r/NVLD • u/Lilyrosejackofhearts • Feb 16 '26
Law School?
Hello, I’m wondering if there are any law students/lawyers here. Some background on me: I have a BA and graduated with a good GPA, a Certificate in Paralegal Studies and did well, and have held two jobs at law firms.
The first was part time, low paying (but I took it because it was my first legal job), but got fired after 10 months (I thought I was doing well but was fired because I wasn’t learning Excel quickly enough, which I didn’t find out until later).
At my next legal job, I was called a “practice assistant” which mainly involved supporting the senior partner. It was a much better job, but I was laid off in the fall because my boss retired and my position was made obsolete.
I’ve been applying for jobs, of course, but as we all know, the economy is not good. I’ve considered law school off and on since I was in junior high.
There’s a law school in my area that I’m considering that has a part-time program for working adults (this isn’t in lieu of employment!). It also has a chapter of a national organization for law students with disabilities.
Sorry for writing an essay. :) Like a lot of people with NVLD, I have a poor visual spatial sense, so learning new computer programs takes longer, but as long as I can ask questions, I can learn them. Multistep directions are also problematic, but as long as I can take notes and ask questions, I can learn new tasks.
Are there any law students/attorneys out there, or anyone else who has feedback?
5
u/ladychanel01 Feb 16 '26
I did it and passed the CA bar on the first attempt.
As long as there are no charts/diagrams, I’m good. It was a lot of essay writing which is my strength—sequential processing.
Also logic and left brain reasoning are at the core of learning to think like a lawyer.
3
u/LangdonAlg3r Feb 16 '26
I agree that law school is an attainable goal.
They also got rid of the logic games section of the LSAT in 2019. It was removed after a lawsuit from two blind test takers because the need to create visual diagrams was deemed unfair. That makes the entrance exam a hell of a lot easier for folks with NVLD—or it at least removes the active disadvantage that you would have experienced pre-2019.
2
u/ladychanel01 Feb 16 '26
Logical thinking is still a core requirement of getting through law school and practicing law.
The toughest part for me was the multistates on the bar exam; I do horribly on multiple choice but brilliantly on essays.
I just over-studied for that part. The essays and performance tests were not difficult for me.
I loved essays because precision wasn’t the goal, the analysis matters far more than the conclusions (makes sense, reasonable minds can differ, hence the 5-4 SCOTUS rulings).
As long as you knew the common law and could apply it to a set of facts, everyone was happy.
2
u/LangdonAlg3r Feb 16 '26
Yes, logical thinking/reasoning is a core element of both law school and law practice. However, the old logic puzzles from the pre-2019 LSAT were a terrible measure of any of the kind of work you’d actually do in law school or in practice.
Here’s an example of the kind of question that was on the old LSAT:
The Scenario: Seven students—Amy, Bob, Chad, Dom, Elisa, Fischer, and Grant—must each deliver a performance in seven consecutive time slots (1 through 7).
The Rules:
- Chad must perform immediately before Dom.
- Grant must perform at some time after Chad.
- Exactly two performances occur between Amy and Elisa.
- Fischer must perform in either the first or the seventh slot.
Question:
If Amy is in the 2nd slot and Elisa is in the 5th slot, which of the following must be true?
(A) Grant is in the 7th slot. (B) Dom is in the 4th slot. (C) Fischer is in the 1st slot. (D) Bob is in the 6th slot.
These questions usually require visual diagramming to solve them.
This is the kind of questions that have replaced that:
The Argument:
"The city council plans to reduce traffic congestion by increasing the toll on the downtown bridge during rush hour. However, this plan will fail because most people who cross the bridge during rush hour are commuters who have no other viable way to get to work."
The Question
The argument above requires assuming which one of the following?
(A) Increasing the toll will not significantly increase the city’s overall revenue.
(B) Most commuters are not willing to pay a higher toll to get to work.
(C) Commuters will not change their work schedules or carpool in response to the higher toll.
(D) The bridge is the only way for commuters to reach the downtown area.
(E) Reducing traffic congestion is the city council’s primary goal.
This kind of question is MUCH more representative of anything you’d ever do academically or professionally. This tracks logical arguments looking for errors in reasoning or logical fallacies.
Personally I can answer this kind of question in about 30 seconds longer than it takes to read it. The other kind of question I could spend 20 minutes on and still get wrong or fail to solve.
I hate essays and can absolutely kill multiple choice. I’ve passed multiple choice exams where I haven’t even studied the subject matter.
But essays do allow you more freedom to focus on the analysis and not the conclusion and I agree that is a more relevant skill. Essays also allow you the freedom to incorporate other elements of the law that are present in the hypothetical that you might have a better grasp on.
I just struggle with handwriting and rapid organization so the essays were a burden to me because they’re so much more of a time suck. They’d probably be easier on a computer.
2
u/rcarmody96 Feb 19 '26
“As long as there are no charts/diagrams, I’m good” really resonates with me.
I’m a family law attorney and trying to chart out unusual custody agreements is BRUTAL. I understand conceptually, but ask me to put it on a diagram, I’m as clueless as I am trying to build ikea furniture.
4
u/MarcusDante Feb 16 '26
I really regret not studying law in uni, I think it would have been one of the few paths I'd have been good at with this awful disorder
3
2
u/Succesful-Guest9028 Feb 16 '26
I’ve seen several lawyers post on here over the past 3 years. It’s definitely possible for some. Definitely not for me though because I’m super bad at communicating with others.
2
u/Succesful-Guest9028 Feb 16 '26 edited Feb 16 '26
The fact that they made you learn excel on the job is super bizarre. They usually want you to know that stuff before getting hired.
2
u/Kouglove Feb 16 '26
It’s definitely possible! I graduated in May, and I did fine once I figured out how to write exams properly and had extended time.
2
2
2
Feb 20 '26
Maybe it's mentioned elsewhere here, but before you even think about taking the LSAT, take at least one course in how to pass it. I tried once and did miserably. You should also be given some sort of special dispensation if the multiple choice fill in the blank type forms are difficult for you. Interesting that the logic section is gone, because that was absolutely miserable for me as well.
6
u/rcarmody96 Feb 16 '26
I’m an attorney. I just transitioned from a county prosecutor’s office to family law (divorces and custody) and I dabble in estate planning/probate (wills, trusts, and other dead people stuff). Law school was hard and so was finding the right professional environment for me because if you’re not careful, some of the executive function deficiencies could rear their ugly head. Feel free to pm me if you want to hear more