Report comment

The suggestion that this initiative must be led by a woman is absurd, unhelpful and indeed echoes the problem of sexism in appointments that the initiative is surely intended to fight against.

However, I have no problem with the idea behind the initiative itself. The reality is that women become gradually less and less represented at each tier of the legal profession, and far from being a relic of the past, we still witness a higher proportion of women leaving the profession at each level. Thus, this is certainly not a case of simply waiting for things to level out and there is nothing inherently wrong with considering what can actively be done to help.

I am sure that childcare responsibilities must play some part in this. There are numerous statistics indicating that women are more likely than men to give up their careers or go part time after having children, and this can't be discounted as a factor in career progression. From an employer's point of view, I can see why they would favour somebody who had not had a career break, so perhaps the answer is for society to treat men and women exactly the same as far as children are concerned. I.e., women should not be vilified for combining working with motherhood, and men should feel equally able to put their career on hold for the sake of their family. I don't for a second pretend to know how these attitudes could be changed, but I suspect that they are part of the problem.

Incidentally, I cannot help but think a better work life balance culture would be of huge benefit to everyone in the legal profession, whether man, woman, or other.