Biglaw and Parenting Forum

[Anonymous User]

Probably an intensely personal Q that will have a range of answers, but for Biglaw associates who have kids, does that make you hate your job less or more?

S/O and I will probably be trying soon, and I’m wondering what effect it’ll have on my career. On the one hand, I imagine it’ll make the lack of free time even worse, since you want to spend time with your family. But on the other, I feel like it’ll give me some added motivation to keep earning $ (I mean, what good is this money for a childless adult who doesn’t have free time to travel and enjoy it?)

[Anonymous User]

Probably an intensely personal Q that will have a range of answers, but for Biglaw associates who have kids, does that make you hate your job less or more?

S/O and I will probably be trying soon, and I’m wondering what effect it’ll have on my career. On the one hand, I imagine it’ll make the lack of free time even worse, since you want to spend time with your family. But on the other, I feel like it’ll give me some added motivation to keep earning $ (I mean, what good is this money for a childless adult who doesn’t have free time to travel and enjoy it?)

I have three kids not yet school-age, and for me, time > money. For me, once you reach a point where you can comfortably provide for kids (which for me does not include insane private school tuition or a huge apartment), the added money is absolutely not worth it. Kids care so much more about time with you than they do about having things. That said, infant daycare/a nanny is incredibly expensive and I think infants, so long as they are lovingly cared for when you are not there, "miss" you less, so I was less conflicted about it until my older kid was about 2 and stopped being a baby and became more of a little kid. My solution was a boutique with more reasonable hours/weekend expectations but still close to big law salary, but even then plan on transitioning to government some time in the next couple of years to find even more stable hours, even though that will mean a pay cut. We are saving like crazy now to cushion that blow. As for impact on your career, some partners are very understanding about family time, others less so. I don't know if you have ambitions to make partner, but that was squarely off the table for me once I saw how much partners work and how little time they could possibly be spending with family.

[Anonymous User]

One baby is not that hard, provided that you have a SO who recognizes how much long term benefit the money you’re making is. So if you have to work all day on Saturday or Sunday or both all of a sudden, the SO can just take the baby. It’s not ideal and hopefully it doesn’t happen to often but it’s fine. Same thing goes for evenings, daycare drop offs etc.

Two kids on top of biglaw can be really really hard. Being by yourself and dealing with a 6-18 month old plus a 3-5 year old at the same time is a massive challenge. So all of a sudden what used to be NBD for your SO to deal with alone (when you had one kid) is suddenly a massive burden that makes you feel guilty both for not spending time with your kids and for making your SO deal all alone. Furthermore when your kids are in daycare all day during the week a giant part of you feels really obligated to give them a significant weekend day activity because that’s when you guys get quality time that’s not focused around feeding, diaper changing, bottles, baths, etc.

So now when you get inundated it’s a billion times more difficult than it used to be because you can’t just automatically say to yourself “well I guess I’m gonna spend my Saturday working and that’s what they pay me for so fine” the way you used to.

You try to make up for it by cutting down on sleep or meals or social stuff or hobbies or whatever but like even that’s tough.

Anyway, short version is that with two kids, the regular/expected very-busy period will stress you out like never before.

*been in Biglaw a handful of years and trying to exit but also being super picky because I know how much the money saved during additional months in Biglaw will mean to the family throughout our lives

[Anonymous User]

Probably an intensely personal Q that will have a range of answers, but for Biglaw associates who have kids, does that make you hate your job less or more?

S/O and I will probably be trying soon, and I’m wondering what effect it’ll have on my career. On the one hand, I imagine it’ll make the lack of free time even worse, since you want to spend time with your family. But on the other, I feel like it’ll give me some added motivation to keep earning $ (I mean, what good is this money for a childless adult who doesn’t have free time to travel and enjoy it?)

I have three kids not yet school-age, and for me, time > money. For me, once you reach a point where you can comfortably provide for kids (which for me does not include insane private school tuition or a huge apartment), the added money is absolutely not worth it. Kids care so much more about time with you than they do about having things. That said, infant daycare/a nanny is incredibly expensive and I think infants, so long as they are lovingly cared for when you are not there, "miss" you less, so I was less conflicted about it until my older kid was about 2 and stopped being a baby and became more of a little kid. My solution was a boutique with more reasonable hours/weekend expectations but still close to big law salary, but even then plan on transitioning to government some time in the next couple of years to find even more stable hours, even though that will mean a pay cut. We are saving like crazy now to cushion that blow. As for impact on your career, some partners are very understanding about family time, others less so. I don't know if you have ambitions to make partner, but that was squarely off the table for me once I saw how much partners work and how little time they could possibly be spending with family.

OP here. Yeah, this tracks what I was expecting to hear. I’m not sure where you’re based, but I’m in a secondary market so it’s not *as bad* when it comes to partnership and time away from family. But, with that said, it’s still pretty fucking bad. Glad to hear you made the right choice for you family. Any golden handcuff issues so far? I like to think I’m above that, but, really, lol.

[12YrsAnAssociate]

Having my kid 100% changed my life and professional goals and has made biglaw a pretty tough place to work. It's been several years, and each year is harder. I honestly don't see me making it much longer. I'd rather watch my son kick a soccer ball.

[Anonymous User]

Probably an intensely personal Q that will have a range of answers, but for Biglaw associates who have kids, does that make you hate your job less or more?

S/O and I will probably be trying soon, and I’m wondering what effect it’ll have on my career. On the one hand, I imagine it’ll make the lack of free time even worse, since you want to spend time with your family. But on the other, I feel like it’ll give me some added motivation to keep earning $ (I mean, what good is this money for a childless adult who doesn’t have free time to travel and enjoy it?)

I have three kids not yet school-age, and for me, time > money. For me, once you reach a point where you can comfortably provide for kids (which for me does not include insane private school tuition or a huge apartment), the added money is absolutely not worth it. Kids care so much more about time with you than they do about having things. That said, infant daycare/a nanny is incredibly expensive and I think infants, so long as they are lovingly cared for when you are not there, "miss" you less, so I was less conflicted about it until my older kid was about 2 and stopped being a baby and became more of a little kid. My solution was a boutique with more reasonable hours/weekend expectations but still close to big law salary, but even then plan on transitioning to government some time in the next couple of years to find even more stable hours, even though that will mean a pay cut. We are saving like crazy now to cushion that blow. As for impact on your career, some partners are very understanding about family time, others less so. I don't know if you have ambitions to make partner, but that was squarely off the table for me once I saw how much partners work and how little time they could possibly be spending with family.

OP here. Yeah, this tracks what I was expecting to hear. I’m not sure where you’re based, but I’m in a secondary market so it’s not *as bad* when it comes to partnership and time away from family. But, with that said, it’s still pretty fucking bad. Glad to hear you made the right choice for you family. Any golden handcuff issues so far? I like to think I’m above that, but, really, lol.

I'm in NYC so can't speak to secondary markets and of course everyone's version of what amount of family time is right will be different, but for me the right balance is no regular weekend work (emergencies will come up and I understand that), and being able to be there for dinner/bedtime without then logging back on again until midnight (sleep is also a precious commodity for parents). We haven't had golden handcuffs issues so far and for me that has involved not paying attention to the fancy apartments/vacations/things other people have and just focusing on what we need and living pretty frugally (though without feeling like we are going without things we really need or want). It has helped that a lot of my friends are pretty far up in their finance careers and so their level of wealth so far exceeds what would be possible even in biglaw that keeping up with the Jones's is totally off the table. That said, I have more than one big law friend with new babies who hate their jobs and yet just bought apartments for north of $2million, which means they are tied to their jobs, which I totally don't get.....

[Anonymous User]

Secondary market, big law (full scale) with 1 kid and another on the way. I appreciate the $ and stability of biglaw much more than I did when I was younger, but like a previous poster said, I don't see this working when the kids are older and want to play. Plan is to see if I make partner... if so, try that out (see how bad it still is), and, if not, try a much smaller regional practice (not a lot of good in-house here).

[Anonymous User]

I just had my 2nd child so I have 2 kids now under 3 and I'm a midlevel. COVID has definitely helped with the remote work aspect so I get to see them more (10-15 min a couple times on a super busy day is better than not seeing them at all and I love the random interruptions when my wife and kids come in my office at 530pm for 2 minutes to check on me).

That said, we have a nanny and I don't think I could mentally handle daycare with the amount I work. My wife (who also works - not biglaw hours, but more than 40/week) wanted to hire a nanny when we had our first because of how much time I spend working and because she wanted someone that was completely focused on our child and could work around our needs as professionals. I somewhat begrudgingly agreed because it's more expensive but I think it has made a massive difference in our happiness and family time. Our nanny is very much a part of our family now, my children love her, and when my wife or I randomly get some free time at 3pm on a Wednesday it's much easier to say "hey why don't you leave a little early today" and get a couple of bonus hours with my kids. Because of our ability to do that, it doesn't feel like a situation where they prefer spending time with our nanny instead of us or anything like that, and we make a conscious effort to spend a lot of time as a family on weekends (again, even if I'm having a busy weekend and "family time" that morning means me taking a short break when my wife brings the kids into my office for 30 minutes on Saturday morning and letting them play with a spare keyboard or mess with all of the various junk on my desk at home). It's not nearly as fun as spending the day at the pool or whatever as a family, but the financial comfort is certainly a nice perk, so it works for us.

[ninthcircuitattorney]

Firms and clients use one (and only one) equation to value a lawyer:
skill-set X time willing to work = value of lawyer

If a lawyer decreases one out of 2 factors, their value will necessarily decrease. Thinking anything otherwise is pure fantasy. The real question is how much are you willing to decrease your value as a lawyer for your family. (I personally decided to just become poorer when I had children, and am happier for it .)

[Anonymous User]

This is my experience - getting to know a child is just like getting to know any other person. What would your relationship with your partner look like if when you were first dating, you spent at most 45 minutes together each day (which, especially if WFH ends, is generous at a lot of BL firms). Would you be able to build a strong bond in that amount of time? Really get to know each other? Almost certainly not. So if you’re in it for the money, just be aware of the trade-offs.

[jotarokujo]

biglaw is at its best when you have fewer commitments - you're single, you don't need a sustainable relationship and you're just down to sleep around, that's the easiest lifestyle to have in biglaw.

having or trying to have a full relationship is harder

it's at its worst when you have kids

[Anonymous User]

Kids suck until they are ~5 years old or so (and especially when they are less than 3). Big law is great for providing an automatic excuse for pushing the burden onto your partner, and then when they get older and bearable you can go get a gov’t / in-house job and spend time with them.

[whats an updog]

Kids suck until they are ~5 years old or so (and especially when they are less than 3). Big law is great for providing an automatic excuse for pushing the burden onto your partner, and then when they get older and bearable you can go get a gov’t / in-house job and spend time with them.

Counterpoint, I love the baby years of having a child (I also like the young interactive years, but teen years are TBD). Plenty of people do it with kids, but for me it sucks. It just depends on whether the money is worth it for your specific circumstance. Even though I disagree with the above poster's "kids suck until..." take, I would agree that if your child is young enough it is probably worth sticking it out as long as you can simply because it is so much money that will provide more options long-term.

[Anonymous User]

Does anybody have parenting success stories? If so, how did you make it work for you?

Our situation:
- We have a child aged one, and we are trying for another.
- I'm a mid-level associate that is soon to begin work in California biglaw. I haven't started yet, but I've been led to believe through the interview process that the workload, although heavy, is flexible with regards to timing on weekends, and so I'll be able to spend at least one day per week with family.
- My wife is a stay-at-home mum (and she has no desire to return to work). My mother-in-law also does a lot of heavy lifting in helping to raise our little one.
- Financially, we have a cushion. I've worked jobs other than biglaw and we have saved $2.5mm (including the value of our house, which we own outright). We are frugal, but I would like to work in biglaw for at least a few years to build our nest egg. I also enjoy being a lawyer - as in the work, not the politics etc., - so I'm hoping this job turns out to at least be sustainable.

Reading through these posts is scary, and makes me feel as though I've made a faustian pact.

[Anonymous User]

In response to post above.

Current biglaw associate with a toddler. I mean there is no magic to it - you just try to see your kid in the mornings and weekends, work from home whenever possible, make it home for dinner and log back on after kid goes to sleep etc.

It looks like your kid will receive enough care and attention (with ur spouse staying home and help from in laws) so it becomes more of how much you want to spend time with your kid rather than worry about your kid being neglected. I know you said you like being a lawyer and you want to save more but you seem to have built enough of a nest egg that you can always move into more predictable/slower pace job. I think most people who end up sticking around in biglaw even if they want to spend more time with kids do so unwillingly because they havent reached financial goal (probably lower than yours). If i were in your shoes, I’d just take a slower job asap since kids grow fast and I wouldnt want to miss out on anything.

[Anonymous User]

Kids suck until they are ~5 years old or so (and especially when they are less than 3). Big law is great for providing an automatic excuse for pushing the burden onto your partner, and then when they get older and bearable you can go get a gov’t / in-house job and spend time with them.

I'm sure your partner loves this...

[Anonymous User]

I wrote this a long time ago.

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=303505&p=10407695& ... #p10407615

The TLDR is, based on my personal experience as a child, I firmly believe parents can work extreme hours and still develop very strong bonds with their kids. My parents did it and many of my friends’ parents did it too despite kids spending most of their time on campus at boarding schools from a young age.

I am of the opinion that most parents just don’t know how to do it because nobody has shown them how. Few people have the financial resources to make it work. Fewer still (in US anyway, boarding schools are much more common, even among families of more modest means in UK/Europe) personally know people that made it work.

I am also of the opinion some parents just WANT to spend time with their kids. And that’s entirely okay.

[Anonymous User]

My wife and I had our first kid last year and I ended up leaving biglaw this spring as a 6th year. I recognize that everyone's experience is different but for me working crazy biglaw M&A hours was totally inconsistent with my being able to be the kind of parent to my kid and partner to my spouse that I want to be. Admittedly much of this is due to COVID craziness, but I worked roughly 9 months after coming back from paternity and of those only one was under 200 and I hit 300 twice. Before we had our kid I had planned to stick it out at least until I got NSP, but that goal went out the window almost immediately. I took my time leaving to make sure that I landed at an in-house position that wasn't a crazy pay cut, but I could not be happier that I left. My stress is WAY down, I spend infinitely more time with my kid and spouse, and I'm still doing interesting work and making enough to not be super stressed about money. I won't be making partner money, but I couldn't be happier. Ultimately it's a personal decision though and no judgement for those that choose to stick it out to provide for their family.

[Anonymous User]

I'm in-house (former biglaw) with a biglaw spouse. Two kids (2 and 4yrs). You can make biglaw work with small kids, but you have to be a hero and ask your spouse to do the same. By "be a hero", I mean keep crazy hours to enable you to spend time with your kids and ask your spouse to take up a lot of slack (especially on weekends), and not get much time to yourself. We both waffle on whether it's worth it. And my spouse is in about as much of a "lifestyle" biglaw practice as one can have. Not sure many people could do do something like V20 M&A without a stay at home spouse or live-in nanny and never seeing their kids.

Work from home helps, but it's not a panacea. It's still not possible to bill much when you have a sick kid at home.

I think to some degree we are both waiting to see how things change when we get to the elementary years (which will dovetail with spouse's partnership year). Seems like a double edged sword. They are more autonomous with fewer constant needs, but also get involved in activities that demand your time (and transport).

[Anonymous User]

OP here. To the above poster who’s going into Biglaw with 2.5 mil and a house that’s paid off, I have a really important Q for you: why?

[nealric]

OP here. To the above poster who’s going into Biglaw with 2.5 mil and a house that’s paid off, I have a really important Q for you: why?

I can see reasons why. If you want a long-term career in a field that primarily the providence of biglaw, then there really aren't other better places to get training. Most people don't want to do nothing with their lives, and those who are high-achieving enough to have a biglaw offer, typically don't want to just laze around.

Even if you only care about the money, while $2.5MM is enough to retire modestly on at a young age, it's not like someone at that level is going to be eating caviar in private jets on a regular basis. With a starting point at $2.5MM, you could leverage a 10-year biglaw career into very comfortable retirement with net worth at double to triple that starting amount.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. To the above poster who’s going into Biglaw with 2.5 mil and a house that’s paid off, I have a really important Q for you: why?

I can see reasons why. If you want a long-term career in a field that primarily the providence of biglaw, then there really aren't other better places to get training. Most people don't want to do nothing with their lives, and those who are high-achieving enough to have a biglaw offer, typically don't want to just laze around.

Even if you only care about the money, while $2.5MM is enough to retire modestly on at a young age, it's not like someone at that level is going to be eating caviar in private jets on a regular basis. With a starting point at $2.5MM, you could leverage a 10-year biglaw career into very comfortable retirement with net worth at double to triple that starting amount.

I mean, yeah, fair. But there’s plenty of middle ground between Biglaw and “laze around.” There’s also plenty of middle ground between “caviar and private jets” and financial stability/comfort.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. To the above poster who’s going into Biglaw with 2.5 mil and a house that’s paid off, I have a really important Q for you: why?

That’s me. I have a bunch of reasons but some of them are specific to my situation:

- I’m originally from a smaller offshore market where I was expected to work silly hours, the salary and job security was poor, and there was only 10 partners in my practice area citywide who, without exaggeration, were almost all psychopaths. The stories from working with a couple of them (and the aftermath) were horrendous. In-house opportunities weren’t much better unless I moved practice areas. In comparison, this biglaw opportunity triples my salary and at least gives me a wider range of partners to work with, or firms in which to lateral, if I end up in a similar situation.

- I rejected an offer from a V10 in New York, and instead chose a V50 in California which, although still a busy practice, seems to have flexible partners as well as clients who work normal hours. I’ll bill high hours, but apparently the Saturday fire drills disappear and I can schedule accordingly.

- I’m not sure I feel comfortable retiring with $2.5mm. I was fortunate to make high returns from index funds in the recent stock market recovery. I’m no expert, but there seems to be a genuine chance of lagging returns or a correction in the next decade. A bunch of my net worth is also tied up in my house which doesn’t produce returns (and my wife won’t be happy if we downsize). On paper, the figures don’t work when you consider two kids in private school and the like. Also, I don’t worry about it but more than half could disappear overnight if my wife got itchy feet. In my experience (and especially as risk adverse lawyers), we all tend to underestimate the figure with which we’d be comfortable pulling the pin.

- My only marketable skill is being a lawyer. I’ve thought of retraining but it almost seems pointless at my age and position. Sitting around at home retired, which listening to my friends who are medical professionals etc talk about how well they’re doing, doesn’t sound like fun. Especially with Covid and travel restrictions.

- I do consider my savings as FU money, as in financially I have no issues with walking away from a job that becomes toxic. I literally did that one time after seeing red flags galore in a new job. Of course, there’s other factors (future employability, having a bunch of lawyers read my LinkedIn status change and gossip, etc) that still acts as a disincentive.

I’m hoping to work for a few years, while saving 75% of my income, and see where I end up. Of course, I don’t want this to be at the expense of my children, which is why this thread is worthy of attention.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. To the above poster who’s going into Biglaw with 2.5 mil and a house that’s paid off, I have a really important Q for you: why?

- I’m not sure I feel comfortable retiring with $2.5mm. I was fortunate to make high returns from index funds in the recent stock market recovery. I’m no expert, but there seems to be a genuine chance of lagging returns or a correction in the next decade. A bunch of my net worth is also tied up in my house which doesn’t produce returns (and my wife won’t be happy if we downsize). On paper, the figures don’t work when you consider two kids in private school and the like. Also, I don’t worry about it but more than half could disappear overnight if my wife got itchy feet. In my experience (and especially as risk adverse lawyers), we all tend to underestimate the figure with which we’d be comfortable pulling the pin.

To clarify, I wasn’t saying “why not retire?” I just meant why Biglaw, when you can afford to take less lucrative but more enjoyable jobs (gov work, PI, etc). It was largely a tongue in cheek comment about how if I had 2.5 mil, I’d be leaving Biglaw, not entering it. I didn’t mean to put you on the spot at all, and I genuinely hope it works out for you.