This essay examines the ways in which women lawyers of two generation–the pioneer generation of the 1880s and the “new woman” generation of the 1910s–confronted the dilemma of marriage and career. Members of the Equity Club in the 1880s revealed three distinct sets of attitudes toward balancing marriage and career: the separatist approach that a professional woman must remain single; the Victorian attitude that a married woman must sacrifice her career; and the integrated approach that a woman could have both marriage and career. Women lawyers surveyed by the Bureau of Vocational Information in 1920 revealed that the “new woman” generation of women lawyers lived in an era of transition. While they shared the same separatist, Victorian, and integrated views toward marriage and law practice as did women lawyers in the 1880s, they also embraced the new values of the early 20th century which shaped both the contours of the legal profession and the parameters of women's lives. Set within the context of the new values of the era, the separatist, Victorian, and integrated approaches to resolving the dilemma of marriage and career, which were originally formulated by women lawyers in the late 19th century, assumed new meanings for women lawyers in the early 20th century.

This study of graduates of the University of Michigan Law School from the late 1970s reports on the differing ways that women and men have responded to the conflicting claims of work and family. It finds that women with children who have entered the profession have indeed continued to bear the principal responsibilities for the care of children, but it also finds that these women, with all their burdens, are more satisfied with their careers and with the balance of their family and professional lives than other women and than men.

This essay suggests that recent work in feminist theory should reorient the questions that are asked about the role of gender in the legal profession. Some use gender as a category of analysis to explore differences that reinforce conventional gendered stereotypes, such as the conceptualization of work and family in lawyering as a “women's issue.” Others use conventional sociology of the professions analysis, such as stratification, to measure women's “success” and “satisfaction” in the context of the traditional law firm. By focusing on some recent historical and sociological research on women in the legal and medical professions, the author illustrates how we might ask different questions, not to reify gender differences but to more fully examine the role that gender difference, as socially constructed, might play in the transformation of law practice.