Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I feel ya. I'm not in law school but I am studying to be an actuary and this time of the year blows.

Took an exam last tuesday, and will take another one tomorrow. Spent over 500 hours combined studying for these 2 exams in the past couple months. Sad thing is I have 5 or 6 more to take.

just make sure you don't get burnt out by doing some things to enjoy yourself
 
Well, after getting my Bachelors and Masters in Law (from King's College and London School of Economics respectively), I'm now looking into doing my PhD.

There must be something wrong with me.
 
Well, after getting my Bachelors and Masters in Law (from King's College and London School of Economics respectively), I'm now looking into doing my PhD.

There must be something wrong with me.

In your case, based on the fact you made it through two law degrees, must show that you actually like it. That is a good thing for you. I could not imagine somebody who hates law school like most of us that I know and go through 3 law degrees. In the US, it would be the basic degree, JD, then LL.M as the advanced degree, and then S.J.D as the legal scholar researcher degree. I have met a French PhD in law and an English DPhil/DCL in law, but never an American S.J.D., but I am sure they are out there. Oddly enough, the French and English guy are the same person!
 
^^^ Funny, I have a BA in business and a MBA with a concentration on economic crime and I still want to go to law school. WTF is wrong with me?!

There might be nothing wrong with you and you love law school. I actually loved the study of law. I find it fascinating but I get too passionate and emotional about it. Two traits I don't have that are necessary:

1) Ability to detach your personal feeling and emotions from your work.

2) A thick skin.

Another thing that would help is a good home life.
 
There might be nothing wrong with you and you love law school. I actually loved the study of law. I find it fascinating but I get too passionate and emotional about it. Two traits I don't have that are necessary:

1) Ability to detach your personal feeling and emotions from your work.

2) A thick skin.

The first case I worked on as an intern, unpaid, was to help strengthen a case by finding weaknesses in a defendant's character. I knew many of the weaknesses of the person. I knew his family was rich and were prone to corruption from some of its members (think the TV show Dallas). I knew the family dynamic rested on a combative relationship. Those were material facts I found regarding the basic background of the defendant. When it looked like our side was going to win, he went up to his cabin and shot himself dead rather than be found liable for breaking a building code law which could amount to huge fines, and then be discovered in his deceptiveness, which the whole county knew about for many years from the press. It was too much for him to bear and after he killed himself, nobody on the side opposing him felt good about themselves. We felt like we killed him.

Nobody could detach themselves after his suicide.

You have to have a thick skin to be involved in such a case and then just brush it off your shoulders. That was just a law student's story (mine) and I could not imagine how bad that would be after 20 years of defending and prosecuting real estate violations which have entire personal net worths possibly riding on one case.

In one land use case, before I was even in college, I recall one architect got all the legal requirements for building/expanding a house near a state park. Of course, for every law, there is another one causing ambiguity. One very well funded opposing side decided that the house, while certified, was against the good of the state park. The house had to be modified, at great cost, to please the environmental group. The chief architect, a very popular and esteemed member of the community, left his practice in disgust realizing that there are no laws that can ultimately protect any building project if the other side has enough money to challenge you. It ended up over the house having to be redesigned and moved back a few feet from the state park. It was a huge financial loss for the owners of the house and the architect. And over a few stupid feet. That house still stands today and I don't notice that at one time, it was 4 four feet closer to a state park. An architect's livelihood was destroyed and a family put into huge debt.
 
The law students who were married and had a healthy personal life seemed to do better in general over single students, who moved to town just for school, without a support structure.

So I need to find a stable love interest before going to law school? :eek:

It's hard enough to do that now. ;):eek:
 
So I need to find a stable love interest before going to law school? :eek:

It's hard enough to do that now. ;):eek:

If not a spouse or significant other, then good friends and a support system from church, 12 step, bowling team, macrumors, myspace, facebook, practicing lawyers, or anybody that you can get support from. With so many law students thinking that lawyering is infighting, and a lot of them make that mistake, one needs outside support, and people who can be outside of law school and sometimes bring you back to earth and show you just how petty and unimportant law school really is. If you get a law degree and lose your humanity or conscience, then you lose. A support group can keep you human.

What is insidious about law school is that very slowly, it by no intentional means, turns you from a human being into a pitbull in a suit without knowing it. It's a slow process of losing one's soul and that's why most leave school or the profession because for most, spirituality and kindness/fairness will be what you want to be remembered for, not how badly you wiped out your opponent.

That negativity comes way more from students coming in aggressively than the system of the school's intent to make you a lawyer. It's a self governing system of increasing anxiety, depression, and anti-social behavior.

Law, in America especially, is combat. Our courts, unlike the European courts, relies on an adversarial system vs. a search for the truth and what really happened. We don't look for guilt or innocence, we look to craft the better argument. Our system relies on the craft of argument thus the unusual traffic of appeals and counter-suits. It's a massive archive of legal history where truth and justice are buried and become irrelevant in the end.

Do you want to see what law students are like when blogging? See www.autoadmit.com , but I warn you there is more hate there than a white supremacist site.

Any law student will see the instant negativity in their first two weeks once they start reviewing cases and engaging in the Socratic method. When law is not jurisprudence, but a controlled UFC match with a dumbed down approach with no room for collegiality, then you will know if you really want to continue.

A support group is a must to keep you human.
 
In your case, based on the fact you made it through two law degrees, must show that you actually like it. That is a good thing for you. I could not imagine somebody who hates law school like most of us that I know and go through 3 law degrees. In the US, it would be the basic degree, JD, then LL.M as the advanced degree, and then S.J.D as the legal scholar researcher degree. I have met a French PhD in law and an English DPhil/DCL in law, but never an American S.J.D., but I am sure they are out there. Oddly enough, the French and English guy are the same person!

Strangely enough, as much as I love studying law, I have no great desire to practice it. Not saying I don't ever want to practice, just that it's hardly my life long dream to do it. My life long dream was to do a PhD. Which is a shame as that is exactly where the money isn't :eek:
 
Strangely enough, as much as I love studying law, I have no great desire to practice it. Not saying I don't ever want to practice, just that it's hardly my life long dream to do it. My life long dream was to do a PhD. Which is a shame as that is exactly where the money isn't :eek:

I lived on Brompton, near Gluocester, in South Kensington in '85 as an undergrad.

But you may know this guy, just Google sompong ggu as his profile sounds very similar to yours, unless that person is you, for if that's the case, hello, I am the guy that was in the elevator in 1994 or 1995 with all those questions asking why the LL.B and J.D. were basically equivalent after the law school admissions people admonished me telling me a real terminal law degree, academically, was the PhD or SJD, not the JD. I had the strange goal of a PhD, any PhD back then. :)

One relative of mine finished their dissertation that took 8 years to write, so since high school to PhD, it was a 16 year road. :)

But is that (googled person above) you or a colleague? I lived in London town, SW2, in 1985, so I am rather ancient now. I was also a grad student in 1995-96 in San Francisco. Do you travel between London, SF, and Paris? The reason the coincidence is so strange is that your call name is French and this guy has a docteur du troit (or something like that) from U. Paris X, studied in London, and of course, the States and teaches everywhere around the globe.
 
I lived on Brompton, near Gluocester, in South Kensington in '85 as an undergrad.

But you may know this guy, just Google sompong ggu as his profile sounds very similar to yours, unless that person is you, for if that's the case, hello, I am the guy that was in the elevator in 1994 or 1995 with all those questions asking why the LL.B and J.D. were basically equivalent after the law school admissions people admonished me telling me a real terminal law degree, academically, was the PhD or SJD, not the JD. I had the strange goal of a PhD, any PhD back then. :)

One relative of mine finished their dissertation that took 8 years to write, so since high school to PhD, it was a 16 year road. :)

But is that (googled person above) you or a colleague? I lived in London town, SW2, in 1985, so I am rather ancient now. I was also a grad student in 1995-96 in San Francisco. Do you travel between London, SF, and Paris? The reason the coincidence is so strange is that your call name is French and this guy has a docteur du troit (or something like that) from U. Paris X, studied in London, and of course, the States and teaches everywhere around the globe.

You may have asked me lots of questions about the equivalence between a JD and the LLB back in 1995. But given I would have been 9 years old at the time I fear my answers may not have been very insightful :eek:

I think that may have answered your question.
 
You may have asked me lots of questions about the equivalence between a JD and the LLB back in 1995. But given I would have been 9 years old at the time I fear my answers may not have been very insightful :eek:

I think that may have answered your question.

That professor was as short as a 9 year old though. :)

Something like 8 law degrees and spoke 8 languages. Loved education, obviously. :)
 
I feel ya. I'm not in law school but I am studying to be an actuary and this time of the year blows.

Took an exam last tuesday, and will take another one tomorrow. Spent over 500 hours combined studying for these 2 exams in the past couple months. Sad thing is I have 5 or 6 more to take.

just make sure you don't get burnt out by doing some things to enjoy yourself


I just did two midterms tonight and they did this mind game. One fact pattern had all relevant facts and we had one hour to answer it. It was about consideration with four parties in Contracts.

The second test, was a Criminal Law midterm with tons of irrelevant facts and given minutes after the first exam. This was a pure red herring sinkhole of a test. And it was very hard to separate valid facts from made up garbage and then have just one hour to read, outline, and IRAC the freaking thing.

How I hate this stuff, but it's far better than lecture where ego freaks take over and fight with the professors just for the fun of it. None of the teachers, though lawyers, have any backbone, save one, and are far, far more interested in being liked than teaching the law.

I was so disgusted with law school studying today that I reconnected with my MBA program to finish the remaining classes. I thought law school would challenge me but it has made me regress into a fifth grader and my brain shrunk. How I long for any grad school besides law school.

Some people are so disruptive during class that ordinary straight laced students bring dope to class to get the egotistical gunners stoned so they won't talk too much. Certainly not grad school. I think we should just sell pot at the front desk in the office for gunners. :)
 
I feel ya. I'm not in law school but I am studying to be an actuary and this time of the year blows.

Took an exam last tuesday, and will take another one tomorrow. Spent over 500 hours combined studying for these 2 exams in the past couple months. Sad thing is I have 5 or 6 more to take.

just make sure you don't get burnt out by doing some things to enjoy yourself


I know somebody who is an actuary and they find law school interesting, short, and easy. From your above post, I now understand why. 500 hours for just two exams? My God, that's scary.
 
RE: Law School Not As Challenging as Master's Degree?

The academics rarely push anybody like a master's or phd program will. My MBA school days were far more easy psychologically but harder academically and I would do the MBA school thing over law school any day of the week. And note that among graduate degrees, the MBA is most often considered the easiest, especially among those who have been in more than one graduate program. No thesis for MBAs. But it's still harder academically than law school.

You have got to be kidding me with this post. Law School is a Doctorate Degree. You can't be honestly comparing a masters degree to a law school education. A master's degree is far easier academically. My old roommate went to Thunderbird Business School for his MBA before law school (For those who don't know Thunderbird is one of the TOP business schools in the country). He told me that law school was far more challenging (his sentiment has been reconfirmed by everyone I know in law school who has a Master's Degree; that includes people who got their master's degree at Brown, NYU, Harvard, et cetera). Anybody who tells you that a non-doctorate degree is harder than a doctorate degree is probably someone who doesn't have a doctorate; thus, take what they say with a grain of salt. The bottom line is that almost everybody that I know who is in a position of power in this world has a lawschool education; that includes CEO's of large companies, directors of government organizations, political figures, and ironically law school professions (the stats show that a proportionally small % of people who finish law school are actually practicing law as their profession 10 years after graduation). I think law school is really a worthless title for the education you receive because the education teaches you about life. A first year student learns about the Constitution, a person's fundamental liberties, rights, how to buy and sell property, the legal ramifications as a landlord/tenant, civil liability, criminal liability, et cetera. These are things that seem necessary information for any human being, even if you aren't a lawyer. If you hate law school, I say stick it out; it will open a boat load of doors for you down the line. Sometimes in life you have to do what you hate to do what you love. Suck it up and think about how much worse it could be.
 
I thought the difficulty of a law program lies between a master's program and a PhD. You are also forgetting about engineering programs, which a probably the most difficult academic path.
 
I thought the difficulty of a law program lies between a master's program and a PhD.

I don't PhD's for most social sciences are "tough" so much as they are long.

Now science PhD's are probably very tough, but we all have different talents (ie a lawyer would find physics tough, but a scientist would likely find the law tough as well).
You are also forgetting about engineering programs, which a probably the most difficult academic path.

I don't know...

If anyone has taken both the LSAT and whatever standardized test is needed for an engineering program, I'd really like to know how they feel about this.

The LSAT was honestly the most difficult test I've ever taken.
 
Well

PhD students have far more free-time (i.e. non-school time) on their hands than law students have (at least from my own knowledge that seems to be the case; I could be completely ignorant to the realities of a tough PhD program). I live with two PhD students and they are always going out, sitting around watching TV, and have expressed absolutely no fear of failing out. In Law School there is a real possibility that the school will flat out fail you if they aren't happy with your performance. In fact, some law schools are curved as low as a 2.4 GPA for first year students. What that means is the teacher must fail students. "Survival of the fittest." On top of this you cover several thousand pages of material in only a few months and are tested in one four hour sitting for each class (5 monstrous tests within a 10 day period). I'm getting ready for finals right now; I have 5 100-page outlines prepared for these gauntlet of tests coming up. Furthermore, teachers go out of their way to humiliate you in class, something that is not done in most master's programs or PhD programs. I have another friend who graduated from Stanford with a Master's Degree in Engineering. He finished it in one year because he took undergrad classes that counted towards both his masters and his undergrad, and also he took an accelerated course load (something that someone would be physically unable to do in law school; a standard, non-accelerated 15 hour course load in law school is about a 70-hour-a-week commitment to a serious student). Law School is THREE YEARS and you CAN'T FINISH IT IN 1 year, no matter how many courses you take in undergrad. I'll let you make your own judgments about who had it harder between him and an average law student. Law Schools recognize the insane academic commitment to such an extent that they require students to sign forms promising that you WON'T WORK while in law school. This is completely the opposite of a PhD or Master's program where having a full or part-time job is the norm. Law School is quite the scary academic atmosphere; something I simply do not see other graduate students going through (or PhD students for that matter). To put a dabble of icing on this case, lawschool generally culminates in taking the bar, a multiple day exam that covers material that you might not have even studied in law school, such as specific codes for the state you are in. The average person studies for the bars for 3-6 months upon graduation. Why not count this as part of the experience? Therefore, lawschool is more realistically a 3.5 year experience. Overall, the only other academic atmosphere that seems comparable is Medical School.
 
You have got to be kidding me with this post. Law School is a Doctorate Degree. You can't be honestly comparing a masters degree to a law school education. A master's degree is far easier academically.

First of all, I am a JD/MBA student right now, and it's my opinion. Other opinions may differ.

But get your facts straight about a law degree. Here's a link explaining the often misunderstood degree.

www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Juris_Doctorate

The ABA, and California Bar, who I worked for, only recently recognized the JD as a law degree with the right to call it a Doctorate (1976, cf: Yale Law School, New Haven, CT).

As strange as this sounds, after the JD comes the Master's or LL.M, and after the LL.M comes either the LL.D (which in many cases is honorary, but in some schools the PhD academic equivalent) or the S.J.D., the law school equivalent of a PhD in most ABA schools that offer that terminal degree. The S.J.D. is the most common PhD equivalent degree and these people are referred to as "Doctor". Some southern states however, who have existing civil and cannon law underpinnings, call all three types of law degrees "Doctor". This information is available from any ABA law school or calbar.org.

I am not being harsh to you but forgive me so I can spare you embarrassment in the future ;) I got seriously embarrassed on this topic:

As a funny story, I am just a year out of finishing my BA degree, many years ago and searching for a Master's degree, and I walk into the law school of my alma mater, with the Dean, and I ask if I could enroll in the LL.M, or the Master's degree program. They said I needed my JD first, but then I countered and said, "But that's a doctorate!" and they said, "No, it's like your second Bachelor's degree, and for 300 years in this country, until 1976 nationwide, was called the LL.B, or Bachelor's of law, the degree that allows you to sit for the bar." It is the "basic" law degree.

It was a harsh awakening to realize that in no way, in no country on earth, is the JD the same as an MD, OD, DDS, DVM, DPA, DBA, or PhD.

Does that mean the JD is easy? Hell no I say. Is the MBA easy, hell no to that.

And I would also say neither is any Physics, Chemistry, EE, or EL engineering bachelor's degree from anywhere. And neither is the "certification", non-degree CCIE, awarded to only the most expert computer network engineers in the world in Cisco router and switch technologies. When I was in Cisco school, between my BA and my grad studies, I was just there to learn to supplement my Microsoft certification, and while there were millions of students in Cisco certified schools worldwide, only 1,000 people ever achieved the top level certification, or the CCIE.

Another non-degree title that is "brutal" beyond belief is the California CPA Exam.

Not long ago, I went to my Dean at my law school and asked why the LL.B of the US/Colonies of 300 years or so and other early schools (Columbia, William and Mary, Virginia and some other eastern schools) finally agreed to the JD title unanimously in the 1970s from coast to coast, it was because of an educational reason for pay/benefits. Funny how money comes into play in almost everything. You will learn about "deep pockets" and the famous "Palsgraf" case in Torts and Remedies in law school if you embark on that path.

He told me that people like him and other law professors and Deans never received the same respect and pay/benefits as their co-workers who had PhDs. Ironically, many an LL.B, including our county's presiding judge emeritus, decided to keep his LL.B designation since that's what he came in for at Cal's Boalt Law School, and that's what he worked his ass for, with honors and the coveted Order of the Coif which eventually landed him on a fast track to Judgeship. Nobody is going to ask him if he kept his LL.B or if he decided to receive a new diploma with his name on it that said, "Juris Doctor". :)
 
PhD students have far more free-time (i.e. non-school time) on their hands than law students have (at least from my own knowledge that seems to be the case; I could be completely ignorant to the realities of a tough PhD program). I live with two PhD students and they are always going out, sitting around watching TV, and have expressed absolutely no fear of failing out. In Law School there is a real possibility that the school will flat out fail you if they aren't happy with your performance.

I say that your PhD roomies are geniuses, or at least extremely smart. Sure I kind of slacked through my bachelor's and still got a decent GPA.

But they kicked my behind (and I am not into S&M) when I walked into the first day of my master's at the school of business. 3-4 page papers that would get an A or A- on the bachelor's level turned into 15-25 page papers in graduate business school, and sometimes got sent back to "rewrite".

In California, where I worked for the Bar, supra, previous post, law school curves their grades low and hopefully to reflect the bar. Walking into the bar, you automatically get a 55. You have to get 8 points on average on your essays to pass the bar out of a possible 45 points. Sounds easy? Not quite. If you score a 67 on the bar, that is great. If you score an 80, you are among just a few hundred in the whole state of California. Thus the harsh grading in law school.

If you do go to a law school that graduates you with a 95-100, then fine, but that person will not get anything close to that on the California Bar Exam. As for other states, I didn't work for them and I cannot comment. California's Bar pass rate, overall has floated between 50-65% percent over the last few decades for first timers, repeaters, and re-entry lawyers from other states or California lawyers who got slapped repeatedly for not paying their Cal State Bar dues/fees. Even California law students have to pay their fee to the State Bar or else possibly face getting kicked out of law school. Yes, the California Bar, while I loved them and the people, are a "business".

If you go to law school, congrats on your bravery. Same goes with a decent MBA program. Realize that neither will be easy. In law school, you won't encounter high math but be required to write a 2 hour essay, under normal circumstances in 1 hour and that is very, very hard. In MBA school, they will hit you with both writing, but not timed, thank God, but throw you with advanced accounting, finance, economics, taxation, statistics, quantitative analysis, and sometimes game theory if the teacher wants to hurt you. This is not easy, either.

In general, math people like me who only have MP3s of Feynman's lectures on physics, and not one music MP3, find the MBA thing less stressful than a 2 hour essay forced to be done in 1 hour.

Take the most vilified law school class, contracts (Kingsfield, Paper Chase). You have to write about a contract (1990s Cal Bar question) regarding a CEO, his contract or lack of with his VP daughter, a middleman and the contract, and two separate customers. A contract, for the rights of the parties to be established, involves an offer that is open, not revoked or terminated, has timely acceptance, and is supported by adequate consideration. That's what you cover for the first party. Then you have to cover the same theory, element by element, on each of the three remaining parties. You have to look for other concepts such as promissory estoppel and the statute of frauds (which is a huge area in itself), and factor those into four separate essays. A very fast writer can do four essays in two hours. In law school, you have 60 minutes to complete four essays wrapped up into one bar question.

As for MBA school, I walked into Quant class, and the teacher was a fan of Russel Crowe's beautiful mind character. The whole semester was a lesson in getting into the mind of a mad man. Nuff said as for difficulty level. I am stoic as hell, and that class made me cry.
 
It was a harsh awakening to realize that in no way, in no country on earth, is the JD the same as an MD, OD, DDS, DVM, DPA, DBA, or PhD.

I'm with you on this, a JD is a great degree and a very tough one to receive, but it is not considered by most people to be the equivalent of a PhD or even the other so called "professional doctorates." I know a JD/PhD (Psychology), a JD/MD, and a JD/OD, and they wouldn't be able to stop laughing if you told them their JD was the equivalent of their PhD, MD, or OD. Earning a JD is quite an accomplishment, but is it really a "doctorate," not in most peoples book.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.