Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Do you hate law?  (Read 10672 times)

yon

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Do you hate law?
« Reply #50 on: November 27, 2005, 09:50:24 PM »
I can agree with you here, lwr! In fact, one may even assert that some people want to become lawyers to be able to, as the saying goes, do the crime but not the time :)

hahaha

dkast

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 110
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Do you hate law?
« Reply #51 on: December 02, 2005, 12:09:11 AM »
no, I just hate law school ;)

toofuckincold

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Do you hate law?
« Reply #52 on: December 18, 2005, 08:48:50 PM »
Exactly! Lawyering in the real world out there is very different from law school.

980eQ

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: Do you hate law?
« Reply #53 on: December 18, 2005, 11:59:30 PM »
well. After a first semester, battered bruised and beaten, but alive, I can say that I have a profound respect and a bit of love for the law... a bit... hopefully it will get better. I just hope i did well this semester.

IQT

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Do you hate law?
« Reply #54 on: December 20, 2005, 03:11:51 AM »
Exactly! Lawyering in the real world out there is very different from law school.

sarcastic, too?

talented

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Do you hate law?
« Reply #55 on: December 24, 2005, 09:48:39 AM »
if you become an assoc at a big law firm it's gonna be worse than law school

c h e a p i e

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Do you hate law?
« Reply #56 on: March 12, 2008, 05:53:28 PM »

I posted the following in the wrong thread initially...

Not to throw a curve ball or anything, but at my first summer position I did research to force an 80+ year old women to undergo ECT (electroconvulsive therapy), and research to take money from Mother Theresa. Now I'm conducting the investigation to have a lady declared legally incompetent.

So I agree that lawyers often advocate for positions they don't agree with.

My first summer position I did research to force a 80+ year old women to undergo ECT (electroconvulsive therapy), and research to take money from Mother Theresa, both successfully. Now I'm conducting the investigation to have a lady declared legally incompetent.

The 80 year old women was so depressed that she stopped eating and the ECT snapped her out of it. That or just getting a decent meal at a hospital rather than the crap she ate at a public nursing home. I'd guess the latter. Quote "I don't remember the last time I had grapes! and melon!, and cottage cheese!"

Mother Theresa was named as a remainder beneficiary in a trust where our client was the primary beneficiary. Our client is 50 and living in a community home and the cost was extensive. We wanted to shelter her funds (including the trust) so that the home would give her a break and so she could begin receiving government benefits. But that would mean cutting out Mother Theresa. It really didnít matter because the trust was so small that our client would have to die suddenly for there to be any money left for Mother Theresa anyway. So I proceeded to point out that Mother Theresa is dead and our client is very much alive.


I can understand your pain! I know what it means to have to force someone to undergo ECT! My stepmom is a psychiatrist and she tells me how difficult it was for her many years back to make her patients undergo Insulin shock therapy (IST) -- she never administered ECT to any patient, BTW. Insulin Shock Therapy is viewed nowadays as a cruel practice with no reliable evidence of efficacy beyond a simple shock or placebo effect. IST had a higher apparent success rate in schizophrenics who were ill for less than 2 years, as this was also the time period when 'spontaneous recovery' was most common. Nowadays, psychiatric medications and variations in psychotherapy (e.g. cognitive behavioural therapy) or family therapy or supportive interventions are the main treatments used. ECT is still sometimes used, but it attracts controversy soon. Insulin shock therapy was developed by Polish researcher Manfred Sakel in 1933 and was used well into the 1950s, being replaced by tranquilizing drugs and then later anti-psychotic drugs as well (which also have a sedative effect). Epileptic seizures occur during the beginning stages of treatment, roughly 45Ė100 minutes into the procedure, but before the onset of the comatose state. Seizures occurring during the coma are more dangerous, requiring immediate interruption of the procedure and the ending of the comatose state, and may be followed by delayed recovery or severe shock.

kmac128

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 116
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: Do you hate law?
« Reply #57 on: March 13, 2008, 09:47:17 AM »
about the question of morals....

its true that sometimes as a lawyer you may represent an interest you are not actually morally ok with, but thats kinda your choice, you could work for a public interest that you do agree with, or you could work in a smaller firm and specialize in a field that youre ok with, or have a solo practice.

furthermore, doctors and other professions must also deal with these issue.  for example, a child molester/child rapist/murderer, whatever, in jail has a heart attack or some other emergency, the jail cant handle the problem and he is sent to the local hospital.  youre the doctor on call and this child molester comes in hand cuffed to a gurney.  yeah, you think the guy is the scum of the earth, maybe he should just die, but thats not your job, your go to work to help him, just like you would if he were a teacher or a priest.

granted, as a lawyer the situation is different, but you choose where you work and therefore, indirectly, the kinds of cases and interests you may defend. doctors dont have that luxury, they 'work' for anyone, no matter the individuals background

im not a lawyer, yet, nor am i a docter, but from an outside perspective, thats how i see it.

i am however a soldier, and i can tell you, i may not agree with every mission given to me, with every campain im sent on, but that's not my job. an old saying in the army is "Mine is not to Question Why; but to Do, or Die"  just like a lawyer, if i dont like that choice, i can get out of the military and try to get that job as a decision maker ie a politician.  the risks are greater, the chance at succeding is less, but this is analagous to going out on your own as a lawyer, the risks are greater, but you get to make the decisions.  if you choose to work for a big firm, you choose to allow those decisions to be made for you.