Female corporate lawyers at Anthem find opportunity, no glass ceiling

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Pamela Williams was bewildered.

As an attorney and now senior vice president and counsel at Anthem Inc., she has gone pretty much wherever she wanted, literally and figuratively. She did not build her career by letting obstacles block her path or sitting patiently on the sidelines.

Her decision to become an attorney was made while in middle school, and through the next several years of schooling, she followed her parents’ advice to work diligently toward her goals and not feel intimated because she is a woman.

anthemattnys-7-15col.jpg Kathy Kiefer, Catherine Kelaghan and Pamela Williams. (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

A few years after law school, Williams became a deputy prosecutor in Fayette and Union counties. There she handled everything from traffic infractions to search warrants and felonies. She liked the work but long-term she wanted a more stable career than being a political appointee. So when a litigation position opened at Anthem, she jumped.

And that is where she was one recent afternoon when she found herself crammed in an elevator. She was among colleagues, visitors and a security guard who would escort the ensemble out to the company’s outdoor terrace which overlooks Monument Circle in downtown Indianapolis. She could go anywhere in the building, so she did not understand why they had to get clearance to walk outside.anthem-atty-bios

Finally, one member of the group tried to erase her confusion by explaining that not everyone has her confidence to walk through closed doors without permission.

Like Williams, Anthem co-workers Kathy Kiefer, corporate secretary and vice president of legal, and Catherine Kelaghan, vice president and counsel, have built their careers by working hard and charging ahead.

The three women are examples of Anthem’s diverse workforce. The billion-dollar health insurance provider notes women comprise 76 percent of its workforce and 63 percent managerial leadership.

Kiefer gained experience in private practice, working for Ice Miller LLP and as in-house counsel at Conseco Inc. before arriving at Anthem. She wanted to practice business law because she enjoys being in the boardroom more than the courtroom. Her job now calls upon her affinity for puzzles as she makes sure all the pieces fit together in the areas of corporate governance, corporate law and finance.

“I never felt the glass ceiling,” she said. “I never felt that being a woman didn’t allow me those opportunities, but I think it is getting easier as there’s more of a push to include women in higher levels of executive management and board membership.”

Working at the Internal Revenue Service after college, Kelaghan interacted with lawyers, which inspired her to pursue a legal degree. She will mark 24 years at Anthem this year, where she oversees and provides legal support to many divisions in the company, including employment and employee benefits litigation, human resources, information technology, and health care analytics. She also mentors new employees.

“I don’t know that it’s different based on gender,” she said when asked if she has noticed any differences between mentoring women and men. “I think I see more of a difference based on either career aspirations or personality, or even their own backgrounds, what they hope to accomplish.”

The trio sat down with the Indiana Lawyer to talk about their careers and how women can be successful in the law.

Q: What advice would you give to young women working as in-house counsel?

Kiefer: I would say know what your priorities are, and the things that are really important to you, try to do those. If it’s important to you to go to your kids’ activities, do that. I’m not saying don’t work hard. Absolutely work hard, put yourself out there, but know what your priorities are and be flexible.

Q: How easy is it to set priorities without having your colleagues wondering how serious you are about your career?

Williams: You definitely have a precarious balance. For me, it’s setting expectations for myself and not beating myself up. It’s about flexibility; is something absolutely critical happening right now that I have to be involved in or can I delegate that to someone? Then I have to compare that to, is it one of 50 soccer games, or is it a lead role in a play and this is the premiere night? So it’s all a balance between family and your job.

Q: The legal profession is noticing that women are leaving the law. Why did you three keep practicing?

Kiefer: I took nine months off. My kids were very young then so I had the opportunity to be a stay-at-home mom and I realized I was a much better working mother.

Kelaghan: I think we spent a lot of time getting our law degrees so we obviously want to be lawyers. The thought of not practicing law, I never thought about not doing that.

Williams: To what Kathy said, I think I’m a much better working mother than a stay-at-home mother. I wanted to have both. I wanted to be a good mom and I wanted to be back at my job, working hard and accomplishing things.

Q: To keep women practicing, do you think the model of what it means to be a lawyer has to change? Does the profession have to adjust to be more accommodating to women?

Williams: I think being in-house, we work as many hours as we would work at a law firm. The expectations are every bit as high if not higher. It’s not that less is required of you in-house, it’s culture and flexibility. I speculate in a law firm, it is just a different set of expectations but the end game of where you’re trying to get to and what is expected out of you is the same — good work, lots of work, quality work. How you get from here to there is different.

Kelaghan: From the firms we work with, I’ve seen some younger associates quit. I don’t know the demands there, but does the model have to change? Possibly. I certainly work with female partners at some of our firms, but other firms, we still work with primarily white males. It would be nice to see more diversity with those teams.•


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. OK, take notice. Those wondering just how corrupt the Indiana system is can see the picture in this post. Attorney Donald James did not criticize any judges, he merely, it would seem, caused some clients to file against him and then ignored his own defense. James thus disrespected the system via ignoring all and was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him. Yes, nearly $526 for all the costs, the state having proved it all. Ouch, right? Now consider whistleblower and constitutionalist and citizen journalist Paul Ogden who criticized a judge, defended himself in such a professional fashion as to have half the case against him thrown out by the ISC and was then handed a career ending $10,000 bill as "half the costs" of the state crucifying him. THE TAKEAWAY MESSAGE for any who have ears to hear ... resist Star Chamber and pay with your career ... welcome to the Indiana system of (cough) justice.

  2. GMA Ranger, I, too, was warned against posting on how the Ind govt was attempting to destroy me professionally, and visit great costs and even destitution upon my family through their processing. No doubt the discussion in Indy today is likely how to ban me from this site (I expect I soon will be), just as they have banned me from emailing them at the BLE and Office of Bar Admission and ADA coordinator -- or, if that fails, whether they can file a complaint against my Kansas or SCOTUS law license for telling just how they operate and offering all of my files over the past decade to any of good will. The elitist insiders running the Hoosier social control mechanisms realize that knowledge and a unified response will be the end of their unjust reign. They fear exposure and accountability. I was banned for life from the Indiana bar for questioning government processing, that is, for being a whistleblower. Hoosier whistleblowers suffer much. I have no doubt, Gma Ranger, of what you report. They fear us, but realize as long as they keep us in fear of them, they can control us. Kinda like the kids' show Ants. Tyrannical governments the world over are being shaken by empowered citizens. Hoosiers dealing with The Capitol are often dealing with tyranny. Time to rise up: Back to the Founders! MAGA!

  3. Science is showing us the root of addiction is the lack of connection (with people). Criminalizing people who are lonely is a gross misinterpretation of what data is revealing and the approach we must take to combat mental health. Harsher crimes from drug dealers? where there is a demand there is a market, so make it legal and encourage these citizens to be functioning members of a society with competitive market opportunities. Legalize are "drugs" and quit wasting tax payer dollars on frivolous incarceration. The system is destroying lives and doing it in the name of privatized profits. To demonize loneliness and destroy lives in the land of opportunity is not freedom.

  4. Good luck, but as I have documented in three Hail Mary's to the SCOTUS, two applications (2007 & 2013),a civil rights suit and my own kicked-to-the-curb prayer for mandamus. all supported in detailed affidavits with full legal briefing (never considered), the ISC knows that the BLE operates "above the law" (i.e. unconstitutionally) and does not give a damn. In fact, that is how it was designed to control the lawyers. IU Law Prof. Patrick Baude blew the whistle while he was Ind Bar Examiner President back in 1993, even he was shut down. It is a masonic system that blackballs those whom the elite disdain. Here is the basic thrust: When I asked why I was initially denied, the court's foremost jester wrote back that the ten examiners all voted, and I did not gain the needed votes for approval (whatever that is, probably ten) and thus I was not in .. nothing written, no explanation, just go away or appeal ... and if you appeal and disagree with their system .. proof positive you lack character and fitness. It is both arbitrary and capricious by its very design. The Hoosier legal elites are monarchical minded, and rejected me for life for ostensibly failing to sufficiently respect man's law (due to my stated regard for God's law -- which they questioned me on, after remanding me for a psych eval for holding such Higher Law beliefs) while breaking their own rules, breaking federal statutory law, and violating federal and state constitutions and ancient due process standards .. all well documented as they "processed me" over many years.... yes years ... they have few standards that they will not bulldoze to get to the end desired. And the ISC knows this, and they keep it in play. So sad, And the fed courts refuse to do anything, and so the blackballing show goes on ... it is the Indy way. My final experience here: I will open my files to anyone interested in seeing justice dawn over Indy. My cases are an open book, just ask.

  5. Looks like 2017 will be another notable year for these cases. I have a Grandson involved in a CHINS case that should never have been. He and the whole family are being held hostage by CPS and the 'current mood' of the CPS caseworker. If the parents disagree with a decision, they are penalized. I, along with other were posting on Jasper County Online News, but all were quickly warned to remove posts. I totally understand that some children need these services, but in this case, it was mistakes, covered by coorcement of father to sign papers, lies and cover-ups. The most astonishing thing was within 2 weeks of this child being placed with CPS, a private adoption agency was asking questions regarding child's family in the area. I believe a photo that was taken by CPS manager at the very onset during the CHINS co-ocerment and the intent was to make money. I have even been warned not to post or speak to anyone regarding this case. Parents have completed all requirements, met foster parents, get visitation 2 days a week, and still the next court date is all the way out till May 1, which gives them(CPS) plenty of to time make further demands (which I expect) No trust of these 'seasoned' case managers, as I have already learned too much about their dirty little tricks. If they discover that I have posted here, I expect they will not be happy and penalized parents again. Still a Hostage.