Considering changing career paths...

[lawschool]

Hi all,

I'm new here, and there's someone who has posted something somewhat similarly recently, but the situation is a bit different so I figured I need to stop lurking and go ahead and make a post of my own, so forgive me if I mess up anything etiquette-wise. And also forgive me for the length of this!

I'm currently in law school (hence the name) and have been for a little over a year; however, I have been seriously considering "dropping out" and pursuing a different career path due to a general feeling that it's just not the right "fit" for me anymore and am starting to look into other possible options.

Prior to law school, I was considering pursuing a graduate degree in psychology. I was mostly considering PhDs but was concerned 1) about the length it takes to get the degree - which I'm slightly less worried about now because... well... it is what it is, 2) the competitiveness of getting into a program, and 3) my sort of disinterest towards conducting research. My UGPA is less than ideal (~ 3.3) & my major GPA (which was psychology) is ~ 3.2, I think; I won't get into details, but I had a lot going on during college that impacted my performance -- and at some point I started to suck at basically anything that involves numbers so I got a C+ in stats... both psych stats and regular stats, which may or may not be a problem for admissions??? Based on my lurking, I've confirmed that's on the lower-end of programs. I haven't taken the GRE yet (because law school requires a different test), but I imagine that, if I can get my brain to remember the days I used to like doing math, I'll be able to get a fairly strong score.

I have several interests in psychology, and they're all pretty distinct from one another (in this order):
1) "Forensic psychology," but I'm primarily interested in the psychology of violence and, even more narrowly, the psychology of serial offenders of violent crimes. In this regard, I find things such as criminal profiling* especially appealing. As I'm sure is a given, FBI work would be ~ ideal ~ but I know their behavioral unit is incredibly competitive so I'm not sticking all my eggs in that basket. (* I'm using this term because I think it's generally understood & best explains the kind of work I find most fascinating, but I know it's somewhat problematic). I also think that, even though being a lawyer might not be as great of a fit as I expected, forensic psychology has an intersection with law that I can appreciate. If I continue with law, I'd like to be a defense attorney, so client advocacy is definitely something I'm interested in and if there are some forensic psychology areas that are geared more towards helping criminals/understanding criminal behaviors (and underlying psychological components of those behaviors), I'd likely be most interested in those as opposed to expert witness testimonies and jury selections.
2) Colorism (specifically within the black community) and its effects on mental health and - as a super narrow & somewhat-related topic - motivations for interracial dating... more specifically, why might minority who historically dated intraracially begin to date interracially (someone white) in light of achievement (like Kanye's "When he get on, he'll leave yo' a.. for a white girl" line)
3) A general interest in mood disorders, which I would likely have an interest in pursuing through a counseling aspect.

I have a couple curiosities/questions I was hoping I could get some advice on!
1) Considering my strong interest in forensic psychology (and my sort of sad UGPA/major GPA), I was looking at forensic psychology MA programs. Yay/nay? Obviously, the major downfall is that I'd have to pay for it. But... I'm in law school, so I highly doubt the incurred debt would be more than I'm currently expecting. I thought this would be a good opportunity to get better versed in forensic psychology specifically, ideally get exposed to some research opportunities (I didn't do anything research-related in UG beyond the required research class), and also, assuming I do well, help me out re: UGPA. Is that line of thinking correct? Additionally, is it likely the MA would transfer at all if I decided to get a PhD?

2) Considering my interests, would it be best to just get an MA (which I'd likely want to get in forensic psychology) or does a PhD sound like the route I need to take? If an MA is the best option, what jobs would I likely be able to get with it?

3) Since I'm just re-considering this, are there any major things I should take into consideration that it seems like I'm not thinking about?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[psych.meout]

This is exactly what I did. Left law school after two years and went into a PsyD program. My advice, don't do it. Law school may be graduate school for liars, but at least the "law" exists, as ****ed as it is. The mental health profession is so riddled with blatant denial of reality (disease model of addiction/belief that biology is merely a social construction/tyranical ideologies about all sorts of **** such as sexual fantasy behavior, etc.) that if law school isn't a good fit for you psychology probably won't be either. At least if law school wasn't a good fit for you because you have a low tolerance for bull**** like I do.

Which program are you in? It sounds like this is more telling about your program than about clinical programs in general or mental health as a profession.

 

[lawschool]

I don't have an issue with law school because I think it's a graduate school for liars. I don't know what law school you were at, but I'm happy with my education here. While there's some pretentious people, I think that's true anywhere, but overall, my issue with law school is that I'm not sure what I'm learning is resonating with me in a way that I feel will lead to me having a happy career. I also wonder if, while I could represent indigent people and advocate for them that way, my advocacy skills and passions for criminal justice reform would be better utilized working with inmates or doing research on the effects of the system or even just better understanding criminality and things of that nature. I guess I'm also curious what people think about psychologists as "activists" in the sense of whether psychological research and knowledge can be used to help push policy reform. But I agree, it does sound like the first response has just had some unfortunate experiences in their advanced degree pursuits.

 

[psych.meout]

I don't have an issue with law school because I think it's a graduate school for liars. I don't know what law school you were at, but I'm happy with my education here. While there's some pretentious people, I think that's true anywhere, but overall, my issue with law school is that I'm not sure what I'm learning is resonating with me in a way that I feel will lead to me having a happy career. I also wonder if, while I could represent indigent people and advocate for them that way, my advocacy skills and passions for criminal justice reform would be better utilized working with inmates or doing research on the effects of the system or even just better understanding criminality and things of that nature. I guess I'm also curious what people think about psychologists as "activists" in the sense of whether psychological research and knowledge can be used to help push policy reform. But I agree, it does sound like the first response has just had some unfortunate experiences in their advanced degree pursuits.

It seems to depend on the person. Some people take this advocacy role very seriously and get involved in public policy work, sometimes even getting an MPH in addition to their clinical doctorate, but others are more than happy to not take any part in advocacy. They might just want to let the science speak for itself without getting muddied by the waters of politics, while others just want to be left alone, because they are busy enough with their day jobs. My program hass a good mix of all these amongst both the students and faculty.

 

[deleted343839]

1) Considering my strong interest in forensic psychology (and my sort of sad UGPA/major GPA), I was looking at forensic psychology MA programs. Yay/nay? Obviously, the major downfall is that I'd have to pay for it. But... I'm in law school, so I highly doubt the incurred debt would be more than I'm currently expecting. I thought this would be a good opportunity to get better versed in forensic psychology specifically, ideally get exposed to some research opportunities (I didn't do anything research-related in UG beyond the required research class), and also, assuming I do well, help me out re: UGPA. Is that line of thinking correct? Additionally, is it likely the MA would transfer at all if I decided to get a PhD?

No, I wouldn't bother with a forensic psych master's. Ultimately you'll need a doctoral degree to be a forensic psychologist, so my advice would be to either apply directly to clinical PhD programs or apply to strong research-focused experimental master's programs that will help you get into a good doctoral program. In psychology you start general and then specialize more at each stage in your training. Don't make the mistake of trying to specialize too early at the cost of attending a more rigorous, well respected program. Very little of your master's coursework is likely to be transferrable.

 

[wtfook]

I don't have an issue with law school because I think it's a graduate school for liars. I don't know what law school you were at, but I'm happy with my education here. While there's some pretentious people, I think that's true anywhere, but overall, my issue with law school is that I'm not sure what I'm learning is resonating with me in a way that I feel will lead to me having a happy career. I also wonder if, while I could represent indigent people and advocate for them that way, my advocacy skills and passions for criminal justice reform would be better utilized working with inmates or doing research on the effects of the system or even just better understanding criminality and things of that nature. I guess I'm also curious what people think about psychologists as "activists" in the sense of whether psychological research and knowledge can be used to help push policy reform. But I agree, it does sound like the first response has just had some unfortunate experiences in their advanced degree pursuits.

You said you weren't interested in research but some of your other responses seem to indicate that you are? Please correct me if I'm wrong. If you were more interested in practice, you would likely be doing one-on-one consulting/testing as a forensic psychologist which would not give you the type of job that has the same broad scope as advocacy and policy reform. Psychologists are not typically as active in policy or advocacy, although it also depends on the philosophy of your program. Counseling psychology as a field has social justice and advocacy as part of their philosophy but the level to which any given counseling psych program lives by those ethics vary. And there will be clinical programs who do that social justice piece better.

I am in a counseling psychology program and I have an interest in policy work. From what I've been able to gather, psychologists are not as active in policy as some other professions but the APA does send people to capitol hill and there are internships that allow you to work with lawmakers and in the legislative branch. However, I think you could do that same work with a law degree. In fact, a strong knowledge of the law is invaluable in drafting laws and legislation. Perhaps you're not resonating with what you're learning because they aren't reframing it in a lens that speaks to you. For example, I have always found career counseling dry AF but then I spoke to a career theory counseling psychologist who does research on the career goals of minorities and how that relates to college access, mental health, and all sorts of other areas of their lives and it became MUCH more interesting.

I think if you wanted to do advocacy and social policy work, you could do it with any degree, honestly. You could get an MPH, finish your JD, or get a doctorate in psychology. However, the lens from which you'll be viewing that advocacy will be very different. Within psychology, it would be heavily informed by your research skills and what you've done research wise can inform the policy you hope to work on. Personally, I think having a JD would be super beneficial, especially as a defense lawyer for criminals, working for a non-profit that hires defense lawyers for convicts who did not receive a fair trial (like the Innocence Project), or being part of organizations like the ACLU.

 

[psych.meout]

So I disagree with you when you say this is telling about my program alone. It is not. Look at what Jordan Peterson has been going through for being a Left "leaning" clinical psychologist who likes to operate from positions of fact. He's been labelled a member of the Alt-Right for **** sake! This would lead to the conclusion that things are much worse than I am making them out to be, not better, and certainly not confined to my program.

How fun that you bought into Peterson's cult of personality and pseudoscientific philosophy. It really puts all of your posts into context.

 

[inert Psychologist]

Not having ever been in another PsyD program I can't say, but my understanding is that things like the disease model of addiction and biology being merely a social construction dictated by the always evil "patriarchy" to name two issues, are not only taught at my school. These are common models of thought that are so clearly false it's laughable but they are taught as fact and anyone who questions them is held in deep suspicion.

I would say your program has failed to bring introspection within yourself to remove any biases that may cloud your training as they are clearly evident in your posts. I know this is a social forum where we can "loosen up" but at some point both our personal and professional identities overlap.

With that being said both the issues you brought up at recent movements in a very new field (relative to "hard sciences") require some context: Alcoholism is being treated as a disease due to the research hinting at a biological link in the addiction toward certain substances. Sex and Gender are two things you seemed to have slept through in your intro courses- Sex is biological, Gender is the social construct.

 

[psych.meout]

Ah yes, the another uninformed and angry radical leftist starts throwing out baseless insults at Peterson. If I had nickel...

Now I know why you thought it was only my program, because you're one of those who actually believe in things like the socialization of biology. Real things exist, you should believe in those instead, but based on your take of Peterson you clearly live in the radical Lefts's echo chamber where facts are as toxic as they are in the Right's echo chamber.

So for OP, here is a perfect example of why you will have a hard time in the mental health field. People actively believe things that are false, but refuse to address that and go about making painfully passive aggressive statements based on nothing but what they want to be true. Why someone would want any radical, false ideology to be true is another interesting question, but as often as you find it in the general population it is always a major disappointment to find it in mental health.

Best of luck with that psychmeout

I wish the mental health field actually believed and taught the separation between biology and sex, but it does not. The socialization of biology is very much taught and is as much "common knowledge" in the mental health profession as anything, so where you've been hiding I don't know, but while you're right about what biology and gender are, you are wrong in saying that is how these two are taught, at least in mental health and across any social science discipline. I came across this crap in my required gender studies course as an undergrad. The disease model is nothing even remotely new and every decent mental health professional I've ever talked with about this readily concedes addiction it is not in any way a disease. Philosophically for individuals it can be a good paradigm to use if it helps them stay sober, but as an actual disease it's just silly to even think about, yet that is how it is taught and has been for a long time.

As for the rest of your triggered response, I reject your projections and wish you all the best.

I think you forgot to call us "****s."

 

[wtfook]

I wish the mental health field actually believed and taught the separation between biology and sex, but it does not. The socialization of biology is very much taught and is as much "common knowledge" in the mental health profession as anything, so where you've been hiding I don't know, but while you're right about what biology and gender are, you are wrong in saying that is how these two are taught, at least in mental health and across any social science discipline. I came across this crap in my required gender studies course as an undergrad. The disease model is nothing even remotely new and every decent mental health professional I've ever talked with about this readily concedes addiction it is not in any way a disease. Philosophically for individuals it can be a good paradigm to use if it helps them stay sober, but as an actual disease it's just silly to even think about, yet that is how it is taught and has been for a long time.

As for the rest of your triggered response, I reject your projections and wish you all the best.

Could you just clarify for a moment? You disapprove of psychologists asserting that biology is merely a social construct, which I take it to mean you believe in the absolute truths of science, with biology being a part of that. You also don't approve of how psychologists have used biology to describe addiction as a disease. Does this mean you believe it is an individual problem and not something based in biology?

I guess my confusion stems from the fact that you both dislike psychologists' alleged rejection of the truths biology lends AND psychologists' injection of biological science into the explanation of addictions. Or do I have it totally wrong? Thanks for clarifying!

 

[psych.meout]

Did my comments make you feel like one? There is no reason they would have, so maybe you should figure out why this came into your mind. Here's a helpful place to start: I didn't put it there.

 

[psych.meout]

Oh boy... ohhhh boy. Did you post that in the hope that people would listen to it and think Peterson is a nut job? You might want to do a little better looking into these things in the future. This is so sad I am embarrassed for you:

reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/7y8kub/im_pretty_proud_of_my_jordan_peterson_impression/

Huh, it's almost like I linked an obvious parody from a comedy skit youtube channel.

OP, sorry about the thread hijack I participated in. I will move on now and ignore the trolls, which will hopefully give you back your thread.

"Participated in?"

You started and perpetuated it with gems like this:

This is exactly what I did. Left law school after two years and went into a PsyD program. My advice, don't do it. Law school may be graduate school for liars, but at least the "law" exists, as ****ed as it is. The mental health profession is so riddled with blatant denial of reality (disease model of addiction/belief that biology is merely a social construction/tyranical ideologies about all sorts of **** such as sexual fantasy behavior, etc.) that if law school isn't a good fit for you psychology probably won't be either. At least if law school wasn't a good fit for you because you have a low tolerance for bull**** like I do.

 

[inert Psychologist]

Did my comments make you feel like one? There is no reason they would have, so maybe you should figure out why this came into your mind. Here's a helpful place to start: I didn't put it there and neither did Jordan Peterson.

psych.meout decided to skip a couple back-and-forth post where you ultimately come to the conclusion that we are ****s and that the "tyranical ideologies" taking over mental health profession are just a distraction from discussing what really happened to Seth Richards.

Understandable and honestly I'm going to take that route too. I just hope when it's time to see a client that is different from you and they say they wish to be referred to as she/her that you don't point to their crotch and say "but you have a penis, I would be biologically wrong if I refer to you as such." Instead I hope you are able to remove your prior biases from the session and understand that while they know they are male by sex, they would like to be referred to in female pronouns as their gender because that is how they feel.

 

[Hawkeye11]

 

[foreverbull]

I'm finding your posts confusing. Can you explain what the "socialization of biology" refers to, specifically?

And by asserting that there's a stifling of dissent in your program, are you saying that you should be allowed to ignore multicultural counseling perspectives? You seem to be venting about your program, but I'm not understanding some of the issues you briefly mentioned but haven't really explained.

 

[DailyJoy]

Hi all,

I'm new here, and there's someone who has posted something somewhat similarly recently, but the situation is a bit different so I figured I need to stop lurking and go ahead and make a post of my own, so forgive me if I mess up anything etiquette-wise. And also forgive me for the length of this!

I'm currently in law school (hence the name) and have been for a little over a year; however, I have been seriously considering "dropping out" and pursuing a different career path due to a general feeling that it's just not the right "fit" for me anymore and am starting to look into other possible options.

Prior to law school, I was considering pursuing a graduate degree in psychology. I was mostly considering PhDs but was concerned 1) about the length it takes to get the degree - which I'm slightly less worried about now because... well... it is what it is, 2) the competitiveness of getting into a program, and 3) my sort of disinterest towards conducting research. My UGPA is less than ideal (~ 3.3) & my major GPA (which was psychology) is ~ 3.2, I think; I won't get into details, but I had a lot going on during college that impacted my performance -- and at some point I started to suck at basically anything that involves numbers so I got a C+ in stats... both psych stats and regular stats, which may or may not be a problem for admissions??? Based on my lurking, I've confirmed that's on the lower-end of programs. I haven't taken the GRE yet (because law school requires a different test), but I imagine that, if I can get my brain to remember the days I used to like doing math, I'll be able to get a fairly strong score.

I have several interests in psychology, and they're all pretty distinct from one another (in this order):
1) "Forensic psychology," but I'm primarily interested in the psychology of violence and, even more narrowly, the psychology of serial offenders of violent crimes. In this regard, I find things such as criminal profiling* especially appealing. As I'm sure is a given, FBI work would be ~ ideal ~ but I know their behavioral unit is incredibly competitive so I'm not sticking all my eggs in that basket. (* I'm using this term because I think it's generally understood & best explains the kind of work I find most fascinating, but I know it's somewhat problematic). I also think that, even though being a lawyer might not be as great of a fit as I expected, forensic psychology has an intersection with law that I can appreciate. If I continue with law, I'd like to be a defense attorney, so client advocacy is definitely something I'm interested in and if there are some forensic psychology areas that are geared more towards helping criminals/understanding criminal behaviors (and underlying psychological components of those behaviors), I'd likely be most interested in those as opposed to expert witness testimonies and jury selections.
2) Colorism (specifically within the black community) and its effects on mental health and - as a super narrow & somewhat-related topic - motivations for interracial dating... more specifically, why might minority who historically dated intraracially begin to date interracially (someone white) in light of achievement (like Kanye's "When he get on, he'll leave yo' a.. for a white girl" line)
3) A general interest in mood disorders, which I would likely have an interest in pursuing through a counseling aspect.

I have a couple curiosities/questions I was hoping I could get some advice on!
1) Considering my strong interest in forensic psychology (and my sort of sad UGPA/major GPA), I was looking at forensic psychology MA programs. Yay/nay? Obviously, the major downfall is that I'd have to pay for it. But... I'm in law school, so I highly doubt the incurred debt would be more than I'm currently expecting. I thought this would be a good opportunity to get better versed in forensic psychology specifically, ideally get exposed to some research opportunities (I didn't do anything research-related in UG beyond the required research class), and also, assuming I do well, help me out re: UGPA. Is that line of thinking correct? Additionally, is it likely the MA would transfer at all if I decided to get a PhD?

2) Considering my interests, would it be best to just get an MA (which I'd likely want to get in forensic psychology) or does a PhD sound like the route I need to take? If an MA is the best option, what jobs would I likely be able to get with it?

3) Since I'm just re-considering this, are there any major things I should take into consideration that it seems like I'm not thinking about?

Hey OP, I'm wondering if a dual JD/SW degree would be a good fit. I oddly had similar enough varying interests (ie. Criminal justice, race, mood disorders) and was deciding between a JD and masters in SW or a Psyc PhD. I only picked Psyc because I love research. Just something to look into if you haven't.

 

[wtfook]

The confusion sounds like it stems from your belief that addiction as disease is some sort of biological truth, which it is not... but I'll play nice and just say that is not what I believe. So while I fully reject the science denial behind biology as a social construction I also reject the science denial behind calling an addiction a disease. I am a big fan of actual, real, as in demonstrably provable science, not in it's denial in any form.

Nope. My confusion stemmed from your statements that seemed contradictory. But if you think the disease model is in itself "science denial" then it makes sense why you feel the way you do. In what way do you think the disease model is science denial?

 

[psych.meout]

Sure you were linking what you thought was an obvious parody... sure thing Funny how you didn't mention you knew it was a parody until I noted the video was fake...

And I told OP I wouldn't engage your trolling anymore but are you trying to look stupid? First you link a bizarre and fake video to make Peterson look bad, get called out on it, then back track and pretend you knew it was false, then you quote a very specific and direct response on my part to the actual OP as evidence I was not addressing the OP... It's like I'm watching someone who seems like they want to fight with me just continue punching themselves in the nose over and over. I think I'll leave you alone now for your own benefit.

Talk about projection.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Mod Note: Let's please try to keep it civil, professional, and on-topic. Thanks.

 

[bcliff]

Tulane has an MPH/MSW program that I looked into. I think it’s expensive, but it sets you up nicely for later doctoral training (i.e., research) in public health, social work, or an allied field (e.g., psychology), or a masters-level career in public health administration, policy, or clinical work.

OP, I agree with your own self-assessment that if you were to reapply to graduate programs, you would likely be hard pressed to get in. I think that some programs (especially funded ones) might also be a little hesitant to admit you given that you will have already dropped out of one program to attend another -- How would they know that you’re “sure” this time. I will echo what others have mentioned; that is, try and stick out your JD program, stay motivated by looking for advocacy/policy jobs that you will be eligible for once you graduate, and reframe the coursework into something that resonates more with your own theoretical orientation/perspective. If disinterest is affecting your productivity, maybe read about self-management and self-delivery of contingent reinforcement (e.g., rewarding yourself for finishing assignments on time).

FWIW, I’m from a balanced, clinical PhD program, and essentially all of my training re: SUD has come from a behavioral/economic (rather than medical) perspective, a la Bickel (see below).



From what I can tell, this, rather than a disease model, is much more consistent with where the field of clinical psychology is at. I’m wondering if there may be overgeneralization of anecdotal evidence occurring in this thread?