Lisa S.* is is 39-year-old on public assistance. She is also a law school graduate with over $300,000 in student loan debt.
After getting her undergrad at the Minneapolis College of Art & Design, she had less than $25,000 in student loan debt, which bothered her so much, she paid it off in two years doing freelance video production and editing everything from weddings and high school graduations to public events and historical documentaries.
She then moved to California and got a master of fine arts from the University of Southern California Film School. “I assumed the more education, the higher salary,” she says. “I was aware that with a master’s degree, in certain jobs you can get a higher pay grade, and that you’d be eligible for more jobs, even with just teaching.”
The following year, 2004, she gave birth to a son and soon realized she would not be able to make ends meet as a single mother doing film and TV editing. She did some number crunching and decided that law would allow her to earn more than what she was then earning, even if she earned at the low end of the pay scale. She enrolled at Pepperdine Law School, deferring her loan payments from USC, “which were killing me,” she says. The total loan debt for her MFA and her JD was initially $275,000. (One general rule of thumb for student loan debt is not to take on more than your first-year salary after graduation.)
Graduating in 2009, Lisa ended up on the job market at a time when employment for recent law grads had just begun slowing. (2013 was the sixth straight year of declining employment rates for recent grads.) Though she had been an A student all her life, having a toddler while she was in law school wasn’t conducive to studying, so she ended up in the middle of the curve — a C student. Though before the recession, firms still would have recruited someone with her grades, by the time she graduated, jobs for students like her were scarce.
Though she did one high-paying contract gig and passed the California bar, she eventually realized the state was too expensive for her as a single mom with two sets of grad school loans, and a $15,000 post-graduate bar study loan exam.
But moving back to Minnesota meant she had to retake the bar, which was about another year of being unable to work as a lawyer, during which time she amassed $40,000 in credit card debt, mostly to cover the extra costs associated with taking care of her son, even though she took on odd photography jobs and began adjunct-teaching law.
Now a solo practitioner in a small Minnesota town, where the median income in her field is $50,000 a year, she is just starting out and making about $20,000 per year. Even with that income, and $500 a month in child support, she and her son are on food stamps, and he is in the free school lunch program...
More than once she has thought that she might have been better off without the education and the debt. She’s been crunching the numbers and was surprised to realize it might make financial sense for her to default on her loans.
The only problem is her private loans. “I have $70,000 of debt that will never qualify for any kind of income-based repayment. They don’t have to follow the government’s thing about hardship, so I’ve used up all my deferment and all of my forbearance. And I can’t discharge them in bankruptcy like federal loans, so they’re kind of like a credit card and kind of like a student loan. That’s the thing I’m most outraged about. A couple of loans are 13+% and until I’m making more money, I don’t qualify to renegotiate with them,” she says.
“I do feel like the key decision that has harmed me was to try to get to the advanced level,” she says, adding that for many people such as doctors, it delays their ability to get started on goals like buying a car or a home till their 30s. “I will likely die before I repay this debt.”
"(One general rule of thumb for student loan debt is not to take on more than your first-year salary after graduation.)"
This seems like a smart guideline, but not a particularly realistic guideline.
It makes sense for undergrad, but certainly not for law school. Which is unfortunate, because we need, say, public defenders.
I guess since she already had one terminal degree, I don't really understand why she didn't pursue teaching at that point. But oh well, too late, not helpful. Plus, it looks like she started law school in 05/06 - height of the housing and employment market, and before people warned you against that.
More than once she has thought that she might have been better off without the education and the debt.
ding, ding, ding
I understand that she graduated at a bad time for law students, but come on. She thought that going to law school as a single parent and taking out a shit ton of debt to finance it all was a good idea?
"(One general rule of thumb for student loan debt is not to take on more than your first-year salary after graduation.)"
This seems like a smart guideline, but not a particularly realistic guideline.
It makes sense for undergrad, but certainly not for law school. Which is unfortunate, because we need, say, public defenders.
I guess since she already had one terminal degree, I don't really understand why she didn't pursue teaching at that point. But oh well, too late, not helpful. Plus, it looks like she started law school in 05/06 - height of the housing and employment market, and before people warned you against that.
IDK even with undergrad it seems like the pace of increasing college tuition is outpacing the increase in starting salaries. I just looked at the tuition for my small liberal arts school. IIRC in the late '90's tuition was around $25,000/year. Now it's around $40,000/year. Seems like most starting salaries for BA/BS are in the $30,000-$50,000 range. Sure there are grants and scholarships, but I don't think they're keeping up the pace either.
Post by downtoearth on Oct 1, 2014 13:34:29 GMT -5
Weird non-lawyer question...is it or was it normal for average (C students) to get good jobs after grad law school? I mean, in my grad school everyone was pretty much A/B average student and the two I can think of that were C students didn't get a research project, so they dropped out.
That being said, I'm guessing law school with a toddler was tough. Plus getting private loans that aren't really government-backed student loans at 13% interest rate seems like a problem that the government should address with banks. That should not be a "student loan" IMO.
The following year, 2004, she gave birth to a son and soon realized she would not be able to make ends meet as a single mother doing film and TV editing.
Weird non-lawyer question...is it or was it normal for average (C students) to get good jobs after grad law school? I mean, in my grad school everyone was pretty much A/B average student and the two I can think of that were C students didn't get a research project, so they dropped out.
Well, law school (especially first year) is graded on a pretty strict curve. I know in my husband's grad school program, if you were making anything below a B+ in a class, you were practically considered to be failing. Everyone was expected to be getting As with the occasional B+ thrown in. Law school grading is not like that at all.
In the past, yes, C students at top schools did get good jobs. These days, that is less true.
I am not sure, however, Pepperdine ever fell into the realm of top school where grades wouldn't matter much. U.S. News (highly problematic but still very influential) ranks Pepperdine at #54, but that puts it as the 6th best law school in California, behind Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, USC, and UC-Davis. No doubt this student would have had an easier time getting a job in, say, 2005 than in 2009, but I doubt it's quite so clear-cut as "bad economy."
Post by tacosforlife on Oct 1, 2014 14:15:29 GMT -5
Bad decisions aside, if this were any other kind of debt, she could declare bankruptcy and have a fresh start. Our student loan system is really fucked up. People who made shitty decisions in the housing bubble are better off than she is. That's sad.
If she was a C student at Pepperdine, she was not middle of the curve. I believe Pepperdine curves to a B or a B+ (I had a friend who went there).
So the article is incorrect--either she was middle of the pack and got B/B+ grades, or she got Cs and was DECIDEDLY bottom 1/4 of the class. That was never a good thing, even when the economy was good. At least where I went, some firms that come for on campus interviews wouldn't even look twice at someone who wasn't in the top 1/3,* unless there was something else exceptional there.
Someone with C grades, even from an outstanding law school would not have been able to get (or would've had an ENORMOUSLY DIFFICULT time getting) a full time job in 2009. Full stop. And Pepperdine is a good school, but isn't like, Yale or something.
School debt is stupid as all get out and there need to be major reforms. But my sympathies are not particularly strong.
*ETA: I feel compelled to add that I went to a school with a like 98% REAL law job (as in, you needed a JD to perform the duties, lol) placement when I attended; it was a great school. But there were some firms who were all "oh, yeah, the entire class is smart and all, but we still only want THOSE people, over there, in the top 1/3."
If she was a C student at Pepperdine, she was not middle of the curve. I believe Pepperdine curves to a B or a B+ (I had a friend who went there).
So the article is incorrect--either she was middle of the pack and got B/B+ grades, or she got Cs and was DECIDEDLY bottom 1/4 of the class. That was never a good thing, even when the economy was good. At least where I went, some firms that come for on campus interviews wouldn't even look twice at someone who wasn't in the top 1/3, unless there was something else exceptional there.
Someone with C grades, even from an outstanding law school would not have been able to get (or would've had an ENORMOUSLY DIFFICULT time getting) a full time job in 2009. Full stop. And Pepperdine is a good school, but isn't like, Yale or something.
School debt is stupid as all get out and there need to be major reforms. But my sympathies are not particularly strong.
Yes. Student loan debt in this country is majorly screwed up. But this particular case is not all that sympathetic. Certainly they could have found someone who made better decisions and is still being screwed over by the system, because I know there are many people like this.
Weird non-lawyer question...is it or was it normal for average (C students) to get good jobs after grad law school? I mean, in my grad school everyone was pretty much A/B average student and the two I can think of that were C students didn't get a research project, so they dropped out.
That being said, I'm guessing law school with a toddler was tough. Plus getting private loans that aren't really government-backed student loans at 13% interest rate seems like a problem that the government should address with banks. That should not be a "student loan" IMO.
If she was getting solid Cs with the law school curve, I would say this woman was doing a lot worse academically than this story articulates.
That being said, I graduated right before the bottom fell out of the market (2007) and I think it still would have been really hard to get a "good" job with grades like that. "Good job" of course being a relative term, but for arguments sake, even in 2007, I would say she wasn't going to get a BigLaw job with a C average from Pepperdine without major assistance like nepotism or a killer network. Could she have gotten the $50,000/yr job? Probably.
Post by StrawberryBlondie on Oct 1, 2014 15:55:00 GMT -5
I'm side-eyeing the hell out of thinking that moving back to MN with an out of state law degree was a good idea. Unless its an Ivy, you have to go to school here to get a job here (obviously there are exceptions, but you know...).
and this is why I decided against going back to law school in 2001 .... the SL balance and how that would f&ck up any work/life balance.
even now I still tinker with the idea of going back (yes starting all over 1L) but ONLY if I won the lottery
This is where I am. I graduated from undergrad in 2006 and I couldn't take the gamble on $120k in debt to make probably $60k a year. And even in 2005/2006, people were starting to talk about law school not being a smart choice anymore, which was enough to send me on another career path.
If she was a C student at Pepperdine, she was not middle of the curve. I believe Pepperdine curves to a B or a B+ (I had a friend who went there).
So the article is incorrect--either she was middle of the pack and got B/B+ grades, or she got Cs and was DECIDEDLY bottom 1/4 of the class. That was never a good thing, even when the economy was good. At least where I went, some firms that come for on campus interviews wouldn't even look twice at someone who wasn't in the top 1/3, unless there was something else exceptional there.
Someone with C grades, even from an outstanding law school would not have been able to get (or would've had an ENORMOUSLY DIFFICULT time getting) a full time job in 2009. Full stop. And Pepperdine is a good school, but isn't like, Yale or something.
School debt is stupid as all get out and there need to be major reforms. But my sympathies are not particularly strong.
Yes. Student loan debt in this country is majorly screwed up. But this particular case is not all that sympathetic. Certainly they could have found someone who made better decisions and is still being screwed over by the system, because I know there are many people like this.
Meh, I think with nearly every victim of the SL mess (and the housing mess), you can find something in their story that makes them not "sympathetic." When you have a perfect victim, then the retort is usually, "well this person maybe is deserving, but I have a hard time wanting to cut a break for people who knew what they were getting into."
More importantly however, whether the victim is deserving of sympathy isn't really all that important, and distracts from why we need SL reform. We need SL reform because perfect and imperfect victims are creating huge problems for society. Here we have someone who once was capable of living off public assistance, but now needs it because of student loans. That's a problem for society. It's also a problem for society that student loan burdens result in decreased rates of retirement savings (and savings in general), child birth, and homeownership. It's a problem for society that the burdens of student loans disproportionately fall on those from certain socio-economic backgrounds, resulting in decreased social mobility. It's a problem for society when people default and don't pay their loans back, and it's a problem for society when taxpayer money is used to satisfy their debts to the banks via federal student loan relief programs because people are too strapped to pay the banks back themselves. And it's a problem for society that the high costs of education and SL burdens limit job options for some of the best and brightest, stifle innovation (starting a business is hard with those costs over your head), and result in people choosing more lucrative jobs out of financial necessity instead of in jobs where society needs them.
Yes. Student loan debt in this country is majorly screwed up. But this particular case is not all that sympathetic. Certainly they could have found someone who made better decisions and is still being screwed over by the system, because I know there are many people like this.
Meh, I think with nearly every victim of the SL mess (and the housing mess), you can find something in their story that makes them not "sympathetic." When you have a perfect victim, then the retort is usually, "well this person maybe is deserving, but I have a hard time wanting to cut a break for people who knew what they were getting into."
More importantly however, whether the victim is deserving of sympathy isn't really all that important, and distracts from why we need SL reform. We need SL reform because perfect and imperfect victims are creating huge problems for society. Here we have someone who once was capable of living off public assistance, but now needs it because of student loans. That's a problem for society. It's also a problem for society that student loan burdens result in decreased rates of retirement savings (and savings in general), child birth, and homeownership. It's a problem for society that the burdens of student loans disproportionately fall on those from certain socio-economic backgrounds, resulting in decreased social mobility. It's a problem for society when people default and don't pay their loans back, and it's a problem for society when taxpayer money is used to satisfy their debts to the banks via federal student loan relief programs because people are too strapped to pay the banks back themselves. And it's a problem for society that the high costs of education and SL burdens limit job options for some of the best and brightest, stifle innovation (starting a business is hard with those costs over your head), and result in people choosing more lucrative jobs out of financial necessity instead of in jobs where society needs them.
When banks prey on stupid people, society pays.
I think some of this arguable in relation to this article. The subject of the article makes $20k per year and has a child. Even if she had zero in SL, she is likely going to still need public assistance of some sort. The job market for legal grads would still suck even if law school had been free, she still would have gotten crappy grades, still needed childcare, etc.
Of all of this woman's bad decisions, the SLs may have been the worst, but they aren't the only contributor to her issues. Honestly, I can't imagine having multiple other degrees and a prior career, along with a child and a zillion dollars in debt, and making the decision to hang my own shingle for $20k per year. Just, no. It's time to give up the dream at that point.
This woman makes one mindblowingly bad decision after another. A fine arts degree? Then a master's in film? And took out loans for it? Then decides to go to an astronomically expensive yet mediocre law school in Malibu? Yet, she's not done making bad decisions! Then she lives of one loan to take one bar exam, then on credit cards to take another??? I feel bad for her because her situation sucks, but she seems to seriously lack common sense.
I mean, come on, the chick knew there were less expensive law schools in less expensive areas.
I agree that there are issues with law schools inflating employment numbers, the legal market, need for student loan reform, but this woman's situation is so extreme and she made ridiculous decisions.
"(One general rule of thumb for student loan debt is not to take on more than your first-year salary after graduation.)"
This seems like a smart guideline, but not a particularly realistic guideline.
Yep definitely not realistic for med school for many people.
My schools cost of living for the year is something like $75,000 and most people automatically just take out that much because that's only about $2,000 per month in living expenses. So that's $300,000 right there at an interest rate of 6.8%. Throw in board exams (about $3,000) and applying to residency (I've paid $1,600 so far and that's just applying, not even travel to get to interviews) the cost of education is ridiculously expensive and outrageous.
My law school is ranked close to Pepperdine in a HCOL market. I had a 3.0 average, which placed me in the middle of the pack, and had no problems getting a job in 2005. 2005 was a good year. I had friends who failed the bar the first time around and still got jobs. I didn't know anyone unemployed right out of law school.
I can understand why she thought law school would be a good idea.
Hindsight is 20-20.
Had I graduated In 2009- present, I would have not been hirable as a lawyer.
My law school is ranked close to Pepperdine in a HCOL market. I had a 3.0 average, which placed me in the middle of the pack, and had no problems getting a job in 2005. 2005 was a good year. I had friends who failed the bar the first time around and still got jobs. I didn't know anyone unemployed right out of law school.
I can understand why she thought law school would be a good idea.
Hindsight is 20-20.
Had I graduated In 2009- present, I would have not been hirable as a lawyer.
I feel awful for her.
Well make me understand it. She had two degrees, school loans and a kid. How was this a good idea?
I didn't say it was a good idea. I said I understand why she THOUGHT it was a good idea. Because the legal market was very good when she went. Before everything crashed.
I can see how the average undergrad thinks law school is a good idea. I do not understand how miss ma'am with her master's looked down at her baby, said, I need to make more money TODAY and then thought and thought and thought some more before the magic light bulb said, I know! I'll be a lawyer.
I'm not saying she was going all sorts of places with a Fine Arts degree, don't get me wrong. But I don't understand why she basically just started all the way over with a career that would cost money to get established even after completing the schooling.
I don't think she would have been better off with no education. But perhaps if she'd chosen a path that took her previous experience into account and din't include a not terribly affordable school in Malibu.
I can see how the average undergrad thinks law school is a good idea. I do not understand how miss ma'am with her master's looked down at her baby, said, I need to make more money TODAY and then thought and thought and thought some more before the magic light bulb said, I know! I'll be a lawyer.
I'm not saying she was going all sorts of places with a Fine Arts degree, don't get me wrong. But I don't understand why she basically just started all the way over with a career that would cost money to get established even after completing the schooling.
I don't think she would have been better off with no education. But perhaps if she'd chosen a path that took her previous experience into account and din't include a not terribly affordable school in Malibu.
I guess I don't see why she thought the other factors in her life would not be a problem. The debt from USC, raising a baby presumably on her own, continuing her education in an area with a high cost of living, and then not taking into consideration the exam fees and other costs associated with passing the bar.
For the average undergrad, I can see why law school appealed. I don't understand why it appealed to her.
I guess I don't see why she thought the other factors in her life would not be a problem. The debt from USC, raising a baby presumably on her own, continuing her education in an area with a high cost of living, and then not taking into consideration the exam fees and other costs associated with passing the bar.
For the average undergrad, I can see why law school appealed. I don't understand why it appealed to her.