Wall Street Journal agrees with me: law school is a big lie

Cameron Stracher, author of Double Billing: A Young Lawyer's Tale of Greed, Sex, Lies and the Pursuit of a Swivel Chair, writes the following in today's Wall Street Journal (free link), which is the only time I've ever seen a mainstream publication tell the real truth about law school:

The legal profession is really two professions: the elite lawyers and everyone else. Most of the former start out at big law firms. Many of the latter never find gainful legal employment. Instead, they work at jobs that might be characterized as "quasi-legal": paralegals, clerks, administrators, doing work for which they probably never needed a J.D.

Although hard data about the nature of these jobs is difficult to come by (and relies on self-reporting, which is inherently unreliable), the mean salary for graduates of top 10 law schools is $135,000 while it is $60,000 for "tier three" schools. It's certainly possible that tier-three graduates tend to gravitate toward lower-paying public-interest and government jobs, but this lower salary may also reflect the nonlegal nature of many of these jobs and the fact that these graduates are settling for anything that will pay the bills.

At $38,000 a year for law school, plus living expenses, law-school graduates certainly have a lot of debt ($60,000 on average, upon graduation). For this price, college students and their parents should be thinking harder about their choices. When I went to law school, nearly everyone tried to convince me that doing so would "keep my options open." All this really means is: "You can still be a lawyer."

If I wanted to be a screenwriter, waiting tables would have kept my options open, too. In fact, many wannabe screenwriters find themselves going to law school, misled by adults into thinking that it will help them get into the movie business. It won't. Sure, you can be a talent agent or a movie producer with a law degree, but you can be one without a degree, too. Most of the skills you learn in law school (and legal practice) won't help you make a movie, and the few that will may not be worth the cost (more than $120,000, including tuition, living expenses, as well as three years of forgone experience and salary). Rather than keeping options open, the crushing debt of law school often slams doors shut, pushing law students to find the highest-paying job they can and forever deferring dreams of anything else.

It's time those of us inside the profession did a better job of telling others outside the profession that most of us don't earn $160,000 a year, that we can't afford expensive suits, flashy cars, sexy apartments. We don't lunch with rock stars or produce movies. Every year I'm surprised by the number of my students who think a J.D. degree is a ticket to fame, fortune and the envy of one's peers -- a sure ticket to the upper middle class. Even for the select few for whom it is, not many last long enough at their law firms to really enjoy it.

There's something wrong with a system that makes a whole lot of people pay a whole lot of money for jobs that are not worth it, or that have no future. If we wanted to be honest, we would inform students that law school doesn't keep their options open. Instead, we should say that if they work hard and do well, they can become lawyers.

This is the same thing I explained in my famous blog post, Law school, the big lie.

The only thing I'd disagree with is that alleged $60,000 mean salary for tier three schools, because the law schools employ sneaky use of statistics to inflate salaries. Arizona State University reported the salary of "graduates who had jobs at private law firms at graduation," which is basically reporting the salaries of the luckiest 10% of the graduating class. We see public companies getting caught lying on their financial results all the time; I wouldn't be surprised if the law schools aren't also doing some outright lying--their results aren't even audited by CPAs like the financial results of public companies.

Comments

[Carnivore Jesus]

I'm in favor of anything that convinces people not to become lawyers. Our society has way too many of them and they are litigating our country to ruin.

P.S. It's a little tacky to refer to an old blog post of yours as "famous".

[Kurt]

Half-sigma,

I think you're spot on about law school and the legal profession in general. I have friends and family members who are lawyers and what you say seems to fit with what I have observed. This is also one of the reasons why I never wanted to go to law school.

I also think some of this is true about MBAs as well. The graduates of the top 10 or top 5 MBA programs tend to get good jobs (thats assuming there is no recession). Everyone else either goes back to their old employeers or hacks it out on their own.

The significant difference between MBA and JD is that MBAs who don't make the grade in the corporate world sometimes have opportunities to become entreprenuers. Afterall, they are studying business.

[Kurt]

Another point: Schools (MBA, Law, all others) lie or misrepresent the income of their graduates all the time. They do this as a marketing ploy.

[anonradguy]

So here's the question: if I'm great on tests but have the personality of a rusty nail should I apply to law school (I know I can ace the LSATs, I got 162 on a practice exam I took for kicks and had very good grades at my Lesser Ivy undergrad) or stay in my mediocre radiology residency program?

[Half Sigma]

"but have the personality of a rusty nail"

Many law firm partners have no better personality, so this is not a problem.

If you can get into HavardYaleStanford and don't mind working 90 hour weeks at BIGLAW for partners with even worse personalities than you have, then I say go for it, you'll make more money than you would as a doctor.

[anonradguy]

we're talking geeky and stiff not 'abuses the subordinates but knows how to kiss ass to the superiors'

right now I can make probably about $250K when I get out...IF they don't ship all the X-ray-reading jobs to India. Big IF, huh?

when do you get too old for BIGLAW? I'm in my late twenties, I don't think they'd take you if you were 40.

[Peter]

No mystery here. It all comes down to the fact that over the last couple of decades law school has become a de facto extension of liberal arts college. Attenting law school is almost a natural decision for B.A. holders who have few marketable skills and few employment prospects. Law school involves no math, no science and no computers, making it ideal for technophobes and people with math anxiety. Almost all tests are of the essay variety, right within the typical liberal-arts graduate's comfort zone. Come to think of it, we've all heard the expression "comfort food," law school might be described as "comfort schooling." Three safe, comfortable years before you'll have to deal with looking for a job and facing the (drumroll please) Real World.
Not that there'll be a snowball's chance of this ever happening, but a terrific way to cut down on the numbers of law school graduates - and increase the opportunities for the remainder - is to add specific undergraduate course requirements for all law school applicants. For instance, two classes of college-level (no remedial stuff) mathematics, two lab sciences, and one course in programming. It would work wonders.

[dana]

oh god this is all so true

i was able to get into law school after undergrad, most likely admitted on affirmative action for females as my LSATS were only 88%ile, which really isnt great. i barely did ANYTHING 1st year and got by on Cs. 2nd and 3rd year i pretty much was able to take gut courses in con law related stuff and raise my grades, but i was never any good at law school, even though by the end i got largely Bs. on top of that, it turns out i have THE WORST PERSONALITY TRAITS POSSIBLE for a lawyer to have. i am straight forward and pathologically honest and can't shift my story, cover my ass or lie on the fly. just in interning in a couple of local law offices i confronted unbelievable amounts of dishonesty on the part of the clients and lawyers colluding with them (mostly in social security disability and bankruptcy law) that it made my head spin. i realized that by graduating from a state school low on the totem pole i had consigned myself to ONLY only having the option of going into private practice in some dinky little paperwork filling out fields of law. yep, 8 years of school and i was filling out social security disability forms for drug addicts and vietnamese immigrants who were lying their faces off.

i passed the bar and i do not have one single marketable skill outside of my 6 years of managing a video store. great idea, going to law school.

[Nancy Spungen, Esq.]

"Comfort schooling?" Wow, Peter, you had a better time in law school than I did. For those three years, even a cynical misanthropist like me consistently found ways to be repulsed by other humans. Unlike liberal arts grad programs, law school is designed to discourage, rather than encourage.

HalfSigma, you're right about the misconception that law school is a ticket to the upper middle class. One thing I've noticed, though, is that most law school students -- at least, of the US News Top 50 or so, or the third-tier but big metro schools -- don't need a ticket. They're *from* there. Those people tend to stay in place, regardless of their class ranking or law school's ranking. It's the ones who are hoping law school will elevate their low position in society who will be disappointed. There are so many lawyers nowadays that there isn't much room to move up.

[SciFiGeek]

" For instance, two classes of college-level (no remedial stuff) mathematics, two lab sciences, and one course in programming. It would work wonders."

You'd lose a lot of good lawyers with mostly verbal skills. That said you're raising a lot of good points about fourth-tier law schools everyone should know about. In short, nonprestigious law school is a scam.

Hmmm...wonder if there are areas of law that don't rely on lying face-to-face?

[SciFiGeek]

Spungen's correct. The only way to move up is to be a middle class person who gets a very, very good LSAT score. I suspect this is rare but inspires lots of other people to waste money.

Have you ever noticed how the illusion of upward mobility encourages people to tolerate inequality?

[Half Sigma]

I liked the academic part of law school, it was the lack of employment opportunities that I hated.

I think that law school was a lot more enlightening than my MBA program where I didn't even learn anything.

However, the MBA has a slightly positive value in the workforce (slightly positive means that at sometime in the next 30 years someone MIGHT think well of it and hire you or promote you--that doesn't mean it's an isntant ticket to anything except what you were already doing if it's not from a top 10 MBA school), while the JD has a NEGATIVE value if you are trying to do something outside of law.

[anonradguy]

I suspect the MD is even worse. no, that's my point: like dana, I'm a lousy liar. so, is it really worth switching to law, or is there some subfield where you just push paper and the money's pretty good? seems like most top jobs require rainmaking, as sigma's said in his marketing economy post, but there are exceptions to every rule and sometimes they are lucrative.

[SciFiGeek]

While we're at it, can we define middle, upper middle, and upper class? I'm a little confused as to what exactly falls where.

[Nancy Spungen, Esq.]

SFG, this harks back to the IQ/income debate. I was such a person (maybe more *lower* middle class, *sniff*). Problem is, LSATs only help you get into school, and help predict whether you pass the bar. They don't predict grades. And, even if you get impressive grades (I didn't, and neither did any other high-LSAT person I knew), success in the private law firm world is very relationship-dependent.

The guy with the highest LSAT (from a poorer family) dropped out second year to wander the earth. Loans and all.

Not saying I haven't moved up a bit. But, I think the semi-prestigious school my LSAT dragged me into is more of a liability than an asset, outside the white-shoe firm world. The non-elite firms were full of (usually) richer people from the big third- and fourth-tiers, who usually went to better undergrads, who often went way back together. They had each others' backs; no one had mine. Although, most of them eventually got spit out too.

I see that HS's experience was great undergrad (Wharton) then low-ranking law school. From what I've seen, that formula is a lot better than vice-versa, but I'm sure there are lots of other factors involved.

[bbartlog]

As I recall there was a study that showed that essentially all liberal arts degrees are not a moneymaker - if you instead invest the tuition and enter the job market, you come out ahead. Whether you have the same life satisfaction is open to question of course; if you love your field and genuinely want to learn, college may be a good idea. Similarly you will likely end up with a different set of friends, which can also affect the decision. But from a pure financial perspective most degrees are a poor investment.

[Nancy Spungen, Esq.]

Dana, unless you went to law school a long time ago, I doubt you received any affirmative action for women. Just like with undergrad, women are flooding law schools (all except the very elite), sometimes even outnumbering men, without affirmative action. That's probably one reason the value of the credential has plummeted -- with women and minorities allowed in the game, there's a lot more competition for the good school slots and entry-level jobs. Yet, the partners and other top dogs are still overwhelmingly white guys.

[pierre]

i take issue with the notion that law school leaves options open. i found that it shut doors for me. not because of debt, but because after i practiced a couple of years and hated it and was suffering from chest pains at 28, people thought i was either a burn out - and no one has use for that - or i couldn't hack it - and everyone knows that clients just show up and hand money over to lawyers. the question became, if he couldn't deal with clients showing up to drop off lots of money, how is he going to handle it here where we really work!!!

[pierre]

oh, and a couple of other things about those "elite" lawyers. remember the attrition rates at the firms where they work are breath taking. i have no firm stats but having been at one and knowing many classmates and professional collegues who have cycled through, i'd put the avg stay between 2.5 and 4 years.

and many of them experienced the same difficulty that i did making a lateral move into a different career. they either had to quit altogether or they had to go to the PD's office or DA's office taking a fraction of the $$$ they were making. so when you stretch their earning out over ten years, sure its high in the early years, but they had the unfortunate experience of having their earning potential decrease the further they got into their careers. but their lives at the big firms just weren't worth it.

so, my guess is that if you analyzed the avg earning of all people who go through the "elite firm" cycle you'll see that the avg is much lower over a longer period of time than it is in the early years.

just another reason why law school is a bad move - even for many at the top of the class

[beowulf]

Pierre,

I believe that's called the golden handcuffs. You get a six figure income from a big firm and about the time you start to burn out you realize you're not qualified to make that kind of money doing anything else (back in the dotcom heyday, tech firms were hiring away young assocates and they paid signing bonuses! Those days are long gone).

The guys who make the money and are more or less happy are the ones who realize its a business. You do the marketing and you have your paralegals do the work. Whether its PI, real estate, bankrupty or immigration, its the guys who've made it an assembly line who make the money without killing themselves.

What's the saying, the A students become partners, the B students become judges and the C students become rich. That's about right, no prestige in, say, bankruptcy, but you get your marketing down pat, there's good money in it.

It helps if you're in a state that doesn't have a glut of lawyers (that is to say, not Florida) and has a politically powerful bar assocation that keeps out those do it yourself paralegal shops.

[SciFiGeek]

"What's the saying, the A students become partners, the B students become judges and the C students become rich."

I thought it was, the A students become *professors*. Big difference.

[anonradguy]

"And, even if you get impressive grades (I didn't, and neither did any other high-LSAT person I knew), success in the private law firm world is very relationship-dependent.

The guy with the highest LSAT (from a poorer family) dropped out second year to wander the earth. Loans and all.

Not saying I haven't moved up a bit. But, I think the semi-prestigious school my LSAT dragged me into is more of a liability than an asset, outside the white-shoe firm world. The non-elite firms were full of (usually) richer people from the big third- and fourth-tiers, who usually went to better undergrads, who often went way back together. They had each others' backs; no one had mine. Although, most of them eventually got spit out too."

"so, my guess is that if you analyzed the avg earning of all people who go through the "elite firm" cycle you'll see that the avg is much lower over a longer period of time than it is in the early years."

You've answered somebody else's question, but given me my answer. I'd just go to a big law firm and last six months before winding up at the DA's office. I'm not going anywhere. Thanks!

In truth, this is an example of the rare case (see Half's next post) where someone is in the common upper middle class but the Fussellian middle class.

[Big Bill]

For a woman who manages to get into a top tier school and really isn't lawyer material, the problem is even worse.

She has $100K+ of debt to pay off, AND a husband to find, AND kids to have.

And how many guys in their right mind are going to go for a wife and mother who had that kind of debt and no longer wants to work like a dog and pay it off?

And even if she does find him, how much time and money is he going to have to support her, AND the kids, AND pay off her debts, AND get a house.

Nope, ladies, the best time to decide you want an Mrs degree is in your undergraduate days, well before you get stupid and go to law school because you saw all the episodes of Boston Legal on DVD.

As I hope you realize after reading these stories about a lawyer's life being a brutal grind, he's going to have a tough, grinding life supporting you and the kids as it is. Don't add massive useless Law School debt to his back.

[nobody]

Big Bill is missing the point. If this woman is a looker, top tier school is the best hunting ground for an upper class husband. The $100k debt is nothing for these people. Just don't try to do this at a 3rd tier lawschool. You will only meet lower class people with few options for big money.

The public do not understand that most lawyers are small business owners trying to sell their service in an increasing competitive market place. If told most prospective students that, many will opt out of the field completely.

[beowulf]

SciFiGeek,

Yeah you could be right... was years since I heard that saying, but the punchline is still the same. Its the C students who sacrifice prestige can make the bucks practicing law.