Women CANNOT do it all
Neither can men, for that matter, but no one expects them to.
Recently I was perusing Ms. JD, and a few postings got me to thinking. First, there was a seven part series by Peg, on the 7 Truths that Every Working Woman Should Know Before Having Children. She's a junior associate at a big law firm with two small children. The gist of her advice falls under the category of: if you have children, you're on your own. Your firm won't be particularly helpful. You can't rely on your family. You can't even expect your husband to help you at all. Oh, and by the way, your body will most likely fail you as well. There are many similar posts on the website, and they all have a familiar theme: it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to devote the necessary time to be both a great lawyer and a great mother. After reading all of this, I came to another post. In it, a 30 year old woman wanted advice regarding whether she's too old to go to law school - especially considering that she wants to have children in a few years. EVERYONE starts gushing about how it's not too late to go to law school and that she should do it, etc. etc.
Is that really good advice? I found it somewhat shocking that after all the kvetching about work/family balance, everyone would be so positive about the prospect of starting a family while trying to make a start in the legal profession. The way I see it: (1) It doesn't make any monetary sense [in my law school's orientation we were told that a lawyer doesn't make back the money (s)he spent on law school through increased earnings until after 30 years of work]; (2) Lawyers work some of the longest hours of any profession [which obviously is a huge negative if you want to start having small children]; and (3) The profession of the law is still heavily male dominated and many firms will not make concessions for working mothers.
Am I saying that women - especially those who want to be mothers - should not go into the legal profession? Of course not. I recently graduated from law school, and I fully intend on having children in three years. What I am saying, however, is that the system will NEVER change until women stop pretending that these real issues don't exist when planning for the future. I'm tired of the knee-jerk female response to whether a women should clearly overextend herself being: "Go for it! You can do everything! Just jump right in!
It's not that I don't understand why women react this way: they're so used to arguing against the notion that women are not as capable as men that they forget that women are no more capable. It's just that this sort of mindset is not helpful. No man would ever consider being the primary caretaker of an infant child and jumping into a demanding new career at the same time. If he asked his guy friends if they thought such a move was a good idea they would at the very least counsel him to really think about it before making such a move. Most likely many of them would actively counsel him against such a plan. No one would say "Go for it! That sounds like a fantastic idea! Wonderful!" Why should women counsel each other so unwisely?
I can already hear a bunch of angry comments about how women can do anything. I repeat - I'm not saying we can't - I'm saying we can't do everything. That simple fact may not be a truth that many people want to hear, but it is a truth nonetheless. Perhaps if we take it to heart then, unlike Peg, we will demand more from our husbands, our family, and our workplace which would allow us to successfully take on the solemn duty of raising the next generation, and having a fulfilling career that we can be proud of.
*By the way, if you want to read a great book on this topic, you should read: The Mommy Myth:The Idealization of Motherhood and How it Undermined Women. It really shaped my thinking in this area.
- Login or register to post comments
- Go to AdversePossession's blog
- Email this page
_0.jpg "Kirkland & Ellis LLP")
Comments
good question
Even though I think you have mischaracterized my 7 myths series (especially the one that you've tagged to the word "firm"), I think you raise a good question. I was raised in the '70s and '80s, in the era of the ERA and many other social pressures around the idea of "we can have it all". It took me a long time to face the facts that you can't have it ALL. We, as women, can have a lot but probably not it ALL. I think that I didn't realize this until I had to walk away from a career that I loved and was very successful at because of the pull of motherhood. Sadly, I don't know that I could have learned that lesson any other way or any earlier. It's one of those things that you can't know until you try to have it all and realize that you are failing.
No, really, we can do it all if we want to.
I think there are other motivations for going back to law school
besides money; I left a successful career where I was making more than
I will be post-law graduation as a public interest attorney--BUT, I
hated my previous career and feel MUCH MORE fulfilled in what I'm doing
now. And because I'm happier, I feel like I am a better mother
and wife. I would rather be making less money (but enough) and happy
with what I do, than to be stuck in a career that I despise, even
though the money is good.
And I think it's too narrow to say that
being a lawyer can't be compatible with being a mother. Granted,
not everyone has caught up with the family-friendly options such as
flex time, working from home, part-time, etc., but I know that it is
possible. I see it everyday, both in my agency, and with others that I
know. You can do it without being overextended.
I fully support
any woman who wants to "have it all" because I don't think anyone
should feel like it HAS to be an "either/or". You can be a mom and an
attorney, and be good at both. I do have a very full and busy life with
its share of complications, but I love it and I wouldn't change
anything. If it didn't work for me, I would make changes. I do
try as much as possible to warn advice-seekers about possible drawbacks
or issues, but I also try to let them know that I am very happy,
successful, and fulfilled with my professional and personal life.
An
administrator at my school recently saw me and asked about my kids. He
knows my husband is a medical resident and that I both clerk for an
agency and TA a class at school, s well as taking my own classes. He
then asked me (in jest) how many times a day I want to just run away to
a tropical island and escape it all. I told him honestly that I
am more happy and fulfilled in my life than I've ever been and I
wouldn't change anything going on right now. My way is NOT for
everyone. But it works for me, and I think everyone has to really work
hard to find the balance in their own lives, and it's not as black and
white as some want to try and make it.
happiness vs. "it all"
I think you can and will be happy as a professional and a mother. However, happiness and fulfillment do not equal "it all". (or do they?) What you are describing is the proverbial "balance" and I applaud you at finding it. I too, think that I have achieved balance, or at least I am very close to it right now.
I think what the original poster was trying to say is that you can't be everything and that it is not even realistic to aspire to be everything. I actually loved my prior career and I was very good at it so that gave me a lot of personal pride and a sense of accomplishment. However, balance was impossible and could not be a good mother at the same time as I was good at my job. In fact, I could not be a good mother and even continue to do that job at all, never mind doing it well or not so well. So, I couldn't have it all. That doesn't mean that I was doomed to a life of sadness or disappointment but it meant that I had to adjust my priorities and rearrange my career goals and aspirations.
I think the real difference in opinion is "having it all" or "having balance".