Lawyer influences

July 24, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
I wonder if interest in the old TV show “Perry Mason” has increased since news stories about U.S. Supreme Court justice nominee Sonia Sotomayor have mentioned how influential the show was in her becoming a lawyer.

After being told she couldn’t become a detective because she had diabetes, she realized maybe she could be an attorney. This decision came after watching hours of “Perry Mason.”

Is it that simple to pinpoint the moment in your life when you knew what you wanted to be when you grew up?

For years, I thought I’d enter the field of sports medicine. I was convinced it was what I wanted to do. I loved sports and the workings of the human body – it was a perfect fit. Then I took chemistry in high school and realized I’m more of a liberal arts girl. Writing was something I always enjoyed, which is how I ended up majoring in journalism.

My decision to enter my profession wasn’t related to a specific moment, person, or influence. It was a gradual realization as I found myself enjoying history and English classes more, and math and science courses less.

But some people have that “ah-ha!” moment when they realize what they’re meant to do. It may have come after watching countless hours of “Law & Order” or “Ally McBeal.” Perhaps a parent is an attorney and you’ve always admired their work. It could be you experienced a situation that made you want to help those wronged by the law.

Maybe you can’t say TV made you want to enter the legal profession, but when did your realize you wanted to be an attorney?
ADVERTISEMENT
  • I think this should be a two part question.

    One, what caused you to enter law school?

    Two, what made you decide to stick with the profession once you finally understood what it actually entailed? This latter point was a rude awakening for some of us.
  • Brian - you bring up a good point in sticking with being a lawyer. Perhaps I\'ll explore that more in a future post.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT