PT-LawMom

As women in a highly competitive school environment leading to an even more high pressure career, we have to learn how to take shit, be it from clients, bosses or colleagues. One of the reasons I started blogging was to network with other future attorneys, both female and male, who could envision a more ethical, collegial world where we share resources and help each other. I have benifitted immensely from my network of contacts and hope to help others in similar ways. I feel like, especially as women, we need to support each other against this good ol’ boys network.

That is why it was particularly disappointing to read another MILS today support my view about how we need to be honest and open and help each other and then turn around and call one of the MILS a selfish mother — basically a bad parent — for allowing multiple babysitters to watch her baby so she could attend class. Haven’t we all done that? I know I have and I’m probably the worst offender — working full-time AND using evening sitters? I never see my kid! Then she pretty much called me out directly for having a nanny “raise” my child and drive him to school.

Regardless, she throws up a desire for “blogger honesty” as the motivation for stating that mothers who use babysitters are allowing others to raise their kids. This is a tired argument that just doesn’t hold water. It takes a village to raise a child. As much as my child might love to spend every minute with me, he is enriched much more by his interactions with the diverse people who care for him each day, from his Indian Montessori teacher to his Mexican nanny to his Texan grandmother and his British grandfather. Let’s not forget the gay couple at church who babysit in a pinch or the blind elderly woman who lets him read her stories while I study during the post-service coffee hour. It takes a village and I would be a selfish mother only if I were to deprive him of those experiences.

Kristina at Wicked Words has written a great open letter to one of the executives at a Boston legal temporary placement firm, Counsel on Call, calling his company and others in the field out for perpetuating the myth that contract attorneys are unhireable or undesirable rather than assisting those attorneys with permanent placements.

Her most recent letter was set off by a chain of events over the past few weeks. First, this article in the Boston Globe, to which she dashed off the following letter:

It is with a dull anger that I read your article, “These temp lawyers are top-notch, a new firm in Boston promises,” (May 5, 2008), which my grandmother handed to me as I was clicking on the classifieds in a fruitless effort to find an ad for a junior-level attorney. You see, I have four years of an Ivy League education, followed by three years of law school, and bar admission.

In a world where someone with a J.D. is automatically considered to one of the top earners in the country, the Globe frittered away the opportunity to report on the underclass of lawyers that are mired in tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of dollars in debt and count on document review to pay the bills. Instead, it gleefully perpetuated the “stereotype” by noting that a contract attorney is a “fancy name for recent law school graduates who are desperate for work” and touting the services of a staffing firm that refuses to hire recent graduates who “couldn’t get a job anywhere,” without bothering to interview a single contract attorney.

This recent underemployed attorney also used to be a journalist. Maybe she should have remained one, as the Globe could certainly use a refresher in one of the cardinal rules of journalism, Always Examine all Potential Angles.

To which Counsel on Call’s representative replied (on Kristina’s blog):

Chad Schmidt said…

Just wanted to drop in and clarify a couple of things, as I can understand why my “can’t find a job” quote would upset you – and I’m glad you’ve brought it up for discussion.

This is what I remember saying to the reporter (and to be honest I can’t remember my exact words, but the quote seemed like more of a paraphrase than verbatim): 10-15 years ago, the landscape was much different. The ‘knock’ or perception was that contract attorneys were only recent law grads or attorneys who were out of work.

That does sound derogatory and insensitive … not at all the way I intended. That quote, however, represents the perception many people in the profession held and propagated – one we vehemently disagreed with, not only in fact but in principle – and it left an obstacle that still exists in many circles. All of that obviously didn’t come thru in my quote, which is my fault.

We’ve made a lot of progress in recent years in opening up more career options for attorneys, and that’s what I was trying to communicate. Even though the article wasn’t about recent grads, there are so many talented people out there who can’t find the job they want, and that’s very disheartening – we’re certainly attuned to that as a company. The more attorneys who gain experience and attain the jobs they want, the more it helps us make flexible work arrangements increasingly popular, if that makes sense. There are a lot of Catch 22s involved, which I know is frustrating. It might not sound like it in that quote of mine, but there are a lot of very dedicated people here trying to make the profession better and unearthing more opportunities for everyone.

I hope to keep this dialogue going, because you’re certainly not alone in your plight and we talk to attorneys about it every day. Hopefully The Globe will do an article on the subject and shine the spotlight on it in Boston. Good luck in your professional pursuits — your blog is very relevant and I’ll certainly keep reading.

Regards,

Chad Schmidt
Counsel On Call

Read Kristina’s latest response (linked at top) and join in the conversation at Wicked Words.

Someone searched my blog today for a link to the full summary of my current favorite Spanish novela, Al Diablo con los Guapos. Here’s the full summary. Don’t read it unless you want to know how the soap ends. I totally cried watching tonight’s episode. Poor Milli!

Fortunately/unfortunately, Chapin has me hooked on Fuego en la Sangre and those sexy cowboys. No tears there (so far…).

Four years since Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriage, California followed in its footsteps, recognizing that marriage is a fundamental legal right and that moral judgments should not be imposed on people’s marital choices in a society that is supposed to enforce the separation between church and state.

“The right to marry,” Chief Justice George wrote, “represents the right of an individual to establish a legally recognized family with a person of one’s choice and, as such, is of fundamental significance both to society and to the individual.”

Chief Justice George conceded that “as an historical matter in this state marriage has always been restricted to a union between a man and a woman.” But “tradition alone,” he continued, does not justify the denial of a fundamental constitutional right. Bans on interracial marriage were, he wrote, sanctioned by the state for many years.

In a second rationale from the interracial case, the court struck down the laws banning same-sex marriage on equal protection grounds, also adopting a new standard of review in the process.

When courts weigh whether distinctions among people or groups violate the right to equal protection they generally require just a rational basis for the distinction, a relatively easy standard to meet. But when the discrimination is based on race, sex or religion, the courts generally require a more substantial justification.

Discrimination based on sexual orientation, the majority ruled on Thursday, also requires that sort of more rigorous justification. The court acknowledged that it was the first state high court to adopt the standard, strict scrutiny, in sexual orientation cases.

Doesn’t monogamy and committed pairings fit right in with the conservative agenda? Hopefully Connecticut and other states will follow in California’s footsteps and recognize that the government should be giving equal rights to EVERYONE, whether based on skin color, religion, sexual preference, or any other category. Basic legal rights should not be limited by moral judgments, no matter how justified legislators or judges may think they are. That argument could be a slippery slope. If we say that it’s okay to pass or enforce law based on our religious beliefs then how can we go out and preach to people in countries with laws strongly shaped by religious values to change the way they operate? Hypocrites.

Well I made it through Spring semester and, boy, did it fly by! Between family and work upheavals, heavy reading and paper demands for my classes and illness, I can barely remember what I did over the past few months. I’m just glad it’s done and that I have a few weeks to recover before starting over again in June with a really intense summer session.

I won’t make predictions about how exams went. I will say THANK YOU to everyone who suggested I talk to the school and ask for some help last semester. I didn’t do it and it hurt me with fall grades. This semester, especially with the addition of the super-slow-brain meds, the extra time really did help me concentrate. I also brought highlighters, flags, etc. after realizing on the first, smaller exam that I was having difficulty with reading comprehension and needed some aides to help me break down the question. I think that helped for the second exam, but I guess we will see when grades are issued.

This summer I have to take two six-week classes. I already have the book and study CDs for one class, so I should probably get a jump on the reading. Bleech!

is her nanny, as I’ve recently discovered. Mine started this week and I LOVE her. She has organized my cabinets, cleaned out my drawers (even my bedside drawer ), done the laundry and made dinner for Pumpkinhead and then had something else waiting for Chapin and I each night! She makes Pumpkinhead a healthy breakfast and then takes him to school at 8:30 and picks him up at 3:30, much more reasonable hours than before when I was dropping him off at 7 and he was getting picked up at 6:30 by whoever happened to be able to get him that night.

If I love her this much while I’m on break, imagine how much I’ll adore her once I’m back in school four nights a week until 9 p.m. You should see my pantry and my fridge! Pumpkinhead’s toy room! Seriously, I am in over-organized heaven. She’s promised not to touch my home office with all my school stuff, although now I wonder if maybe I should let her…

How can I afford a nanny you ask? Well, I got really, really, REALLY lucky. I found a single mom who needed a place to stay for her and her two daughters (8 and 10 - soooo sweet and well-mannered). She and the kids are living with us and we’re paying for food, utilities, TV, Internet, gas, car insurance, etc., in exchange for her babysitting/cooking/housekeeping services. She gets child support and during the year she will most likely take on a part-time job while the kids are in school. We’re paying her during the summer to watch Pumpkinhead and have bought YMCA and Zoo memberships so that she can keep all three kids occupied while they are out of school. She’s even going to take Pumpkinhead to swimming lessons and we’re hoping to sign him up for karate or music classes as well. Hopefully it will continue to go as well as this first week.

Sorry I haven’t been posting much. Pain, exams, the usual stuff. I have lots of fun and exciting things to post about Pumpkinhead, Mother’s Day, my new nanny , etc., but I’m in a ton of pain this week so it’ll have to wait.

The good news is that after months of weird side effects like calling my son’s head a hat or Jim, Joe or the table a piano (soooo impressive at work!), suffering from wild mood swings, breakthrough bleeding, and drinking gallons of water to ward off potential kidney stones from the Topamax, the neurologist has concluded that, indeed, I am too sensitive to this medication. He says that 100mg twice/day is a “child’s dose.” If that’s the case and I was practically manic at that dose, I’d hate to see what I’d look like at 200!

Anyway, I was concerned he’d put me on a TCA, which cause massive weight gain, but I’d forgotten about Cymbalta. It was one of the first medications I tried. My pain came back strong after 6 weeks on 30mg, but I didn’t want to go up to 60 because of the anti-Bow-Chicka-Bow-Wow side effects (really, really ANTI). However, after almost a year of trying a bunch of other things, Chapin and I both agree that, as important as that is, I am NO FUN in pain and that needs to get resolved.

So… Doc told me to quit the Celexa cold turkey and start the Cymbalta. Taper the Topamax down over a week’s time. By this time next week, God willing, I should sound more like my old self. And, hopefully, some of my pain will be relieved. I also have an appointment tomorrow for accupuncture to see if that helps (thank you to those who suggested it). In addition, I’m considering a Myer’s Cocktail, but the first visit is $200 and each cocktail is $144!!! Could be very helpful, but !

P.S. I am still using the homeopathic remedies I mentioned, but at 1/2 capful per day, it is a sloooowwww process and, in the meantime, I’m hurting!

This week’s roundup is up at A Little Fish in Law School.

The Weekly MILS (Moms In Law School) Roundup is the brainchild of Saramel (retired). It is hosted on a rotating basis at the PT-LawMom and A Little Fish in Law School blogs and is usually posted no later than Monday morning. Next week’s MILS Roundup will be back here.

That’s surely what the thousands of immigrants being held at detention centers nationwide are feeling these days, especially those who have lived in this country for years as legal residents and are suddenly being locked up for petty offenses committed years ago during their youth. How many of us regret things we did as a child? But should we have to die as a result? The New York Times has a heart-wrenching story about a man whose only crime was to overstay his tourist visa. He spent many years weaving elegant $2,000 gowns in New York City. When he tried to re-enter the U.S. after a recent vacation to his homeland, he was told that he application to adjust his status had been denied and he was jailed pending a hearing.

He should have been safe there. He should have received the same basic rights we are entitled to. But immigrants, as non-citizens, are not entitled to those same protections.

As the country debates stricter enforcement of immigration laws, thousands of people who are not American citizens are being locked up for days, months or years while the government decides whether to deport them. Some have no valid visa; some are legal residents, but have past criminal convictions; others are seeking asylum from persecution.

Death is a reality in any jail, and the medical neglect of inmates is a perennial issue. But far more than in the criminal justice system, immigration detainees and their families lack basic ways to get answers when things go wrong.

No government body is required to keep track of deaths and publicly report them. No independent inquiry is mandated. And often relatives who try to investigate the treatment of those who died say they are stymied by fear of immigration authorities, lack of access to lawyers, or sheer distance.

When Mr. Bah fell and fractured his skull, it took the detention center more than 24 hours to get him to a hospital. By the time they did, after hours of watching him vomit, he was in a coma and remained that way for four months before he died. His relatives had to track him down because no one informed them. When they tried to call the detention center, they were told the center could not give out any information.

Why is our country wasting its resources on people who are trying to better their lives and not on true “criminals.” And why is the government allowing the guards in these centers to get away with degrading and shaming people this way? The government got all high and mighty after Abu Ghraib and yet look what it is doing in its own country. How can we preach basic human rights to other countries and not practice what we preach?

Called the neurologist today to discuss the fact that I can barely lift my arms to drive my car this week, much less lift my heavy textbook (that’s what I get for all the handwriting I’ve been doing in preparation for finals). He suggested raising the Topamax back to 100mg twice/day (i.e., crazy psychotic girl level). I said, “No thanks” and asked if he could recommend something topical to get me through exams because no way am I changing meds right now! Tried that last semester at exam time and look what happened. He said I could try Capsaicin cream (burns like you wouldn’t believe!), but that I should come in to see him ASAP to talk about alternative medications.

Right now I’m on Topamax for the pain (not working) and Celexa and Buspar for the depression and anxiety that the Topamax cause. Meds for the meds - yippee. Sound crazy, but I was literally weeping in my car and in front of Pumpkinhead so I had to get on something. So my current choices are the following:

1) Increase Topamax dosage and potentially lose my mind (I really went psycho/nuts at 100mg - ask anyone who knows me). Not to mention that I’m already sounding stupid/confused enough from this stuff (orally, not in writing, because it affects the speech part of my brain). I’m not sure how much more my ego can take! On the plus side, Topamax does cause weight loss which is a nice side effect. Also causes kidney stones…

2) Come off the Topamax and the Celexa/Buspar and switch to a Tri-Cyclic Antidepressant (all of which are apparently great for neuropathic pain but cause SEVERE WEIGHT GAIN — wouldn’t that be an ironic twist?!?!)

3) Go back to the Neurontin I was on in the fall, which requires me to take several horse pills three times each day. It also causes confusion and weight gain.

Yep, brought this on myself. Now what do I do? Bleech. Send some cooling arm vibes my way, will you? At least for this week so I can get through my exam? (P.S. I did try the cream, but it requires application four times a day for a week before it deadens the nerves sufficiently to get full relief. I’ll keep going but in the meantime it just feels like someone sliced my arm and rubbed the cut with Habanero slices.)