Yaa Dankwa Ampadu-Sackey is a family law barrister specialising in children law and a Special Educational Needs mediator. Yaa Dankwa is an active member of Inner Temple and serves on several committees supporting education, engagement and retention at the Bar. She is the 2026 Vice Chair of our Young Barristers’ Committee.
According to the Bar Standard Board’s latest ‘Diversity at the Bar’ report, 31.9% of the Bar; 8.2% of pupils; 32.8% of non-KCs; and 27.9% of KCs have primary caring responsibilities for one or more children. In this blog, Yaa Dankwa shares her experience of parenting at the Bar.
I come from a cultural background where the role of a woman has traditionally been anchored in the home. This expectation has not disappeared but has evolved. Women are now expected to excel in their professions while continuing to carry primary responsibility for the home. It is no longer a question of choosing one or the other but an expectation of doing both well.
In practical terms, the organisation of childcare, the maintenance of routines and the quiet, constant work that keeps a household functioning still falls largely on the mother. This work is rarely seen but is always felt.
My experience
My experience at the Bar reflects this reality.
Before I entered the profession, I had heard the stories. They were not always said openly but they were there. The Bar, I was told, could be unyielding for mothers. Long journeys to court were expected. Late evenings, weekend work and nights spent preparing were part of the culture. What struck me most was not simply the intensity of the work but the sense that asking for adjustments because you are a parent was something to be done cautiously, if at all.
There was an unspoken message. You could succeed but only if you absorbed the pressure without drawing attention to it.
I carried that understanding with me when I began. I was careful about what I shared. I was not only a junior barrister finding my footing but also a mother raising young children and managing a home. Those realities did not disappear when I entered practice, but I felt they had to be kept at the margins.
One of the most difficult periods came at the start of my pupillage in January 2020 when I relocated to the Midlands. My children were 4 and 5 years old. Leaving them behind was one of the hardest decisions I have had to make. The emotional strain of that separation is not easily explained. It was not simply distance but the constant awareness of absence.
I had intended to return home to Essex each weekend. However, the cost of travel and the demands of preparation made this unsustainable. The rhythm I had hoped for quickly gave way to something far more limited.
When the pandemic arrived, I was able to return home. This period brought relief. Being physically present with my children again was deeply important. However, the challenges did not disappear they simply changed form.
My days began early, often before dawn, to allow time to prepare for work before the household awoke. Then came the morning routine, getting the children ready for school and ensuring everything was in place before I turned fully to the demands of practice.
Childcare was a constant consideration. Not only in terms of logistics but also cost. What would have made a meaningful difference at that stage was the confidence to request adjustments without hesitation. A simple request, such as ensuring that conferences or advocates meeting did not take place after 4:30pm, would have had a significant impact.
Childcare operates within strict boundaries. Time is measured closely. For example, if you were late to collect your child from a child minder, you could be charged £2.00 for each minute of delay. In my case, these additional charges sometimes meant that the fee earned from a conference was reduced to a point where it no longer reflected the value of the work. I adjusted arrangements where I could. This resulted in a system where if I was unable to collect my children by 7pm they would remain overnight at an additional cost. This became part of our routine, not because it was ideal, but because it was necessary.
The demands extended beyond childcare. To ensure attendance at court by 9:00am., and in some instances by 8:30am where it was necessary to secure a conference room, a journey of two hours or more was frequently required. This meant waking my children at 6am so that I could leave by 6:30am. A babysitter would take over until the children were collected and taken to school by a paid taxi driver.
One morning stands out. As I prepared to enter the courtroom, I received repeated calls from my children's school. Upon returning the call, I discovered that there had been no breakfast club that day. My children, then 6 and 7, had been dropped off as usual and were left waiting outside the school gates. They were safe and the school provided support, but it was a moment that left a lasting impression. It highlighted how easily systems can fail and the significant burden parents carry in maintaining everything.
These are not isolated incidents. They are a part of the reality of parenting at the Bar.
At that time, I did not feel able to request adjustments. I had been advised that while requests could be made, the work would likely be assigned to someone else who was willing to accommodate all demands. The implication was clear: to progress, one must adapt.
There has been progress since then. There is greater recognition of the challenges faced by parents. However, a lack of confidence persists, particularly among those at the beginning of their careers. The structure of chambers does not always accommodate the diverse circumstances parents navigate.
Support also varies. Some rely on family networks while others depend entirely on paid childcare. This reliance brings financial pressure and requires constant coordination. In conversations with colleagues, a pattern emerges. Larger chambers often have greater capacity to offer support. However, meaningful change should not be defined by size but by approach.
I would also add that the pressures are potentially higher for those who practise in London, where in my view competition is more intense.
I do think the level of pressure is influenced by seniority. The further along you are in your career when you have children, the more confidence you tend to have in articulating your needs and advocating for yourself. You are also more likely to have an established practice, which can better withstand a period of time away. This, in turn, can reduce some of the financial and professional pressures, at least to a degree.
Practical steps that can help
There are practical steps that can be taken across the profession.
Where possible, conferences should be scheduled to suit the unique caring demands of the barrister. This is not a matter of convenience but of enabling parents to remain present in their children’s lives.
Efforts should be made to allocate work in locations that minimise excessive travel. Time spent commuting is time taken from both preparation and family life.
It is also important to recognise that parenting is not static. There are stages when children require more time and attention. A system that allows for flexibility during these periods is one that supports the profession’s longevity.
Financial structures must also be considered. For those undertaking legally aided work, time away during school holidays is not optional. It is a necessity. Without a fair approach to rent and financial commitments, the profession risks losing capable practitioners.
Parenting at the Bar is possible. That is not in question. The issue is the cost at which it is sustained and whether that cost can be reduced.
My journey has required resilience, adjustment and persistence. These qualities are often spoken of as though they are sufficient. They are not. Resilience should not be the mechanism that compensates for structural gaps.
The aim should be a profession where parents are able to practise without feeling that they must diminish one aspect of their lives to sustain another. A profession that recognises that supporting parents is not an exception but an essential part of retaining talent and ensuring that the Bar reflects the society it serves.