The Motherhood Myth, Traditional Firms, and the Underrepresentation of Women

Abstract

This Article makes the case that the motherhood narrative-that women are underrepresented in partnership and leadership ranks of law firms because they are their children's primary caregivers-is a myth. After detailing how the motherhood myth has been used as an excuse for a lack of meaningful change, the Article provides evidence of an alternative narrative: "traditional firms" are structurally and culturally antagonistic to women. These firms are characterized by extreme work expectations and heavy reliance on the unpaid labor of stay-at-home spouses (SAHSs). Traditional firms' dependence upon SAHSs is central to maintaining the firm status quo and driving out women. Next, the Article describes how firm modernization would allow women to gain parity in firm partnership and leadership ranks. The Article argues that modernization should be measured in terms of firm reliance on SAHSs and then responds to counter-arguments that modernization is not possible in the service of clients and is unlikely to improve the retention of women. Finally, the Article explains how three different groups-bar associations and other organizations, firms, and attorneys-should collect and analyze data about firm reliance on SAHSs as a first step towards change.

Keywords: Women in law firm leadership, Motherhood and underrepresentation of women in law, Law firm modernization, Traditional law firms, Traditional firms, Underrepresentation of women in law firms, Why women leave law firms, women in the legal profession, Stay-at-home spouses, Law firm reliance on stay-at-home spouses, SAHSs