I will finish my LLB next year a month after my 21st birthday. Instead of going straight to law school and prepare for my Bars, I really want to get my LLM straight after University.
A lot of my friends have been commenting that I am way too young to commence a Masters and despite the fact I have good grades it will operate against me.
What are your opinions?
So far I am interested in Public Law, Public International Law and Human Rights.
I am really excited about the UCL combination of Public Law and Human Rights.

Youll be 21 next year, right? And youre applying for 2011/12, correct? So by the time you apply next year youll be 21 and when you finish the programme youll be 22, right? (Oh great Beicon. Youre so good at maths! I know, thank you very much!).

Ive got to agree with your friends on this one I think youre too young. Im not much older, to be utterly honest. Im 26 (27 in June and considering Ill start my LLM in September, Ill be 28 by the time I graduate once again, great at maths!). But if Id done my master at the age of 22 I wouldve followed a completely different course from what Im planning to do now. And the only reason for that is: experience. I agree that it might not have been much experience (although Ive working in law firms for the past (almost) seven years), but Im really chuffed that I didnt go and pursue an LLM before, otherwise I wouldve just thrown my money in a bloody dustbin.

Let me explain: when I first started to work (at the age of 20), my dream job was a position as an associate at a big-arse law firm in my country that would allow me to pursue a career and some day in the future become partner in the M&A department. After seven years doing the bloody same thing (M&A), Ive grown tired of the business of law (as an acquaintance of mine, who usually pops up around here, once said). So, the point is, if I had gone and done my LLM at your age, I wouldve done all the commercial law and finance modules possible and, after a few years of real practice, I wouldve seen that Id wasted my money and my chance of spinning my career round towards a new direction.

Now, after seeing what the business of law (hope my acquaintance wont mind that Im quoting her without prior authorisation please dont make me pay royalties!) is all about, Ive decided I should try something different and I wont for sure use badly this opportunity that Ive got in front of me.

To sum it up: I know its hard, but I reckon you ought to wait a little bit. Youre very young and pursuing an LLM now doesnt seem to be a good idea in my humble opinion. Who knows? Now youre all excited about UCLs human rights and public international law modules, but have you ever actually worked in such area? Do you really know what a solicitor, barrister or any other person in such field actually does? And if you do, have you ever worked alongside a solicitor, barrister or any other person in such area for at least one or two years (so that you can actually get a thorough idea of what the day-to-day activities involved are and make a grounded judgment about whether you like it or not)? I dont intend sounding as if Im discouraging you (though I am). I havent got the world all sussed out, but please do take account of some of the things I have written.

Cheers,

Beicon

Thanks. I definitely will take your advice into consideration. I do believe my main issue is that I consider myself academically routed (and I don't mean exceptionally brilliant). I do not think I even want to practice for any length time. What I really want to do is teach and write on legal issues.
If it were really up to me, I'd do multiple masters in areas that pique my interest and currently the top areas are Human Rights, Public International Law and Public Law.
It is all very frustrating for me right now but after having a discussion with several of my professors I need to put it on the back burner and concentrate on preparing for finals. There will always be summer to lament about it!!
Thanks so much again for your response and good luck with your programme.

Hum, I don't think you should let what others think influence your decision. If you want to pursue a masters degree and feel up to it, you should go for it. I am 22 years old and just like you, people would tell me to wait. I ignored them and I don't regret it.

I was admitted to 06 universities and will start my LL.M this fall.

So long you hold a JD (LL.B) in law, have reasonable experience in the field, nothing should keep you from giving it a try. It's a career investment after all.

Anyways, just my opinion.

I agree with Beicon.

An Uncle of mine is a Professor at a top University in Australia and he always told me "the older you are going to university, the better." Whilst I take that comment (as I would any opinion) with a grain of salt, I do believe there is much merit in it.

Here (remembering Australia is only a little over 200 years old!) the University of Melbourne has recently completely modified its system to reflect other parts of the world where you must study a general undergraduate degree before completing a 'professional degree' such as law. Like any system, there are pros and cons, however, in my opinion, it's a change for the better.

Take me for example. I didn't do very well in my undergraduate degree (Arts - History & Politics), largely because I wasn't really sure what I wanted to do. Fast forward to 29 years old, when I returned to university to do my JD. I was so hungry for it as I knew it was what I wanted to do. I graduated equal third in my class. I'm not saying you can't be determined in your early 20's, but there is more chance of you being motivated by more general things (e.g. the usual 'get a good degree from good a school and get a good job, etc'). You are more likely to get on a path and follow it but not necessarily know where it's actually taking you. Before I decided to return to school to study law, I spend quite a lot of time doing work experience with solicitors and barristers and finding out, from people who actually work in differing areas of the profession, what it's like. Then I did my due diligence on the law schools.

There is also a view that the real benefit of postgraduate study is the work experience you bring to it. It is a completely different kind of learning to an undergraduate degree (to which you only bring your high school education and maybe your experience in a casual job like McDonalds). In my view, too many people do LLMs and MBAs too young, and often for the wrong reasons, e.g. more letters after your name, job prospects, etc.

I also believe that learning and practical application go in cycles, i.e. learn, consolidate, learn, consolidate, etc. I am in my second year at a big law firm and feel that I am still consolidating the academic knowledge I gained in my JD. If I am accepted and begin my LLM in October, I will have had just shy of two years experience following my JD. At my age (32), having already acquired some life skills and work experience in other fields, I feel that's just enough. I doubt I would feel it was enough if I was in my early 20s.

If nothing else, in your early 20s, it takes you a couple of years to get into the swing of full time work and also to be able to see the 'big picture' in the matters you are working on and to build skills in dealing with clients and the other side. Although some may disagree, I would also be cautious of employing someone (not that hiring and firing is my job at the firm!) who had lingered at university too long without getting any practical experience. Don't forget that you can know the academic side of the law back to front but you can still be caught with your pants down in the real world. For example, in litigation, there are ways of doing things that are not written down in any case, statute or textbook. You only learn them through working with more experienced practitioners.

Finally, postgraduate courses such as LLMs and MBAs have undergone a lot of change in recent times. They used to be much more general. The world is becoming a specialised place to reflect the rapid changes in a growing number of areas of business. Many people say the jobs our children will do haven't even been invented yet. If you support the notion that specialisation is where things are heading, then it follows (as Beicon alluded to) that by doing a Masters before you've had a really good look around and have a good generalist grounding through some years of work experience, you may be 'putting your ladder up against the wrong wall.'

So, I would also add that, in my view, the best academics are the ones who have actually practiced, even if only for a short time. Again, I would be suspicious of anyone who have never really left university. In my experience, the adjunct professors who were still in practice but taught specialised electives at law school ran rings around many of the 'hardcore' academics.

I wish you all the very best.

Melbsolicitor

I will finish my LLB next year a month after my 21st birthday. Instead of going straight to law school and prepare for my Bars, I really want to get my LLM straight after University.
A lot of my friends have been commenting that I am way too young to commence a Masters and despite the fact I have good grades it will operate against me.
What are your opinions?
So far I am interested in Public Law, Public International Law and Human Rights.
I am really excited about the UCL combination of Public Law and Human Rights.

I will finish my LLB next year a month after my 21st birthday. Instead of going straight to law school and prepare for my Bars, I really want to get my LLM straight after University.
A lot of my friends have been commenting that I am way too young to commence a Masters and despite the fact I have good grades it will operate against me.
What are your opinions?
So far I am interested in Public Law, Public International Law and Human Rights.
I am really excited about the UCL combination of Public Law and Human Rights.

I am 22 and currently finishing my 2nd LLM, so I say go for it! If you can do it and if you have an opportunity then I don't see any reason why you should waste your time

Tiflis, what country are you in? How is it possible to have done two LLMs at 22? Must be a very different system to Australia. Interesting to see some of the differences between countries...

Wow. :) I am so happy I stopped lurking on this profile and started to post - it is good to have advice and support!

Melbsocilitor - thanks for your reply. You have made some exceedingly good points. The only thing is that whether I pursue my LLB before or after my Bar, I do not intend to work before I do it.
So my general options are: Start my LLM (provided I am accepted) at 21 and finish my LLM at 22, then start my second LLM at 22 and finish at 23. After this I go to law school which I will finish at 25.
I am compulsorily required to work for the Attorney General's Chambers for the first three years after being added to the bar as a condition of a scholarship I have. So I will get work experience in any event before I start applying to firms, which honestly, I am not sure I really want to do. The route I am leaning towards after my three years with the AG's Chambers is applying to be a TA at the University I now attend.
I consider myself quite motivated and mature, but I suppose with time everything, like fine wine, gets better. I definitely will take that into consideration.

Snowberry: Thanks!! As my parents told me when I came to them with my dilemma, the final decision is most definitely up to me. I, however, strongly believe that feedback is the best tool for making a tough decision.

Tiflis: Wow!!! I am impressed.

I agree with Beicon.

When I graduated from high school I was 16 (at the same time I was finished my first year at law school), then I started my bachelors in the Netherlands and graduated when i was 19-20. I started my first LLM in UK and graduated when I was 20-21. Then I started my second LLM back in the Netherlands which I am doing currently and by the time I graduate I'll be still 22 :)

You are NOT too young! If it makes sense for you to get the additional degree now, do it!

I am 23 and in my LLM group about 1/3rd is around my age. Those that are physically older, are mostly mentally younger and none of them has an intellectual edge.

i'll be 20 when i graduate this summer and am going straight into an LLM - i think it depends on what you want to do and whether you think you want to carry on studying. if you do then you should go for it!

You're definitely not too young I'm 21 and I'll finish my LLM at 22 also at Cambridge - no worries :)

Dear purplebutterfly,

One very important thing that you have to take seriously into account are your career objectives which, from what I could gather, lies in the academia and not in a Law firm. Correct?

If you were planning to go to a Law firm my advice would be similar to that of many above: wait. Somebody tried to diminish the suggestion by saying that this would not give you an intellectual advantage, but nobody said that would be the case (Quod Natura non dat, Salamantica non prestat). Rather, the point is that it will give you focus, better motivation, and the experience to take more profit of the same program. And yes, you will probably also learn more as things will tend to "click" and to connect with complicated problems you faced while working. When you are young and inexperienced, everything seems pretty much the same and it is hard to grasp what is important in the real World.

That being said, it seems to me that your idea is to go into research or academia. So, you are in a different game than most of the people in this website. For this reason, I would take all the comments and suggestions with a grain of salt as many of us have a different career path in mind. There is no replacement for doing your homework. Only researchers and academics can tell you what is best to increase your chances.

On what I would strongly disagree is on taking two Ll.Ms. Even if you are young and it does not represent a financial burden for you and your family, why bother? What you would need any way is a PhD (SJD/JSD or other name depending on where you live) to have a good chance. Moreover, I understand from a friend that the latest trend is for law professors to get a PhD in other areas to then apply that knowledge into the analysis of the law (e.g. a PhD in economics or International Relations). Is this true? Honestly, I have no idea. My advice is to go out, talk to law professors to see what it takes to meet your objectives.

Best of lucks!

I will finish my LLB next year a month after my 21st birthday. Instead of going straight to law school and prepare for my Bars, I really want to get my LLM straight after University.
A lot of my friends have been commenting that I am way too young to commence a Masters and despite the fact I have good grades it will operate against me.
What are your opinions?
So far I am interested in Public Law, Public International Law and Human Rights.
I am really excited about the UCL combination of Public Law and Human Rights.

Beicon and Melbsolicitor make very good points. Some of the better posts I've seen on this board. It is similar where I live. There is nothing wrong with doing an LLM at 22, but I think if you practice 3-5 years you'll get a lot more out of it. Plus, you'll know a lot more about what areas of the law you like. In my view, one of the chief advantages of the LLM is the opportunity to use it to make a big career "pivot."

One counterpoint, however: I will say, speaking from experience, that you can wait too long to do the LLM. For many of us, life gets more complicated as we age. You buy a house, collect a lot of useless things, get married, have a kid (or three) and it becomes exceptionally difficult to disentangle oneself from the daily grind, if even for just ten months. For many, it's also hard to give up a good paycheck and go back to being a poor university student.

I completely disagree with anyone saying that you are "too young." When we enter university, irrespective of where we are in the world, we are also young. Is it correct to tell someone who wants to go that they should wait until they find out what they "really" want to do in life? Sounds like a silly prospect to me. People change and ideas change, but treading water or putting off opportunities because of something as arbitrary as age isn't going to move anyone forward.

I became passionate about human rights and humanitarian law when I was 18 years old and moved from Canada to France at 19 so that I could bypass the BA system and begin immediately studying law with as much of an international focus as possible. 11 years later I have completed law school, moved on to do a degree in human rights, worked in INGOs in various countries, and intend to follow up with an LLM in humanitarian law. My passion and excitement for the subject has never flinched from that moment in my late teens when I decided it was how I wanted to focus my life on. Had my competitiveness been stronger earlier, I would have applied for an LLM years ago.

The question is not whether you are too young, it's whether you are sufficiently passionate about the subject you want to pursue. No one else can decide that for you... And as far as your future goes, having additional credentials never hurts, even if thirty years from now you are practicing a different subject. I do agree that an LLM is a fantastic means to change direction in your legal career, but if you believe this is in your blood and you are seriously passionate about the subject, don't let your age stop you.

I don't necessarily disagree with the thrust of Poppet's argument, so long as it is understood that its validity depends on the implicit premise that one can know that one's passion will not abate or change over time. Many 18 year olds (not Poppet, of course!) are overly passionate about subjects they know very little about or will change the object of their passions numerous times during their 20s.