It was interesting to read Law Society chief executive Janet Paraskeva's acknowledgement of the differences that mature students experience in their endeavour to qualify as solicitors (see [2005] Gazette, 27 January, 18).


My experience is that the difficulty lies largely with prospective employers, who are in a quandary. They are faced with an increasingly diverse potential workforce, and would be justified in thinking, in the light of the training reforms proposed by the Law Society, that this workforce expects greater flexibility from an employer.


Flexibility comes at a price - especially for smaller firms. I fear they may reject applications from mature trainees solely on the basis of these reforms.


Like many of my peers in search of training contracts, I am keen to point out that students in their thirties do not want to be treated any differently from any other trainees. Nor do we need to be cosseted from the commitment required to qualify.


On the contrary, I am prepared for the demands of a highly responsible career and have a wealth of experience in organising my time to ensure that I enjoy the job, which I have spent the past six years working towards. The structured approach of the legal practice course assists in turning out organised and committed individuals who are expected to turn up and do the work. Surely this assists in paving the way to a successful career.


I would ask that if the Law Society really wants to assist mature students in qualifying, that it channels its resources into promoting the advantages of employing us, rather than further disadvantaging our prospects by marketing us as a breed that requires added flexibility in the workplace.


I can assure you, with the utmost respect, we do not.


Gill Evans-Holmes, LPC student, University of Wolverhampton