Motherhood Isn't the Culprit for Big Law's Gender Equity Failures
Women lawyers shouldn't be viewed as moms first when it comes to the workplace.
July 05, 2018 at 03:11 PM
4 minute read
Enough with nuance and complicated explanations. In three words or less, tell me the reason women lag behind men in attaining equity partnership and status in Big Law.
In my experience, men—almost always—blame “motherhood” or “work/life balance.” And women? They point the finger at “bro culture” or, simply, men.
So while women are telling men that the culture overall needs fixing, men are saying biology is destiny. “The work is incredibly demanding, and it's damn hard when you're also a mom,” explains a male litigator about the dearth of female star trial lawyers. He adds, “And I have the utmost respect for mothers. It's the coolest job in the world!”
It's nice he thinks being a mommy is cool, but that attitude isn't helping women's careers. The belief that women prioritize family more than men persists, as Catherine Tinsley and Robin Ely recently wrote in The Harvard Business Review, though “research simply does not support that notion.” The result is that women's careers get stunted. “Mothers are often expected, indeed encouraged, to ratchet back at work,” reports HBR, and “are rerouted into less taxing roles and given less 'demanding' (read: lower-status, less career-enhancing) clients.”
But isn't it true that women with demanding careers and children have it extra hard? Don't some women want alternatives to the partnership track? Absolutely. But women say the bigger problem is the male ethos of the workplace.
“Men who think they are being sympathetic by lightening the load of pregnant women and new moms are doing them a huge disservice,” a Big Law female partner says.
“It's a myth that all women are so focused on their families that they are putting their careers in the back seat,” says a female senior in-house counsel. “Most women I know are not complaining about children. They are complaining about title, advancement and pay.” She adds, “I have full-time nannies and housekeepers around the clock. I don't know where the vacuum cleaner is. I've racked up thousands of frequent-flyer miles because I go anywhere, anytime, for work. And I don't feel guilty!”
The focus on juggling home and family ignores systemic prejudices. “I have extraordinarily talented and productive female partners who have never married and have no kids and are not rewarded to the same extent as men with similarly-situated practices,” says the Am Law 100 partner.
Entrenched beliefs about gender roles are as old as the hills, says Roberta Kaplan of Kaplan & Company. “It's not isolated only to the legal profession,” she says. “For the same reasons that far too many men—and women—have a hard time seeing a woman as president, they have difficulty seeing women as running law firms, trial or deal teams.”
Emphasizing differences between the sexes, warns the HBR article, results in “well-meaning but largely ineffectual interventions” focused on “'fixing' women or accommodating them”—which, I think, describes some of the Band-Aid programs at firms, like mommy career tracks, assertiveness training and work/life balance coaching. Not that there's anything wrong with any of that; it's just that they largely miss the mark on curing gender inequity.
The solution, of course, is complicated. The HBR article says institutions need “to fix the conditions that undermine women and reinforce gender stereotypes.” It advocates “questioning assumptions and proactively changing conditions” so that women have the opportunity to shine.
All fine suggestions, but how many firms will start digging into their corporate soul to lift women? “Leadership fails them,” says Kirkland & Ellis partner Michael Williams. “Leadership needs to do more to recognize and invest in their trajectories.”
In the meantime, stop telling women how daunting it must be to be both a lawyer and a mom. How much male sensitivity can a girl take?
Contact Vivia Chen at [email protected].
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
© 2025 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 AllMorrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
Elite Boutiques Competing More With Big Law Bonuses, With Several Going Above Market
9 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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