I love it when I hear from young women I have met on my Best Friends at the Bar speaking trips.  Recently, I received an e-mail from one of them, a law student at the University of Miami Law, who wanted to know how I felt about the issues covered in an article she had read on line.  I had read the same article and had filed it away for a future blog.  So, hearing from this young woman compelled me to pull it out and shine some light on it for you.

The article, “Lawyer on Maternity Leave Brings Baby to Court After Judge Refuses Trial Delay Request” appeared in the June 5, 2012 ABA Journal on-line edition.  At first blush, the title could enrage young women readers, but, as always, you have to look behind the facts.

In this case, the judge denied the request for a continuance of the trial in a misdemeanor matter ostensibly because it was the fifth such request by the same attorney, and the judge had granted the four prior requests.  The trial date had been set for 25 days, and the lawyer had waited until the last minute to file yet another request for continuance.  The lawyer’s reason for the request was that she recently had given birth by cesarean section, and she did not want to leave her newborn baby to attend the scheduled trial.  The facts show that the case was six—yes, you read that correctly—six years old.  Additional facts show that,  in denying  the young woman attorney’s request,  the judge’s told her that she should bring the baby to court with her.

My response to the law student was to say that, on the facts as I know them, I do not approve of the conduct of either the judge or the young woman attorney in this case.  The judge,  (really a Justice of the Peace in Texas) simply should have denied the request on the basis that he had granted multiple continuances in a case that had already gone on for six years.  He did not have to make the comment about bringing the baby to court because that put the gender issue on his side of the ledger too.  It is not really about the baby, and the young woman attorney predictably reacted negatively to the judge’s comment.  It is about court calendars, court efficiency and what is in the best interest of the parties.  It makes me think of that old adage, “Justice delayed is justice denied.”

However, having said that, let me say that I approve a whole lot more of the judge than I do of the woman attorney.  This young woman waited until the last moment to file her request, and then she was confrontational and overly dramatic in response to the judge’s decision and his comment about bringing the baby to court—which she made clear on Facebook!  In the end, she did bring the baby to court with her, and apparently the baby did just fine.  There is more to how the case was ultimately resolved, and you can read those facts on the Austin American-Statesman.   

None of this behavior helps women’s causes.  I have had two babies by c-section, and I would never have used that as an excuse to continually attempt to delay a matter before the court.  One request perhaps—depending on the circumstances—but certainly not at the last minute.  That does not show respect for the court or for the client.   I worked at my law firm office until the day before each of my babies was born, and I did not ask for any special treatment.  I even showed up at construction sites in a hard hat when I was eight months pregnant.  For me it was business as usual, and that is what it needs to be for you as well—unless there are major health complications, and that is another matter entirely.  Getting pregnant is a choice in most cases, and it should be treated like one.

If women are going to be treated equally and be respected in our profession, they must learn to play the gender card only when it is appropriate.  Certainly there are times when behavior is intentionally inappropriate and offensive to women and/or affects their professional opportunities, and that is when gender is an issue that should not be ignored.  However, this young woman clearly did not understand the difference and made the judge’s reasonable decision all about her status as a woman.  Some of the responses to the  ABA Journal  article by women were equally as offensive and inappropriate for the same reason—overplaying the gender issue.  It is not about the pain involved in having a c- section or about the difficulties of being a new mother.   It is all about professionalism and best practice.

So, what do you think?  Was this appropriate behavior by the young woman lawyer?
Can you see yourself doing something like this—even as a trial tactic?  What about the judge?

Let me know what you think.

A recent article about women lawyers in China makes it sound like they have all the answers and that women lawyers in the West should learn to listen up.  For a variety of reasons, I do not believe this to be the case.  It is hard to compare apples and oranges, and this appears to be a classic case.

The observations in The Asian Lawyer, a product of the American Lawyer, titled “A Woman’s Place” sound all too familiar to me and remind me of other comparisons between our country and China on economic issues.  Ever since the economic collapse here in 2008, some people have been heralding the Chinese and their economic system as the answer to our woes.  High gross national product (GNP) compared to the USA and other strong economic indicators have led some people to say that deregulation like that in China would set our country on a more desirable economic path.  According to them, free enterprise unleashed is the answer to our problems.  I hear these people in social gatherings and on talk radio, and I have a lot of trouble being convinced of this theory.

For instance, I know that the impressive GNP in China is the result of deregulation that also is responsible for huge environmental problems like pollution and shortage of potable water, as described in an in depth article in the Washington Post titled “China’s Environmental Crisis“ written as long ago as 2008.   I also am disturbed by the human rights violations and other societal issues in China and the revelations of rampant greed and graft among the politicians and government officials, as reported continuously on the web site facts and details. com  and in a June 8, 2012 article on www.timeout.com.hk.  So, the bottom line is that I am not buying what the Chinese are selling—at least in terms of economic theories or, now, theories related to women lawyers.   This is an easy “Buy American” moment for me.

The article in Asian Lawyer points out that women are prospering in the profession of law in Hong Kong, and the Chinese model is again being held up with some degree of emulation.  The article  cites the statistics for women in the law as far more favorable in China than in our country.  In Hong Kong, for instance, 46 per cent of the lawyers are women, and 24% of the partners in local law firms are women.  That compares to one third of the lawyers in the United States, who are women, and 19% for female partners in law firms here.  This all sounds good, but, just as in the economic discussion, you have to look behind the figures.

The cultures and social mores in China and the United States are very different, and some of those differences make it much easier for women professionals to thrive in China.  For instance, the cost of child care and domestic help in Hong Kong pales by comparison to the cost for the same services in our country.  As the article points out, women professionals in Hong Kong are “rising on the backs of the inexpensive domestic workers,” most of them from Indonesia and the Philippines, who maintain the households of the upwardly mobile women lawyers and raise their children.  The article also cites as an additional reason for the success of these women that women in China do not feel guilty about delegating childcare to a domestic worker.  The reason given is that so many of these women professionals were themselves raised by nannies in the Chinese culture.

However, I wonder whether there is not more to it.  Traditionally, Chinese families consist of multi-generational members living in the same neighborhoods, if not the same houses, as described in an interesting article on Wudauokou on-line magazine (www.wudaokou.com/article/Traditional_Chinese_family, October 22, 2010).  As a result, it seems logical that the presence of this extended family would give comfort to a mother leaving her children in the care of domestic workers for much of their upbringing.  You undoubtedly have heard the proverb, “It takes a village to raise a child,” and we simply do not have that societal model in most places in our country.  American families are typically spread across the country, and multi-generational models are fast disappearing from our experiences in the West.

So, for me the comparisons are hard to make, and I am slow to conclude that China has figured out a better way to solve the problems faced by women lawyers in our country.  However, the article also mentions one factor associated with the impressive upward mobility of women lawyers in China that I find compelling.  That fact is that a high percentage of senior management roles in Hong Kong are held by women.  In other words, the corporate clients are women, and that may mean that those women corporate clients are advocating for gender diversity in their representation, just as they are doing here in the United States.  If that is the case, I applaud the efforts.  As always, women helping women is a good thing.

As much as I admire the women cited in the article, I am not ready to declare a cure for our ills here in the West.  But, I do not overlook the accomplishments of these women, who are high-ranking partners in the Hong Kong offices of firms like Skadden, Sidley Austin, Davis Polk, Clifford Chance, Mayer Brown, Sullivan & Cromwell, Baker McKenzie Paul Weiss and Weil Gotshall.  These women have risen to their impressive positions in the last 20 years out of a seriously male-dominated legal system with its roots in English law.  At least one of them believes that, “There isn’t much of a glass ceiling [in Hong Kong].”  Certainly, that would be a good result, and I hope we can say that in our country one day soon.

You are a lawyer, and one of the things that you have been trained to do is look behind the facts.  When you do that, you often see things a little differently.  It is good to remember that, especially when things look too good to be true.

Below is a link to the DC Spotlight article that came out this week about the Best Friends at the Bar project.

   http://www.dcspotlight.com/features/limelight/limelight-susan-smith-blakely-talking-glass-ceilings-motherhood-and-career-game-changers/

Please cut and paste it into your browser to read the entire article.  You also will see that a follow-up video will be posted next week on DC Spotlight.  Watch for it,  and, of course, I will remind you then!

DC Spotlight and the editor Wendy Thompson have been so supportive of the Best Friends at the Bar project.  Wendy is not only enthusiastic about the work, but she also understands the challenges of starting a small business, especially a woman-owned small business.  She is a great cheerleader for women’s issues and causes, and I am delighted that she has taken interest in what has become my mission:  Helping young women lawyers and law students understand the challenges that remain for women in the practice of law and overcoming them.  Wendy and I had a great conversation about these challenges, and some of that is reflected in the article.

You also will see—-again—in this article what a great impression my Dad and his experience as a lawyer had on me.  Don’t ever underestimate the effect that your experiences have on your children.  They are watching and listening even when you think they are not.  That puts a lot of responsibility on you, but it is all good.  It makes you a better actor, and it clearly has positive effects for the children.  Good luck with that as you go forward in your careers.  One day your own children may reflect so positively on what your professional experiences have meant in their lives.

I hope that you enjoy the article and that you send it on via Twitter or Facebook or Linkedin or just plain-old e-mail.  Getting the word out is what Best Friends at the Bar is all about.

By the way, at some point I actually am going to master how to link directly to the sources I reference here and in my newsletters.  Please hang in there with me and forgive the current imposition and necessity to cut and paste.  It is not that I have not tried……….  Keep in mind that this is an old dog learning new tricks!

And, I am learning those new tricks without the IT folks, who used to solve my every problem pronto when I was in law firm practice and public service.  It is so wonderful to have “people” when you need them!  And, it is a disaster when you do not!

People are good.  You are good.  Thanks for following and reading.