One thing to keep in mind about doctors, they aren’t given three years of theory courses and sent out into the world to ply their trade however they see fit. Residency is at least supposed to provide supervised practical training. The practice of law is structured in a much different manner.

I don’t know for a fact that firefighters go through a probationary period but I would certainly expect that they do.

The disconnect between law school and law practice is one of the perennial complaints I’ve seen on sites such as The Volokh Conspiracy.

In law school, there were certain people I knew the first semester that were going to be fantastic lawyers – even if started their own practice right out of law school. You have to be willing to fail. If you have the balls right out of law school, just get a mentor or three. You’ll do fine. You have to start somewhere.

I had lunch with a second year law student today. He plans on opening his own practice. He is an independent thinker. He is clerking for a friend of mine doing personal injury. He’s going to do just fine. You have to have the right mental attitude, self confidence and do like Napoleon did…when you are outnumbered and all the odds are against you – as soon as the troops are off the boats – you order the boats to be burned.

A short circuit in the language that’s all. What is probably meant is working for a firm that takes advantage of skills offered for the purpose they were acquired in the first place.

By your train of thought then, anyone that allows a new doctor to attempt his trade, or a fireman should be shot as well? How is a new lawyer any different? If someone with a new, shiny JD feels they can best invest their time and interest in going it alone straight out, then by all means do it. Might get some of the older ‘wiser’ guys to take notice. Too often we see the big firms turn down cases they do not think are wins, or that might create too much work, in favor of the sure thing, if ever there is one.

Just because the opinion is different than yours doesn’t mean it’s half-cocked.

Anyone who encourages brand new lawyers to go out on their own should basically be shot.

QED.

That doesn’t mean their work isn’t valuable or worthwhile to their clients, or that they cannot derive some satisfaction from a lifelong career in that type of firm that just so happens to pay very well.

You continue to compare apples to oranges, however. You have in your mind what “the practice of law” means, and it is vastly different from what a big firm does. Just about anytime you have a definition framed by a difference in values (i.e., only serving individual clients with their individual problems is worthy of the profession), then you will never see eye to eye. It’s somewhat akin to George Bush and Teddy Kennedy trying to define a good American.

Anyone who encourages brand new lawyers to go out on their own should basically be shot. They’ll do the wrong thing more often than not, and learn bad habits that stick for years, if not for their entire career.

You’re assuming there’s an effective mentoring program out there, or that many lawyers have even a single mentor.

Yes. People charge for their work. But big firms are ruthless withtheir work product. I’ve seen good billers fired for sloppy work. Anyone can bill hours. Not everyone can bill for good work.