However long it may have been since we entered law school, there are few among us who cannot conjure the early and pervasive anxiety of not knowing whether we were “getting it”—or whether we would ultimately “get it”. “Right” answers to difficult hypotheticals that we were absolutely sure about withered under the professor's cross-examination. No testing until the end of the semester, no interim pop quizzes, and no correct answers in the back of any book made those first few months emotionally very trying. We had been brought up in an educational system where there were answers that, indeed, were the answers.

New lawyers entering the profession revisit these strong feelings of insecurity. It's chilly outside the academic womb. The fantasies of being all-powerful and all-knowing slayers of dragons that nurtured them through law school collide with the reality that they know not enough about the practice, and less about what the lawyer's role in a real-life situation ought to be. These novices approach the practice with role models gleaned from law clinics, movies, reading, or watching other lawyers act. What they don't know is how their individual feelings will intrude for better or worse with their idealized image of a practicing “lawyer.” Young lawyers starve for ego support during this very important entry period.

Their mentors—whether they are partners, judges, corporate or public interest employers—have a substantial responsibility during this time. They should encourage lawyers who are infants in the law to sit in on client interviews and, thereafter, to discuss the rationale for how the interview was conducted. Invite their critique. By doing so, both the mentors and the neophytes learn that the lawyer-client dynamic is as important as knowing “the law” itself.