As an aspiring legal professional, you should have some idea about what to expect from a legal career. However, there are other expectations that permeate most legal careers and vary depending upon employers. The objective is to know what will be expected of you profession ally and what you may expect personally. Also, you should have certain expectations of the legal field as a whole and be wary enough to avoid unhealthy or unpleasant work environments.
In The Beginning
People who work in legal careers evolve intellectually and emotionally. At the beginning of your career, you will likely spin your wheels on many unproductive tangents, and suffer anxiety as you attempt to properly complete your tasks, but your confidence will increase along with your competence and efficiency, while your anxiety decreases. During this process your training and experience will promote objectivity without the emotion commonly created by the excitement and drama of your new career. However, there will always be some degree of excitement and drama no matter how entrenched in the legal mind-set you become. Initially, you will probably not be able to enjoy the drama very much, and you will react to it due to a lack of experience. Later, your experiences will prevent the excitement and drama from taking hold of you and allow you to enjoy your career and the opportunities created by it to help others. Patience and perseverance through the rigors of learning your new trade will pay off.
The personal relationships of most legal professionals may change when they grow with the experience and wisdom that a legal career accelerates through training and the implementation of legal analysis. First, as a legal professional you should expect to constantly face self-evaluation of morals and beliefs when you hear different factual scenarios and are forced to apply a systematic evaluation of results. For example, when a disabled mother has been the primary caregiver of a child and the father has been absent due to work or school, who should receive primary custody? What is in the child's best interest? The answer requires a systematic approach to the case, especially with regard to specific facts applied to the law. Your analysis may be influenced by your personal values about disabled people, primary caregivers, whether or not children should remain with their mothers, and absent fathers. You should need more facts to complete this analysis and form your opinions, although you probably already have a few opinions based on these facts. Legal professionals develop their sense of justice and equity when they use a mature and rational approach to sensitive issues, while, hopefully, maintaining compassion, tempered with professionalism and integrity.
Legal Analysis
They should expect that the law involves a lower standard of care than morality. This means that legal analysis does not always provide an assessment of what is morally right, equitable, or just. As the saying goes, you can't impose morality or common sense into people. Legal analysis merely provides an assessment of strengths and weaknesses of a person s position as applied to the law. It is a legal professional's job to apply the law and not necessarily morality, unless it is expedient to do so in conjunction with arguments. Laypeople are consistently frustrated with results; justice may not always appear to be served. Further, just because some legal professionals may adhere to a lower standard of care than they should does not mean you should do the same. However, you can expect frustration or rewards due to inconsistent results between the law and morality depending upon what side of the case you are on. For example, if your firm has a client you know is guilty of some heinous crime, but there was an illegal search and your efforts help to acquit the accused, you will likely be rewarded for your efforts even though the result may be contrary to morality. You may also be faced with a situation where judgment or sentence was imposed on someone inequitably. These situations may be hard pills to swallow.
Checking the Facts about Clients
Legal professionals should expect to develop an ability to determine whether or not others are credible, and double-check the facts. When legal professionals rely on the representation of a client, an employer, or an adverse party, they may suffer negative consequences if that representation is not true. Such misplaced reliance impairs the integrity of legal professionals and could cost them their jobs. For example, pretend your firm's client claims that an adverse party shaved his head before a hair analysis in order to frustrate a likely positive drug test result. You then provide that information to an attorney who argues the point in court. The adverse party brings photographs to court that show the client had little or no hair for a year prior to the drug test. In retrospect, the firm's client explains this by saying it had always been at least an inch longer on the top. At this point, the credibility of the client comes into question, and the firm's efforts are impaired. You should always acquire the most detailed statement of facts possible, and double-check the facts.
Checking the Facts about Employers
Legal professionals should check facts that matter with employers or get them in writing. Let's say that an employer represents to you in your job interview that you will receive a raise within three months to a year, and likely within three months, if you work hard. There is no written contract stating this-you rely on this representation, work hard with excellent performance, yet are refused a raise after six months. Then, coincidentally, after one year, you receive your first negative performance evaluation. Obviously, your loyalty and dedication to this employer were misplaced; your employer did not keep his promise. Also, had you talked to others employed by this fictional firm before accepting the job offer, you may have learned that no one ever received a raise in the time they worked there. This would have let you know that it was highly unlikely that the employer ever intended to keep its promise of a raise; had you further investigated the employer and its representations, you would have saved yourself the disappointment and grief caused by the misrepresentation. With more realistic expectations of the veracity of others, you would not have relied on it.
