Why do people say not to go to law school if you don't want to practice law? Forum

[HYSplease]

Assuming that I have good numbers and get into a T14...

I know that most people on here agree that one should not go to law school if they don't intend on practicing law long term. But why do many famous politicians/non-lawyers in the public sector have law degrees? I find it hard to believe that the writing and analytical skills gained in law school are not beneficial even if one ends up not practicing law, and I've met several people at work that have JDs but are in managerial roles where they rarely if ever practice. Is there any instance when it is deemed "acceptable" (TLS standards at least) to go to law school if one is not set on practicing?

[Aeon]

The politicians and work supervisors with JDs probably started out as practicing lawyers. Plus, they are mostly of an older generation, when the JD was indeed more versatile. Today, with the hyper-specialization of professional fields, it is foolhardy to go to law school with the expectation that the degree will open doors to many non-legal jobs. There are certainly exceptions on a case by case basis, but those exceptions only reinforce the rule: for the vast majority of law school graduates, the only realistic career option with the JD is to practice law.

Plus, if you don't want to practice law, why would you spend 3 years of your life learning about it? If you want to be in management or business, then go for the MBA instead.

[stig2014]

Assuming that I have good numbers and get into a T14...

I know that most people on here agree that one should not go to law school if they don't intend on practicing law long term. But why do many famous politicians/non-lawyers in the public sector have law degrees? I find it hard to believe that the writing and analytical skills gained in law school are not beneficial even if one ends up not practicing law, and I've met several people at work that have JDs but are in managerial roles where they rarely if ever practice. Is there any instance when it is deemed "acceptable" (TLS standards at least) to go to law school if one is not set on practicing?

It's not that people who go to law school only end up working in law. It's just that the amount of people who end up not in law are a relatively small amount and take a pretty non efficient route to get there. Law school teaches you how to be a lawyer. Sure the skill sets overlap with other industries, but many other degrees give much broader skill sets. As for people with law degrees working in public sector/working in politics, I think a lot of that is self selection.

If one wants to be a lawyer go to law school, otherwise, there are much better ways to work in politics, or work for a business. That's what I've gathered anyways.

[HYSplease]

Plus, if you don't want to practice law, why would you spend 3 years of your life learning about it? If you want to be in management or business, then go for the MBA instead.

Well I'm really interested in law, and I'm not thinking about a business career. The mangers I know with JDs are leading institutions that are heavily involved in the law, but they themselves are not practicing.

[nick417]

This is a strange question.

Since law (for the most part) is an exercise in logic, why would someone spend three years learning the skills to be a lawyer if they didn't want to be a lawyer? That seems highly illogical.

[asdfdfdfadfas]

Assuming that I have good numbers and get into a T14...

I know that most people on here agree that one should not go to law school if they don't intend on practicing law long term. But why do many famous politicians/non-lawyers in the public sector have law degrees? I find it hard to believe that the writing and analytical skills gained in law school are not beneficial even if one ends up not practicing law, and I've met several people at work that have JDs but are in managerial roles where they rarely if ever practice. Is there any instance when it is deemed "acceptable" (TLS standards at least) to go to law school if one is not set on practicing?

Because what is the point of sitting around studying law for three years if you don't intend to use that information? If you don't use it you lose it. Sure writing and analytical skills are great, but they aren't worth 200k+ in debt. You can go to the library and check out some books on writing if you want to become a better writer. The Elements of Style is traditionally recommended.

Those people that you know probably graduated from lower tier universities and couldn't get into big law or they got big law and were smart enough to get out.

[Aeon]

Plus, if you don't want to practice law, why would you spend 3 years of your life learning about it? If you want to be in management or business, then go for the MBA instead.

Well I'm really interested in law, and I'm not thinking about a business career. The mangers I know with JDs are leading institutions that are heavily involved in the law, but they themselves are not practicing.

Some lawyers do end up transitioning more into the business side. This is the case even in the rarefied confines of BigLaw. For example, the managing partners of major firms do less in the way of legal practice and more of CEO-type work for their firm. It becomes more salient if you are talking about in-house corporate lawyers who do every now and again move to business roles in their organizations. But they almost always do start out in legal jobs initially.

[A. Nony Mouse]

There are lots of people who get JDs and end up in non-legal positions. Some only get there after practicing law for a while, others only get there because they couldn't get a law job they wanted. It's perfectly normal to change career paths down the road, but that doesn't mean any of those people went to law school for the purpose of getting where they ultimately ended up, or that it's a good idea to go to law school if you want to end up where they are.

You may well practice law and ultimately transition into something else. Careers are long and take a lot of unforeseen turns. But If you know now that you want to do that something else, just go do that directly. If you want to be a politician, go work in politics.

[BigZuck]

writing and analytical skills gained in law school

There's not a lot of this in law school IMO and what you do get could probably be learned for like $100 in like a month, rather than $150K over 3 years or whatever people normally spend on law school.

Thinking that there's a lot of good stuff or "skills" to be learned in law school is big, big, big time flame. You could learn a lot more good/important stuff in a semester of community college or just buying a few good books from Amazon.

[HonestAdvice]

The idea that the JD is versatile is based on the fact that there many lawyers are successful in a myriad of professions other than law throughout the globe. The assumption here is that if JD's comprise a disproportionate # of politicians, CEO's and executives that the JD must have a causal relationship with these other industries. From a distance, it's not a bad argument. The chain of logic is apparent, and the assumption isn't asinine.

The reality is that a lot of law students come into law school already having a capacity for business, and are drawn to logic, fact based analysis, etc. The MBE has an LSAT-like section that's comically easier. There's a third variable causing some people who are good at law to be good at business, which is reasoning skills. In addition, lawyers have some personality traits: they favor logic to emotion, and risk adverse. Both of these characteristics are favored in business and politics, because they're what most shareholders and voters want.

In addition, a lot of areas of law expose to you to other industries, and need to learn about these industries operate in order to apply the law. Again, this isn't because of the JD. It's some lawyers being thrown into a sink or swim situation, swimming and then swimming away.

[HYSplease]

Okay, thanks everyone. Looks like I need to figure out wtf I want to do.

[gator_guy93]

Plus, if you don't want to practice law, why would you spend 3 years of your life learning about it? If you want to be in management or business, then go for the MBA instead.

[PennLaw16]

This mostly depends on your financial situation. Graduating a T14 is a valuable signaling device even if you don't stay in law. Anecdotally, I've received non-law job offers from personal connections on the basis of attending a good law school. I can't be alone in that regard.

But $200k is a crippling amount of debt just to provide a generalized boost to your resume. Being 26+ with $200k in debt can delay home ownership, having kids, etc. It's probably a bad decision personally, if not professionally. So if you're getting a significant scholarship or you've got the money to come out with little to no debt, it might be worth considering. But if you're looking at going $200k in the hole for a degree that isn't necessary for your career goals, you should probably reconsider.

[landshoes]

I've made the signaling argument before, but it only really works if you don't have a better/cheaper option. Many people do, even if it's just "getting a job."

(I know you're saying something similar, PennLaw16)

[Gifted Hands]

BC it's 3 more years of very little work.

[T14orTradeSchool]

"If you don't want to be a lawyer, don't go to law school." is pretty much the sentiment on here. but what I think they mean (and if they don't, what I personally think) is that almost everyone that is successful in another profession with a JD has had to at least work as a lawyer in some form. The experience you get working as a lawyer is exactly what makes your ability transferable.

I'm of the camp that believes that you don't have to want to be a lawyer for *forever* to want to go to law school. I think the most important thing is that you would want to at least practice it for some time, and it's not something you can't see yourself doing for the rest of your life, if it comes down to it. There should be something there you like in it, so that if you don't end up working as a __________, then you aren't in a career you hate.

[Barack O'Drama]

The politicians and work supervisors with JDs probably started out as practicing lawyers. Plus, they are mostly of an older generation, when the JD was indeed more versatile. Today, with the hyper-specialization of professional fields, it is foolhardy to go to law school with the expectation that the degree will open doors to many non-legal jobs. There are certainly exceptions on a case by case basis, but those exceptions only reinforce the rule: for the vast majority of law school graduates, the only realistic career option with the JD is to practice law.

Plus, if you don't want to practice law, why would you spend 3 years of your life learning about it? If you want to be in management or business, then go for the MBA instead.

TCR

[rdawkins28]

One of my college roommates was one of these rich kids (I was dirt poor on various grants) who didn't really have to work. His undergrad was in philosophy and creative writing. Then he went to UMich LS because he was fascinated with the philosophical aspects of law. Never practiced. Never took the bar.

Aside from that, yeh, don't go to law school if you don't want to practice law. Even in my roommate's case, law school stopped being fun after the first year.

[Mikey]

If you want to be a lawyer, go to law school. If you don't, then don't. A goal such as becoming a Judge may also push someone to go to law school, but you will still do legal work for a while before you become a Judge.