ProfReader

It's not that big of deal as long as you don't make it a huge pain with ambiguous instructions, a lack of links, lack of deadlines, etc. Just set everything out in a single email so that it is 100% clear.

If you are outsourcing childcare, cooking, and cleaning, then yes, there isn't as much for him to do, but there are still lots of little things that come up around that house that need doing that he could be very helpful with. I also think that you might underestimate bonding a little bit when you talk about him sitting around watching you feed. Yes, as you well know since you've done it before, babies eat lots, but they also just get held lots and whatever else and he might want to be involved with that. And even if he is just watching you feed, there is some bonding there. Most people that I know are now having the mom do the first stretch of mat leave and then the dad taking over for several months, which you aren't contemplating here, but I don't think that some concurrent parental leave is a bad thing for help around the house and bonding. I wouldn't do less than the month that you propose. I'm not sure how rigid his firm is, but maybe he could work something where he takes every single Friday (or whatever day) for an additional 3 or 4 (or more) months. That could be his day to help with some things around the house and to bond, while you got a chance to get out of the house for a few hours, which will be invaluable.

Why does anyone? Despite what you will read around here about people thinking that they have "strong" references, they are basically all quite generic and similar. So why inconvenience applicants, referees, and the admissions committee?

You are worrying way too much about reference letters. They really aren't that important. Most schools ask for 2 references. Why don't you get one from a university prof and the other from one of your college teachers? And/or maybe aim to get one from a college teacher that teaches at the school full-time (i.e. is more prof-like) than someone who just comes in and does one class.

There is absolutely no requirement that a reference have a PhD for any law school. I have no idea why that would have been an issue.

Yeah, I wouldn't really consider this an academic reference, depending on the work that you did for the prof. If you were helping to prepare class materials or doing citations for a journal article or something, then the prof wouldn't really be able to speak to your academic abilities. If you were cowriting a journal article, that might be another story.

Very extensively (at least at my own, where I previously worked, and a couple of others).

I've been a reference through OLSAS many times and am 99% sure that there is no indication which schools are being applied to. Even if there were, you shouldn't worry about adding 2. They won't even remember that you told them there were 4 and wouldn't care if they did.

In terms of the character count, maybe just focus on the most serious issue. The life-threatening condition, surgery, corticosteroids. The undiagnosed ADHD is less serious and would be the sort of thing that others suffer from. The more serious stuff is more than enough to make the point about your grades those years.

I'm going to present an opposite view as food for thought. I didn't finish my undergrad degree and know a few others who didn't. It worked out fine for everyone that I can think of. Yes, some people probably need the extra year of maturity, but others are fine. It would depend on the person. In terms of needing something to fall back on, universities generally give you a really long time...maybe 7 or 8 or years...to finish your undergrad degree. So if you went to law school and hated it, you could go back and finish your undergrad.

I always use a rubric. Everyone that I have talked to about it uses a rubric. As Providence notes, there are usually lots of points up for grabs, and even an A exam will still miss a bunch. I'm sure that it has happened before, but I really imagine that many profs refusing to share their rubric. I've never included points for writing style. I generally tell students that it isn't really fair to emphasize writing too much under timed test conditions. My stance is that I will wade through the crap to find the good stuff that I can award points for. I'm sure that not everyone adopts that position, but I think the majority of people do. I can't think of people who specifically award points to writing, but I'm sure that it does happen at times. That being said, I think The Scientist's point that clear writing actually makes it possible to understand the point that you are trying to make is a good one. Above, I referred to wading through crap, but some of that crap might have actually been legitimate points disguised in writing so crappy that I couldn't identify it. So while I wouldn't focus as much on writing as I would on substance, it can only help you. I also agree with Providence's point about point first writing. It might not help you get any more points on the exam, but it will certainly help you to think through your thoughts in a more concise and efficient way. You guys barely need me here! Your advice was as good as anything that I have to offer!

I would definitely gravitate towards the actual professor, as long as he or she knows you as well as the instructor. Even more so, given that you've had multiple classes with the professor. When I was on admissions, I gave more weight (to the extent that it even mattered) to letters from an actual professor rather than an instructor. The professor won't really comment on your specific knowledge of religion, but rather things like your writing and analytical skills, your preparation for and participation in class, etc., so the subject doesn't matter much.

I can't really predict what your GPA would be at that other school. My point is just that if you don't apply to a school that is purely stats or if you apply to a school that is mainly stats but looks more in depth at the materials of some applicants below a certain stats cutoff, then some of the committee members may consider this. And admissions committees for other types of graduate programs are probably even more likely to consider where your degree is from.

I keep anonymous on here. But even if your plan is UBC, you will presumably be applying to other schools.

Although law schools don't necessarily care where you went (that being said, when I was on an admissions committee, I definitely noted when students had attended Athabasca just to raise their grades), grad programs may very well care.