routes in to law as a career change ?

jasonwatkins

I guess the only thing i'll really regret is that if I do feel it's something I can do and can do well, that I didn't get started 6 years ago as i've been off work for 11 years in total, so it's not like I wouldn't have had all the time in the world to devote to it ..

loulou123

I second the other poster who said that working in law isn't the exciting career you may be thinking it is. I spent several years as a legal secretary (and even that was pretty hard to get into, in honesty i just got a very lucky break.) and the majority of the time it was so boring! I also began to have a problem with the morals of the situations, such as the barristers defending child abusers, sex offenders etc etc in court and at that point i knew it was time to leave.

Not trying to put you off, good luck to you if thats what you want to do, am just saying that the reality of the job may not match up to what your expecting.

SarEl

loulou123 wrote: »

I second the other poster who said that working in law isn't the exciting career you may be thinking it is. I spent several years as a legal secretary (and even that was pretty hard to get into, in honesty i just got a very lucky break.) and the majority of the time it was so boring! I also began to have a problem with the morals of the situations, such as the barristers defending child abusers, sex offenders etc etc in court and at that point i knew it was time to leave.

Not trying to put you off, good luck to you if thats what you want to do, am just saying that the reality of the job may not match up to what your expecting.

I'd have to be clear - I love it and (most of the time) it is exciting (for me). But that isn't always the case. I happen to be a barrister who specialises in employment law. And I only work for employees / unions - I do no work for employers (apart from a small amount of pro-bono work for charities - not every employer is a bad employer and there are such things as bad employees!). But I consider myself fortunate. But whilst I can see your point about alleged child abusers etc - that is just the point. There is a lot of dull work and there is also a lot of work which you may not want to choose - but someone has to do it. The law operates on the basis that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, and the right to legal representation is enshrined in law too. Personally, I'd reckon that defending hundreds of drunken juveniles who did something daft on Friday night, is as dull as dishwater, and also not really "worth doing". But it all depends on your point of view and your view of the law. In a free society we have to hold to the principal that people have a right to a dfeence, and the best defenec they can get. If we didn't we would be signing up to judging people based on the views of a privileged elite or the tabloid presses opinion. I can see why a lot of people might have problems with the "morals" of this and I agree with you - you have to be "right for it". But morals also start with the right to be presumed innocent and the right to a defence. I'd rather live in a society that starts from that basis than the other kind - no matter how it may appear that someone is defending the indefensible.

jasonwatkins

loulou123 wrote: »

I second the other poster who said that working in law isn't the exciting career you may be thinking it is.

That's the thing, i'm completely realistic about it and excitement is the last thing I'd expect out of it.

I've read many horror stories about working all night, mountains of paperwork e.t.c. and it doesn't put me off.

jasonwatkins

well after all that, the GCSE course is a non-starter. It's evenings only and I can't travel in the evenings, mainly due to not being able to drive for one thing.

Owain_Moneysaver

jasonwatkins wrote: »

law has always interested me and is probably the only thing that would fire my enthusiasm enough to warrant really giving it a go, but the lack of money will probably ultimately prove to be a bridge too far.

If you could volunteer with Citizens Advice Bureau they would train you up to some extent in various areas of law, eg housing, benefits, employment, debt. I think they tend to recruit paid advisors from their volunteer pool. Many Bureaux have law students or trainees attached to them, so you might have the opportunities to work alongside them researching precedents etc.

It won't give you a legal career as such, but it's the only thing I can think of which has a low entry cost and a reasonable timescale.

If you can get into any local authority in the clerical side then you may have an opportunity to transfer to a department that uses law, eg licencing, planning, or some parts of housing, etc.

suelees1

jasonwatkins wrote: »

Thankyou for that. I've never done a degree before, and i receive incapacity benefit, so I guess I do qualify as low income.

I think this is why i'd like to try and secure this GCSE course. Apart from the fact it would get me out of the flat and into a bit of a routine (long story ), i just think as a practical introduction it could work out pretty well and give me a good feel for whether or not i'm cut out for it.

If I feel I am, i'd certainly jump in and try and arrange something with the OU.

I was in a similar boat to you many moons ago. I was 33 and really wanted to get into law and carried out all sorts of research into how to go about it. I eventually phoned my local uni to explain my situation and they allowed me to sit in on a seminar in the law dept to give me some idea of the knowledge required to do this at entry level - at that time it was obviously somewhat over my head but gave me food for thought.

I'd thought about OU but really felt I needed to study with others rather than on my own.

I then enrolled at a local FE college to do a year's 'return to study' course which helped me get back into doing essays etc. The following year I chose different modules to give me some 'Open College Federation' credits (an alternative to A levels). Your local college should do similar.

By this time I'd had second thoughts about a law degree so chose other subjects and I eventually graduated at age 39.

I got a job as a paralegal in a local firm and I'm still there now. I did then think about doing the LPC but I had no interest in some of the study areas. I'd also have had to to do my training in areas of law in which I had no interest and indeed were incompatible with my ideals. I knew I wanted to get into social welfare law so decided to stick with the paralegal job rather than spend the next few years training.

I've always specialised in areas of Social Welfare law and I've certainly not found any obstacles to not actually qualifying as a solicitor. I have my own team and the salary is very reasonable.

I've supervised many trainees in my time and it's given me a real insight into the difficulties they face. It's also getting harder and harder to get a training contract as there are far too many graduates chasing too few places. I'm sure a lot of them only persevere for the kudos of being called a solicitor.

So there are other ways of getting into the law - qualifying as a solicitor isn't the be all and end all but if you do want to go ahead then as has been said there is no quick fix.

Good luck with it Jason

Annisele

I think that (whatever the law says) you will come across age-related prejudice when trying to find a training contract. I had a careers adviser tell me I was 'too old' at the grand old age of 27!

I do know a few people who managed to get training contracts post-40, but they've all had relevant experience elsewhere - an ex-doctor now specialises in medical negligence, a guy fluent in a bazillion languages who specialises in shipping law, that sort of thing.

I self-funded the GDL and LPC, and never did manage to find a training contract (though to be fair I gave up trying when I found another job that I love, and that job does use a fair chunk of law).

So, I'd say that if you enjoy studying law for its own sake, go for it - but if you're doing it purely to get a career in law, don't bother; it's way too competitive.

SarEl

Annisele wrote: »

I think that (whatever the law says) you will come across age-related prejudice when trying to find a training contract. I had a careers adviser tell me I was 'too old' at the grand old age of 27!

I do know a few people who managed to get training contracts post-40, but they've all had relevant experience elsewhere - an ex-doctor now specialises in medical negligence, a guy fluent in a bazillion languages who specialises in shipping law, that sort of thing.

I self-funded the GDL and LPC, and never did manage to find a training contract (though to be fair I gave up trying when I found another job that I love, and that job does use a fair chunk of law).

So, I'd say that if you enjoy studying law for its own sake, go for it - but if you're doing it purely to get a career in law, don't bother; it's way too competitive.

I perhaps ought to point out that it was a careers adviser who said this. My careers adviser (I was the ripe old age of 16) told me I couldn't ever get into the law (I wanted to be a barrister). I was a girl, for goodness sake (but great powers of observation!), poor, in an inner city comprehensive, and no amount of good grades at O level would get me there. XX years later ( I am not admitting to my age) - well, he was wrong. Admittedly the O levels probably weren't a great help - but the A levels and S levels, the Oxford law degree etc etc pretty much did

And we have just completed a round of interviews for training positions which included people of a range of ages - and the older ones did better than the recent graduates, on the whole! So it really does depend...

Owain_Moneysaver

Annisele wrote: »

So, I'd say that if you enjoy studying law for its own sake, go for it -

In which case a BA (Law) may be a more interesting course than a pure law degree (LLB)