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. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  2. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  3. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

  4. My daughter was married less than a week and her new hubbys picture was on tv for drugs and now I havent't seen my granddaughters since st patricks day. when my daughter left her marriage from her childrens Father she lived with me with my grand daughters and that was ok but I called her on the new hubby who is in jail and said didn't want this around my grandkids not unreasonable request and I get shut out for her mistake

  5. From the perspective of a practicing attorney, it sounds like this masters degree in law for non-attorneys will be useless to anyone who gets it. "However, Ted Waggoner, chair of the ISBA’s Legal Education Conclave, sees the potential for the degree program to actually help attorneys do their jobs better. He pointed to his practice at Peterson Waggoner & Perkins LLP in Rochester and how some clients ask their attorneys to do work, such as filling out insurance forms, that they could do themselves. Waggoner believes the individuals with the legal master’s degrees could do the routine, mundane business thus freeing the lawyers to do the substantive legal work." That is simply insulting to suggest that someone with a masters degree would work in a role that is subpar to even an administrative assistant. Even someone with just a certificate or associate's degree in paralegal studies would be overqualified to sit around helping clients fill out forms. Anyone who has a business background that they think would be enhanced by having a legal background will just go to law school, or get an MBA (which typically includes a business law class that gives a generic, broad overview of legal concepts). No business-savvy person would ever seriously consider this ridiculous master of law for non-lawyers degree. It reeks of desperation. The only people I see getting it are the ones who did not get into law school, who see the degree as something to add to their transcript in hopes of getting into a JD program down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT