Is law school possible at 62?

[Hamilton]

First - I disagree with the "little time left" notion.  Speaking as a lawyer, I do not see the practice of law making the world a better place generally speaking.  There are so many people and organizations out there who need the help of intelligent caring people willing to share their experience.  Find your interest and passion and find a school or organization, contact them, and ask how you can help.

I think john articulated the pitfalls well.  Law school is an expensive, time consuming, and greuling process.  Then there is the cost and time to pass the bar.  Finally, in an already difficult job market (that wont be improving) the realistic prospects of a fresh new 66 year old lawyer landing a job are extremely slim.  Heck, I ran into that wall in my 40s and I brought a ton of practical experience and business contacts.

I'm sorry, that is the reality and I would hate to see some law school screw you out of $100,000 with a bunch of false promises and a smile on their face.

John 4040 and Hamilton

How do you see me "actually benefiting society" in a personally fulfilling way in the little time I have left?

[john4040]

As for kids being much smarter, do not count on it. Standardized test scores have been dropping for generations, I spend my days trying to educate the idiots you are coming out of 'good' schools with CS and IT degrees who somehow still do not have basic usable skills. The kids have grown up in a world where everyone gets a trophy and are amazed that somethings actually require work, as such, it would be truly foolhardy to rule someone out because they did not come through the same happy little world that you have.

When education was not as prevalent in the United States, only the smartest graduated from high school and took the SAT - many others worked on the family farm and did not pursue education.  Therefore, your reliance on the average SAT scores to prove the average intelligence of the time is misplaced.  Today, there are many more people being educated.  Virtually everyone is required to go to high school and many more take the SAT.  The scores are lower because there are simply more people taking it - people who have absolutely no business taking it but are taking it because college is becoming a necessity rather than a luxury.  I don't think that you can seriously make the argument that, on the whole, today's generation is not more educated than those of the past.  You make the argument that the younger generations may be more lazy on average -- that may be so -- but I fail to see how that refutes any of my previous points.

In addition to the above, the LSAT has become way more competitive.  Here is a chart showing proving as much:
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/images/2008/10/12/lsat_3.jpg

I would wager a bet that the average LSAT score has increased significantly since 2007.

You do not refute any of my other points, therefore, I fail to see how anything I said was inaccurate or incorrect.

[john4040]

John 4040 and Hamilton

How do you see me "actually benefiting society" in a personally fulfilling way in the little time I have left?

Volunteer at the many non-profit organizations around your area.  Get involved in your community.  Love and provide support to your family.  You can get much more fulfillment interacting on a daily basis with the elderly than you can litigating for them.

[Roomdo]

Hamilton,

(Side note:my maiden name is Hamilton)
I believe you are sincere in your advice and I appreciate that. My purpose in  writing to this discussion board was aimed at obtaining insight into the process of getting into law school and being able to continue with a successful outcome as a person in their 60's. I realize the cost is an important consideration but I am prepared to deal with that if accepted. I have spent the last 40 years contributing to society's needs and problems through local government and volunteer support. All of my experience has shown me that without the ability to legally insulate yourself, you are less likely to have the ability to exercise your personal rights.    I want to learn more about the law and the only way to do it is to go to law school. If I make it through and can still represent myself in a professional manner then I see myself as an individual's advocate.

[john4040]

John4040

People like me, with "real life" experience, can bring something to the legal profession that others do not and cannot. People often trust mature lawyers more giving them  a massive competitive advantage over the kids that came straight through school and university to the law with no idea of how a business is run.

They may value your "real life" experience, however, you stand on absolutely equal footing with the "kids that came straight through school" with respect to the actual practice of law.

As a mature entry lawyer, I expect some difficulty in finding a law firm that is a good fit for my expectations and experiences.  But within two years,  I also expect  to open my own law firm leveraging  my other experience  both legally and in terms of how I  help my clients.

I suspected as much.  The type of firms that practice elder law don't like to train people who leave in a few years.  I think you'd be extremely hard pressed to find a firm that would take you on as an associate.

You expect to open your law firm in two years?  Lets start adding the years up.  You're 62 right now and just studying for the LSAT.  Law school takes 3 years.  So, you'll be 66 when you're done and have passed the bar (assuming that you get into a law school within the next year).  Lets now assume that you get into a firm.  It'll take you 3 more years to learn how to practice law.  You're now 69.  It takes a great deal of time to cultivate relationships with clients.  How many years do you think it'll take to turn a profit?

In all my years through school and graduate school and then as a professional in business ( city government, banking, real estate, commercial insurance, retail sales, energy industry ) I have NEVER been treated like someone’s b1tch nor do I ever expect to be.  I wonder if you would have replied as glibly to my question if I had been a male.

I actually thought you were a male when I first wrote my response.  Then I re-read the sentence about your "hubby."  So, the answer to your last question is a resounding "Yes."

Law school professors do not discriminate.  They are notorious for hiding the ball and trying to make you look like a fool.  They do this to everyone.  Not many older folks are willing to put up with that kind of BS.

Edit:
I'm not saying that law school is a worthless endeavor.  I'm just saying that it's worthless for the two reasons you have set forth:  profit and the ability to legally insulate yourself.  You cannot turn a profit in such short time and you surely cannot learn to legally insulate yourself a few years out of law school.  You'd save way more money hiring an attorney to represent you.  Now, if you would have told me that "I can't live without being a lawyer" and that "the intrinsic value of a legal education far outweighs anything else", then I'd tell you to proceed - but proceed with caution.  On the information you have given thus far, it seems as though you like law and want to learn more about it, but you're also wanting to derive profit from it and the ability to legally protect yourself.  You can remove the last two off your list of "reasons I want to go to law school."

[marcus-aurelius]

The median lsat scores for law schools have most likley risen because more people are taking the lsat, not because the average intelligence has increased.  Simple math.  If 100,000 take the lsat, twice as many people score above the 50th percentile as when 50,000 take it.

[john4040]

The median lsat scores for law schools have most likley risen because more people are taking the lsat, not because the average intelligence has increased.  Simple math.  If 100,000 take the lsat, twice as many people score above the 50th percentile as when 50,000 take it.

See my quote Re: more competition.  Unlike haus' use of the SAT statistic, I didn't use the LSAT statistic to support my assertion that more folks are getting smarter on average.  I used to statistic to support my contention that the LSAT was getting more competitive.

[haus]

john

Work on your reading compression I made no reference to the SAT.

[john4040]

john

Work on your reading compression I made no reference to the SAT.

Standardized test scores have been dropping for generations, I spend my days trying to educate the idiots you are coming out of 'good' schools with CS and IT degrees who somehow still do not have basic usable skills.

Last time I checked, the SAT is one of the major standardized tests in the US.  If you weren't referring to the drop in SAT scores in 1963, which "standardized test scores" were you referring to - anecdotal scores?  I'm not sure my analysis would change one way or another, but I am curious.

[marcus-aurelius]

One who scores in the 95th percentile should in the same area, given a standard deviation