The Defining Decade - Meg Jay

As Flying Houses continues to grow in popularity, I continue to chat about it when the people I meet appear bored.  Perhaps this talk bores them more, but some people recognize the importance of this project--which is to educate, entertain, and "endorse."  It is to write about books like Ada, or The Oath, or Red Son and to recommend them though we know of no one else who has read them yet.

With all of this in mind, I am pleased to present a new review from a new writer.  As only 18 days remain until my 30th birthday, I feel it is quite timely.  

The Defining Decade – A Review

By: J. Alexander Gibson

Like many twentysomethings, I’ve been trying to figure out how to live my life “best,” often wondering to myself, “amidoingitrite???” Do I have the right job? Why isn’t my love life more successful? Is all of this drinking, caffeine and not sleeping much going to destroy my body? So as a person with a strong proclivity for self-growth and discovery, I came across a book, which seeks to help people in my situation figure all of that out – The Defining Decade by Meg Jay.

The Defining Decade is a book that seeks to inform its readers of the importance of their twenties and how important it is to get your life on a good trajectory during that decade. Whereas current popular opinion seems to be learning towards “extended adolescence,” often claiming that it’s ok to bullshit your twenties because everything is starting later anyways (marriage, career, etc.), Meg Jay’s thesis directly contrasts that notion.  Jay boldly claims that, “With about 80 percent of life’s most significant events taking place by age thirty-five, as thirtysomethings and beyond we largely either continue with, or correct for, the moves we made during out twentysomething years.” (xii)

So pretty much, get your shit together in your twenties or else you may regret it when you’re not living a life you want to. Ms. Jay, PhD, a successful clinical psychologist who specializes in adult development (twentysomethings in particular) recounts her experiences with various patients and utilizes scientific research to back her points. She divides the books into three major sections: Work, Love, and The Brain and Body, covering the essence of the problems from which many twentysomethings suffer. 

I consider this book required reading for people in or about to be in their twenties. However, don’t expect it to immediately lead to the perfect job, significant other and/or body, but do expect that it will start getting you to reflect on your life and start thinking about what you want to do, who you want to be and how to get there. View this book as a guide to self-discovery. It’s not going to do anything directly for you—you’ll have to take it upon yourself to make positive changes in your life—but this will certainly be a first step. Also, while I certainly agree with the overall thesis of the book, please don’t let this book discourage you one bit if your twenties are coming to a close or you’re already past them. Kurt Warner (two-time Superbowl MVP) entered the NFL at the age of 28, Harland (Colonel) Sanders who has exactly zero military experience, founded KFC at 65, and a struggling carpenter named Harrison Ford got his big break at the age of 35 when he acted in the legendary movie series and mega-franchise Star Wars.   

Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: Outlining

Welcome to Year Two (and let us hope, the final year) of Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, the weekly column I write for the BLS Advocate.  This is last week's column, on outlining.  The language taken from a Torts Nutshell is repeated as this is the inaugural column for this year (there was one column posted over the summer, but that was an outlier).  Some people may dispute my decision to include my own content from another website on this blog, but it is my personal belief that my blog is easier to navigate (in terms of archived posts) than the BLS Advocate site.  That is a Wordpress blog.  This is a Blogspot blog, and preferable in my opinion.  

Next week's column is on Exams and Grades.  It has been submitted for editing and is currently being reviewed.  Please enjoy. 

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
Restatement of Torts, Second, section 46: “One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress.”
Comment d:
“Liability has been found only where the conduct has been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.”
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
“Almost all states have adopted the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress, but only a minority of courts have been willing to recognize an independent cause of action for emotional distress alone against defendants who are no more than negligent.  (Shapo, Principles of Tort Law, 3d ed., 381).
BY READING THIS COLUMN, YOU HEREBY AGREE TO FORFEIT ALL POSSIBLE CLAIMS AGAINST THE AUTHOR


“Have you started outlining?”
After “What kind of law do you want to practice?” this is probably the most annoying question you will hear over the next few weeks. Not only is there a fair amount of disagreement over what constitutes a “good outline,” but the question leads to the Gordian Knot that is the choice to make your own, or use a previous student’s outline who “got an A.”
I tend to side with the “do it yourself” camp. I personally endorse Professor Feldman’s Academic Success Program and its manual on outlining, and I do believe that there is value in creating your own outline. However, a few points deserve commentary:
Tip #1: “Some outlines are as short as 10 or 12 pages; others are 50-60 pages. You should be able to read through your outline in its entirety at least twice in a day.”
I take this tip to mean that those shorter outlines will be used for closed-book exams, and longer ones for open-book exams. But no matter its length, the real question is: how much does your outline affect your grade? Nobody reviews your outline as painstakingly as you will, so no one can tell you definitively that you have a “good outline” or a “bad outline.” But here are my inconsistent findings:

Criminal Law
Outline: Approx 60 pages
Type of Exam: Closed
Self-Grade for Outline: B- (too long for closed book; too much ambiguity on the law)
Final Course Grade: C+
Civil Procedure
Outline: Approx 80 pages
Type of Exam:  Open
Self-Grade for Outline: B+ (too long; multiple misstatements of law)
Final Course Grade: A- 
Torts
Outline: 35 pages.
Type of Exam: Closed with 1 page double-sided cheat sheet
Self-Grade for Outline: B
Self-Grade for Cheat Sheet: A
Final Course Grade: B+ (including 20% “C” grade on Midterm)
Contracts
Outline: 100 pages+
Type of Exam: Open
Self-Grade for Outline: C+ (too long; too much ambiguity on the law)
Final Course Grade: B-
Constitutional Law
Outline: 84 pages (approx.)
Type of Exam: Closed
Self-Grade for Outline: B
Final Course Grade: B
Property
Outline: 100 pages+
Type of Exam: Open
Self-Grade for Outline: C
Final Course Grade: B+

Now, in general, you will see that each of my grades (save Property, in which I only did comparatively well because most of my classmates were just as lost as me) is only 1/3 of a grade off from what I “self-grade” my outline, which of course is a subjective process. For many courses, you will have some idea of how well you did before or after you take the exam. Grading exams is a primarily objective process—but this column is not about exams, only outlining.
However, almost none of my outlines conformed to Tip #1, and when they did, they were not useful (Torts being the exception). In fact, almost none of my outlines from my first year were useful.  Perhaps this is because of the next tip.
Tip #2: “Do not try to do any outlining when a writing assignment is due.”
For 2Ls and 3Ls, it’s not hard to follow this advice. For 1Ls, it is almost impossible. Both semesters have substantial writing assignments that do not become due until about, oh, Thanksgiving, or the end of March. While you may have a little more time to outline in the spring, after you are done with legal writing assignments, you still have to do at least one of the two Moot Court competitions! What a drag.
The key, I guess, for 1Ls, is to outline before you get those initial materials for writing assignments. While you generally don’t need to balance a job during 1L year with reading assignments, the writing assignments kind of moot that point out. It’s not easy to find the time, and I never found the time, and I suffered.
But I did much better my second year. And it wasn’t until that spring semester that I discovered “the secret” to outlining. Now, “the secret” is not applicable to closed-book exams, though you may attempt to practice using it. But, if you have an open-book exam, this method is practically guaranteed to get you at least an A-. What is the method?
You do your outline. And then you take a practice exam from the same professor. You answer each question with a paragraph—the type of paragraph you’d write for an exam answer. You leave blank the “party” (or defendant or creditor or debtor or whatever) and you have the pre-determined issue, the rule, the application, and boom, you are done, and boom, you bring this practice exam in with you, and boom, you connect the dots and you’ve got a stress-free exam.
I knew a 3L last year who swore by the process of collecting old “A” outlines, and just studying off of those from day one. He didn’t believe in making his own, and he apparently did quite well. The problem with law school is that you can work super-duper hard and not get any reward for it, and some people can do almost no work, have the answers in front of them, and essentially “cheat their way through.” Class participation should be factored into classes more heavily for this reason.
I hope to start my outlining around September 25th. Odds are that I’ll have about 5 pages for each course come November 25th, but it’s good to set goals.  It is.

Christopher J. Knorps is a 3L.  He enjoys studying bankruptcy law.  Please e-mail him at Christopher.knorps@brooklaw.edu if you are interested in participating in MEP or Batman in Brooklyn.