The Bar is one of the most powerful professions in the country – it produces prime ministers, millionaires, campaigners and the judges who shape our law.
It’s a glamorous world which attracts thousands of would-be barristers every year but just one in five students will ever get to present a case in court – only the brightest and the very best survive.
After you've watched the programme, why not share your responses with us?
What do you think?
Join our experts Charles Stephens and Kim Silver in the forum to discuss this week's big question:
If it were made easier to become a barrister, what good or bad consequences for society would follow?
First broadcast: Friday 21 Nov 2008 on BBC TWO England & Northern Ireland
The Barristers in more depth:
OU on the BBC: The Barristers - About the series
Production team
We follow a group of students embarking on a career in a profession adapting to a new world. Find out more about the series. Read more : OU on the BBC: The Barristers - About the series
OU on the BBC: The Barristers - Programme 1
Production team
Just one in five students succeed in becoming a barrister and having their day in court – explore the glamorous and competitive world of The... Read more : OU on the BBC: The Barristers - Programme 1
OU on the BBC: The Barristers - Programme 2
Production team
This week, the focus is on family law - and at the foot of this page, we'd like to know what you think about some... Read more : OU on the BBC: The Barristers - Programme 2
OU on the BBC: The Barristers - Programme 3
Production team
Amongst the stories featured this week, there's a look at barristers who are paid by the state - and at the foot of this page,... Read more : OU on the BBC: The Barristers - Programme 3
OU on the BBC: The Barristers - Programme 4
Production team
As we reach the end of our time with The Barristers, our thoughts turn to the future. This week, we'd like to know what you... Read more : OU on the BBC: The Barristers - Programme 4
Five questions, five perspectives
The Open University
Professor Gary Slapper introduces our videos exploring barristers and their roles Read more : Five questions, five perspectives
Login or Register to post comments
Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
This week, we want to know your thoughts on this question:
If it were made easier to become a barrister, what good or bad consequences for society would follow?
Making it easier would would definitely generate better reasoning skills. Also the student barrister would be still be in touch with the ordinary man on the street
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
Tony Blair: "... in touch with the ordinary man on the street."
I suggest that 'Adorableladus' has created a very clever spoof, and the further post by 'a guest' on 04 December was written by or on behalf of the first named.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
you should be a barrister
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
Thank you. I am, but never practised. At least I remain a member of the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
My daughter is currently studying the GDL following on from her obtaining her degree. She had considered becoming a barrister. The BVC will cost some £12k and the LPC a thousand or two less so there is not much to choose cost wise between the two routes.
What turned her away from the barrister route was the poor pay during pupillage and the long time delay before she started seeing returns on her investment during which time she would be expected to repay the loans she has taken out. As a solicitor, even in a training position, she would be far better placed to start earning reasonable amounts while still young enough to enjoy them.
There is no extra knowledge required to take the barrister route. A lot of Solicitors are every bit as intellectual as barristers, some even more so, but the way things work at present those who cannot afford to fund years of tuition fees and living costs are priced out of considering the bar as a profession. As such it is an elitist profession.
Hopefully the rises in numbers of solicitor advocates will start to erode this elitism.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
Good evening all, I am very Intrested in joining the legal proffesion. I wish to go all the way but doubt wether that will be possible as I am a poor person.
I am blessed with drive determination if it takes another 10 years from now to get there I will try.
I'd be telling lie if I said I did not want a better life style. I do but I want to follow the yearning I have inside to see justice prevail.
The justice for me would be that I could sit back and say I remember when I read the comments on the forum and felt disheartened as I couldnt raise £1200 never mind £12000 to assist myself in any study but I will try.
I believe I have alot to give Society perhaps some may think I am deluded to even consider trying but I am a mum of 6 a wife I studied in a mainstream school in a the North East of England. I have had adversity as many others but nothing that could deter me from my goals.
The one thing that I have learned from all of this is poor people can have many riches to give. I would like to study hard and long to show that I have what it takes to make it in the Legal proffesion.
I do believe if I have the integrity and intellegence to study and practice law to a degree, I should get my chance. I believe it should not be made easy to become a Barrister or any other Law Practioner but why not broden the spectrum of candidates lets face it if you cant cut thea mustard you do not desreve your place.
Socially deprived people are still as able as many others that are comfortably off. I feel i may have come over slightly defensive in my comments but I am poor and want something so bad. i feel it is an injustice to society to not make provision for people like myself.
I feel that if uniteligent poor people tried to join law they would soon fall by the wayside but if this was to be funded from other souses than that candidate there would have to be a minimum criteria and they must fit this as that would take funds away from more deserving cases.
AFTER ALL THE ABOVE SOCIETY WOULD HAVE ME TO BETTER IT. SO I THINK THATS A POSITIVE.
Thank you for your time please be gentle in your post replys I am at present not even in college studing anything so my comments come from personal belief perhaps not as educated as others but one day you never know i may just be up there with you.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
In response to adorableladus. Your sentiments are sensible and worthwhile; I think that you should try to turn these laudable aspirations into reality.
The first step would be to apply to study W100, Rules, Rights and Justice: an Introduction to Law with the Open University. We have an open admissions policy which means that this would be a good way for someone such as yourself to study law.
Go to this link and have a look at the prospectus:
http://www3.open.ac.uk/study/undergraduate/law/index.htm
For anyone else who shares adorableladus' thoughts and aspirations I would say the same. Take action, study hard and keep going. Many things can be achieved by commitment and hard work; being a barrister is one of them.
I hope that I shall not be accused of importuning or inappropriate advertising for saying the Open University can help people such as adorableladusto achieve their aspirations.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
Thank you so much. I am sitting full of cold checked out your post in reply to my comments and I am now printing registration forms off so thank you sooooooooooooooooo much xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. I am really excited to start I will work so. hard I am also entitled to a little help financially I believe although my hubby returns to work in next few weeks but fees are affordable everyone join the OU Thanks again.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
It is right and proper to promote the OU as a means of gaining greater knowledge.
patronising should be optional but of course it can't be for "people such as"...
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
is there a poor person in here?
shoo!
we're talking about you not to you.
The legal profession must be of the highest integrity and the lawyer must be a totally respected and committed individual, a professional in all sense of the word.
Any reduction in the criteria for attaining the status of Barrister would demean and cause irreparable damage to the profession. It would open the floodgate to potential entrants, though having the legal knowledge, may not possess the integrity, compassion, and fervour for justice currently embodied in the profession.
The outcome could present a rationale of untruth, deceit, false summary, and a desire to win at all costs. This would present the judiciary with an extremely difficult analytical task which could lead to injustice.
The relationship between Judge and Barrister would be erroded beyond redemption.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
I do not think that anyone would disagree that barristers should be people of the highest integrity. However, it is worth considering the possibility that there are many people who might be able aspire to, and achieve, the standards which are necessary to sustain the integrity of the profession but are prevented from doing so by the cost. As you will see from the programme, in order to become a barrister, indeed to get established in one's career, one has to go through a period of considerable insecurity and poverty, accompanied by periods of extreme anxiety induced by lack of financial resources. Those with access to solid family resources are much better placed in this respect than those who come from modest, or poor backgrounds. It is surely possible to broaden access to the profession, without any risk of lowering standards, by addressing these issues, thereby recruiting from a much broader range of social backgrounds.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
If access to the profession is broadened in this way, would this be of general benefit to society or only to the individuals involved?
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
1. Does somebody have to be a member of the legal profession to make a valid argument or even to make judgement?
2. Is it not obvious to all but the legal profession that they are out of touch with "the general public"?
3. How on earth do you get put up for an award for defending insurance companies against claimants with asbestos?
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
I would very strongly concur that academic standards should not be lowered; if anything they should be made more rigorous. It is always said - whether this is true or not I am not sure - that the BVC is much easier than the LPC, the equivalent qualification for Solicitors. When I was at University in the 1970s, those reading for the equivalent of the BVC in those days always claimed that the academic component was minimal; things are now somewhat different in that respect.
It is also said, anecdotally, that whereas it is more or less mandatory to do a law degree if you want to be a solicitor these days, those who wish to be barristers benefit from taking a degree other than Law - Classics, Mathematics, Philosophy, History, Modern Languages or even Economics would seem to be appropriate first degrees for aspirant barristers. Lord Denning and, I think, Lord Parker both did first degrees in Mathematics.
While it is true that the Bar is taking important steps towards easing the financial burdens, my impression is that there is a long way to go yet before the person without family resources has equal access to the Bar compared to those who come from wealthy, or comfortable, backgrounds.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
I find that the arguments stated above are quite acceptable in terms of an academic/intellectual level, however, we fail to consider the economic detriments of the legal profession. As has been stated, it is difficult for those from low-income families to consider the prospect of university and the qualifications which follow ahead. We cannot dismiss the costs which are involved.
Recent calculations suggested that students would suffer a debt in excess of thirty thousand pounds from university loans alone. Consider the cost of other qualifications, such as the BVC or LPC, and the cost becomes quite daunting. It has been stated that the cost of the BVC is in excess of ten thousand pounds, money which many people do not have to hand. Once such qualifications are gained, the prospect of a low-paying pupillage is even more daunting. Barristers are not paid well for their services, simply because it is assumed they should have the 'drive' or financial stability to provide during such times.
For many people who come from low-income families, it is simply too expensive. As many have stated, barristers are considered to be the 'elite' of the legal profession and this has been highlighted by the cost alone. I would not suggest that the academic rigour required should be challenged. Universities are already lowering their standards by offering candidates who do not meet the requirements places at their establishments. Barristers, especially those who earn in excess of one hundred thousand pounds, should be more considerate of the fact that many intelligent and promising legal students are falling ill to financial problems and thus cannot become the 'top' barristers.
It is unfair to imagine that students should be forced to burden the cost of the legal profession, simply because the financial rewards later in life are much higher than other professions. If the legal profession gave more to students and universities to fund a student's aims at becoming a barrister and offered less to the employees, the legal profession would certainly see a sudden rise in intelligent and quality students who will offer tens of thousands to the firm which they are employed to, in the future.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
For those who are interested who do not have the advantages of connections within the profession to enable them to seek advice and gain knowledge about the profession, it is well worth contacting chambers near you and the Inns of Court to seek the advice and gain the knowledge. The sooner you start that process, the better informed you will be about what is invovled and so the better prepared you will be when it comes to those all important interviews.
As to finances, the cost is clearly the issue that concerns most people about entering the profession. The Inns now offer substantial scholarships to aspirants barristers. These are assessed both on the basis of ability and on the basis of needs. Between them, the Inns now provide over £4 million in funding each year. At the Middle Temple, we interview every candidate and make our assessments for the scholarships on the basis of ability - but when it comes to the finances we assess the finances of the applicant and usually fix the money according to needs. This means that if you are brilliant, but wealthy, we may give you a scholarship, but award you a sum that is realtively small.
It is worth noting that there are sources of finance outside the profession too. Many of the great Companies in the City will have schemes to assist people from poor backgrounds take their first steps towards professional and vocational qualifications.
If you are interested in becoming a barrister and would like to know more, you can visit the websites of the Inns of Court and you can visit the websites of barristers' chambers. Self-starters always have an advantage when it comes to going places, and that is as true for the bar as it is for any other profession. Most court hearings are held in public - get out to your local court and see a criminal case, watch a civil trial, take every opportunity to talk to the barristers, the judges, the court staff, solicitors - learn about us and about the skills you will need to join us. Remember, if time permits, everyone will be delighted to pass on their advice!
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
I am a barrister of 15 year experience. I have an arabic name, I went to a state 2ndary modern school and did my law degree at polytechnic. I fear for aspiring pupils at the moment as the Bar Council oblige chambers to pay their pupils whether they are in court or not . By this obligation of payment, chambers are discouraged from taking the sort of risks in their selection of pupils that they were able to 10 or 15 years ago, risks which enabled me and many of my contemporaries to enter the Bar at the time. In my opinion and from my experience this payment system on its own has caused the Bar to revert back to its elitist state and has consequently raised the barriers once more.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
This is an interesting question - it can be assumed that the intention of paying pupils was to lessen the risk for new entrants of building up debt (the risk still exists as the programme has shown). However, this post would suggest that by shifting the risk to chambers, there has been the unintended consequence of narrowing rather than widening participation. Research by the Sutton Trust (http://www.suttontrust.com/reports/Comparison_educational_backgrounds.pdf [moderator - note that this links to a pdf file]) suggests that recruitment to the law is still rather elitist, although the research does not focus on access to pupillages or tenancies. It does look at the issue of early marginalisation - which students choose law as a university course initially.
Kim
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
It might be worth noting that the manifest, and disgraceful, failure of Labour education policy since 1997, combined with the relentless 'dumbing down' of the A level syllabus, has meant that independent schools maintain a massive advantage when it comes to subjects like Mathematics, Foreign Languages, Classics and History, subjects which are pre-eminently suitable for aspirant Barristers. Had the Conservative educational policy put forward by Gillian Shepherd in the 1997 Manifesto been followed then, in my opinion, a combination of vouchers and 50% selection, in effect the restoration of the 1944 Grammar Schools, would have allowed a much larger number of children from poor backgrounds to attain the requisite educational qualifications for the Bar. In an era when Universities complain that first year students cannot read books, use a library or write an essay then it is not surprising that the intake of the Bar is still dominated by those who have attended independent schools.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
Having to share a teacher with seven others is so much more civilised I don't know why poor people don't think to try it instead of wasting their Income Support on Pot Noodle and gin.
You'd be surprised how many barristers know someone who knows someone who once danced with a poor person.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
when you say risk, what risk?
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
It is obvious that the cost of becoming a Barrister is off-putting but it is also worth remembering that the 'spoils', for those who succeed, are very substantial. Surely the principle adopted must be the same as that which now operates in relation to University tuition fees and the other costs of being a student. Grants should be available for the very poor and loans for the better off provided on a no-interest basis which can be paid off as and when the young barrister starts to earn fees. The cost should be seen, as is the case with University tuition fees and living costs, as an investment for the future and arranged accordingly.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
I am a barrister in independent practice of just under 10 years call.
The question is somewhat open. What are the 'barriers'?
There are essentially two: the academic requirements of qualification (and thereafter successful practice) and the financial burden of qualification (and sustaining yourself during the early years of practice).
Should the academic requirements be lowered. The answer must be an emphatic no. It is in no-ones interest to have the less academically/intellectually able practising at the bar. Do individuals want to be represented by such practitioners? Does society want criminal trials prosecuted by such people.
The strong market forces which operate on the bar would mean that any such practitioners would be unlikely to be able to develop any meaningful practice in any event.
The financial burdens have already been made more bearable. Unfunded pupillages (such as I undertook) are now a thing of the past. The heaviest burden is the cost of the Bar Vocational Course (now around £12,000), this no longer has to be undertaken in London and so in some cases living costs have been reduced. There are numerous bursaries and professional studies loans to help meet the tuition and living costs. You do not have to be from a 'good' family.
I started to read law aged 25. I took out a £25,000 professional studies loan to pay for the BVC. I had no connections whatsoever to the bar or even the law in general.
Entry to the profession is not easy, but it is not anywhere near as bad as some would seek to paint it.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
When I was 18 in 1966 I considered becoming a Barrister, I was told I would have to go to University for 3 years and get a good degree in law, and then it would take minimum of a further three years during which I would have a few thousand pounds of expenditure before I could qualify. I would be at least 25 before I earned any money.
Unless you have wealthy parents this is not possible thus Barristers will always be elitist and this is detremental to the administration of justice. The barriers and the cost should be reduced.
Re: Barristers: Reducing the barriers?
A couple of thoughts.
One - it is clear from the programme that it is not exactly 'easy' to become a barrister. However, perhaps an interesting way of thinking about this issue would be to ask oneself whether, given the range of skills which barristers possess, a more extensive use of their services might make it easier for us to resolve the problems which we all face in family life and working life.
Two - It could be argued that a civilised society depends as much on the 'rule of law', and respect for the law, as it does on things like democracy, at least in the form of an occasional vote which few of us seem to be bothered to cast, and the freedom of the press, an important civil liberty, which is, sadly, systematically abused by our appalling tabloid press. Given that barristers, together with judges, enable the rule of law to become a reality, I would content that we need more of both of them rather than less.
Perhaps the real question should be – ‘How are we to we pay for the services of those who uphold the 'rule of law' and how could those services be made available to more people, with less expense?’