I had long thought that returning to the criminal Bar after maternity leave would present insurmountable challenges. The work is demanding, unpredictable and heavily dependent upon availability, such that it is practically unheard of to find anyone attempting to practise part-time. Nonetheless I was keen to try. I learned that with planning, flexibility and good clerking, it is in fact possible to shape a part-time practice that is both sustainable and professionally rewarding.

On my return, I initially worked three days a week, later moving up to four and eventually full-time. This gradual reintroduction allowed me to rebuild confidence in my skills while maintaining a balance with family commitments. It also offered the chance to reflect on how work could be approached more strategically.

That I was able to undertake many trials while working part-time was a surprise, but there are in fact a great deal of cases at different levels of severity which have three-day time-estimates. It is not difficult to work out which ones they are at the point of instruction. This offered a balance: they were sufficiently substantial to maintain a viable income, but short enough to fit into a part-time working pattern. I did not consider it a problem that I could not, for a period, undertake much RASSO work: that work was waiting for me in abundance when I returned to full-time hours.

Inevitably, some trials overran. For those ‘trickle over’ days, I relied on additional days at nursery or support from others (including kind clerks and colleagues). Having contingencies and identifying a nursery that could accommodate ad hoc additional days was essential, particularly given that I do not have family living close-by to help with childcare on those days.

An early decision that proved effective was to work Wednesday to Friday. This may seem counter intuitive. In practice, however, beginning mid-week reduced the risk of trials expanding into non-working days. A three-day case commencing on a Wednesday was less likely to drift into the following week. Judges and court listing officers were – without exception – completely in support of my arrangement. There was never a refusal to list a trial on a Wednesday where the court had availability.

Good clerking was central to making this arrangement work. I was fortunate to have clerks who were excellent at anticipating the commitments of a particular case and identifying work that suited my pattern. Working as a junior with a discreet preparatory role, reviewing disclosure or charging decisions, for example, can be well-paid pieces of work that can be completed within more flexible yet predictable parameters than trials, and are particularly beneficial during that initial period upon return.

What surprised me most was how my approach to work evolved. In trying to balance work and family life I became more efficient. With less time at my desk, I became more decisive, both in advocacy and in advice. I had less time to ruminate over cases, and as a result my advocacy became sharper and more precise. Far from detracting from my skills, this focus enhanced them. I also was approaching my job in a healthier, more functional way, because childcare commitments meant that I simply could not be too mentally consumed by work.

The experience demonstrated that part-time practice at the criminal Bar is not only possible but can, in some respects, have many unforeseen benefits. It requires forward planning, supportive clerking and flexible childcare, but it also offers opportunities to reassess working practices and develop professional skills. For those returning from a period of leave, a phased and considered return can certainly provide a realistic balance between professional obligations and other responsibilities. Such an arrangement need not detract from career progression or professional ability. It can in fact have a very positive effect.