a non-trad you're hurt at those places / wouldn't want to go to those places anyway.

My biggest recommendation to 1Ls is go to every firm reception you can, and you will meet partners who have PhDs in all kinds of fields who have done well.

Also, PhDs generally vastly over-estimate the importance of the "Why Law?" question. As researchers, it's important for us to justify why we are pursuing particular research questions and topics, and I think we get trained into feeling like you would then have to answer a 'why law?' or 'why firm?' question. I've learned to just roughly leave it at "I was always interested in the law, and while I also had an academic interest I wanted to pursue, I wanted to be a professional in law, and I've loved my first year. Best decision I ever made." And, as for a firm, I mean, you want to make money and actually work as a professional and in a team working to help people and corporations on actual practical issues. How hard is that to justify?

Oh, I would advise not being a professor's RA for your 1L summer job of course, but that's partly for your benefit in learning what the legal profession's like. You should be pleasantly surprised at the opportunities you get ahead of those of your peers, as long as you remember that nothing will just come to you, you have to be aggressive, network, study hard to get at least decent grades, etc.

Thanks for the response. I only meant to distinguish between PhDs that are essential for a particular legal niche (e.g. IP) vs. those which give you much broader skills, but also might be seen as opening up an exit option. But your point is taken. Good to hear it hasn't been a liability.