Does anyone actually know whether we produce better lawyers now than in the past? So asked Professor Hugh Brayne, concerning legal education in England and Wales in 1996 (Brayne, 1996). He observed that we certainly give students more legal education, but could not answer the question because there was no consensus on what makes good lawyering, nor on how it could be measured. There is one measure that should be included in a definition of good lawyering: the well-being of lawyers. If lawyers suffer clinical depression significantly more than the general population, many would think that law schools should reconsider their curriculum. Some law schools might reply their brief is to teach law, not lawyering. This paper discusses proposed research on the well-being of Australian lawyers in the workplace. It examines what we know about workplace satisfaction for lawyers in Australia, compared with the worrying findings about the legal profession in the United States. The paper examines the likely causes of dissatisfaction including how universities traditionally teach law and what students are not told about legal practice. We discuss the need to investigate the well-being and satisfaction levels among newly-admitted lawyers, and to consider ways to teach law that could help lawyers not only make wise career choices but develop strategies to cope better with stressors in their workplace. Clinical legal education could help students develop professionally as well as personally in order to improve their chances of having a happy and productive life at work.