For Firms Welcoming Summer Associates, It's Time to Think Outside the Bottle
The lawyers of tomorrow are increasingly aware of—and not OK with—the mental health and substance abuse risks that can come with life in the law.
May 04, 2018 at 01:43 PM
6 minute read
Photo: Senyuk Mykola/Shutterstock.com
As far as tired clichés go, “work hard, play hard” is among the most exhausted. Despite the mantra's patently empty promise—that you can somehow have it all by just going full-throttle across every inch and moment of your life—its allure persists, especially among occupational maximalists like lawyers. Now, as law firms prepare to welcome their new classes of summer associates, outdated and uninspired thinking about the appeal of the “work hard, play hard” image is likely rearing its head once again.
Here's the common line of thought: “We want them to like us and have fun, but also to see we take our work very seriously. I know, we have to show them we can work hard and play hard!”
In the practical terms of a law firm setting, that means a lot of drinking-based events, and non-drinking-based events with plenty of alcohol still available. If you work in a firm, you know this is true. If you are alert to emerging trends, however, you should probably also know it's time to rethink your summer associate game.
The lawyers of tomorrow are increasingly aware of—and not OK with—the mental health and substance abuse risks that can come with life in the law. As recently as last fall, student leaders at 14 elite law schools around the country banded together to sign a pledge that they would seek to greatly improve the mental health and overall well-being of their student bodies, and to fight the stigma associated with seeking treatment. If that sounds revolutionary, that's because it is. And as someone whose day-to-day work is a deep-dive into behavioral health and well-being in the legal profession, I can tell you it is not a passing phase or flavor of the week.
In the words of Chris O'Brien, one of the student leaders who initiated that pledge:
More and more has come out in the last few years to show that the prevalence of mental health issues in law school and the legal profession is much higher than people originally knew, especially at big law firms where people work 60 to 80 hours a week. Many of these patterns develop in law school and are continued into the legal profession. We get into a pattern: high pressure, high stakes, anxiety, depression. In law school, we drink a lot, because we enjoy each others' company, and often we continue to drink in order to combat some of these issues, which is extremely unhealthy.
If that sounds like the thinking of a generation who will be drawn to firms who lavish them with the booziest events and best parties, you need to listen a little more closely.
Citing a “mental health crisis” and the fact that misery in the legal profession is “seemingly ubiquitous,” students at Harvard Law School recently pushed the school to conduct a mental health survey to measure the well-being of the student body. What they found demonstrated a “grisly reality” that included truly significant levels of mental health distress and self-identified risk of suicide. In response, the student government offered several recommendations they would like to see the school implement, including hiring more therapists, providing training on how to spot distress in a colleague, and fostering deeper connections between faculty and students. This could, they say, “include more candid discussions about mental health struggles in the legal profession, or even the struggles of the faculty themselves.” Again, revolutionary. Suffice it to say, I doubt the students are hoping for these candid discussions about mental health struggles to take place in the default social settings of the legal profession—happy hours and cocktail receptions.
If finding alignment with the mindset of the next generation of lawyers isn't a compelling enough reason for firms to revamp their summer associate programs, then perhaps they should consider that forced cultural norms—such as regular alcohol consumption—also create a barrier to diversity and inclusion. For the roughly 30 percent of American adults who don't drink due to a variety of reasons, including religious or cultural values, health reasons, or because they are in recovery from a substance use disorder, feeling at home in the social environment of the legal profession is an unduly burdensome task.
As we all know, change is sometimes a difficult and frightening thing, especially when you are talking about cultural change and the unwinding of longstanding traditions. Historical examples of why we must move past the fear and uncertainty to achieve societal progress are too numerous to cite, and in the context of the legal profession, the same fears and rationale for moving past them are abundant. As the American Bar Association and other leaders and stakeholders across the profession continue to push for an increased prioritization of lawyer and law student well-being, it is critical that law firms recognize their important and unique role in that process, and to examine their cultures in search of areas ripe for improvement. Getting your summer associates drunk is clearly one such area, but staying stuck in old patterns has proven to be overwhelmingly seductive.
In my work to help law firms think strategically about improving well-being and reducing behavioral health risk, one of the most common questions I hear is, “But where do we even start?” For many firms, a summer associate program is an example of low-hanging fruit that makes a good target for change. To firm leaders, I would say that the students coming your way are acutely aware of the mental health challenges and unhealthy behaviors common to the legal industry. These students are not looking for firms to pretend the problems don't exist, they're looking for firms who are committed to doing something about them.
Patrick R. Krill is the founder of Krill Strategies, a behavioral health consulting firm focused exclusively on the legal industry. Go to www.prkrill.com for more information.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBallooning Workloads, Dearth of Advancement Opportunities Prime In-House Attorneys to Pull Exit Hatch
The Reason a GC Abruptly Departs May Not Be What You Think
The Week in Data Oct. 31: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
Trending Stories
- 1Dog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
- 2Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
- 3Plaintiff Gets $500K Policy Limit Without Surgery
- 4Philadelphia Bar Association Executive Director Announces Retirement
- 5SEC Chair Gary Gensler to Resign on Trump's Inauguration Day
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250