Q: A law degree is known as a juris doctor. Is it appropriate, then, to call a lawyer, “Doctor?”
A: This is a funny little question that polemics often engage in, it would seem, for shear sport. Those two little letters preceding one’s name bespeaks authority, intellect, and honor.
Lawyers get gypped on that front, I suppose. After all, attorneys put in three years to get a J.D., and follow that up with one of the hardest, quite masochistic, tests known to mankind. What is more, the very degree that we attorneys possess suggests that it would be appropriate to call us, “Dr. Attorney.” After all, M.D. stands for “Medical Doctor” and we call our physicians doctor, do we not?
Surprisingly, the reason why attorneys do not bear this titular prefix is rooted in a notion professional humility.
Dear Sidebar, Please tells us you are starting to tell a joke. Lawyers humble? Seriously, what’s the punch line? Signed, The Society for Protection of the Falsely Humble.
It is no joke. In the earlier part of the twentieth century, the American Bar Association (ABA) considered passing a resolution that would permit us to be titled, “doctor.” But, the committee exploring the idea determined that such a reference would be inappropriate, misleading, and grounded only in “self-laudation.” Still, about a year later, that same ABA committee determined it might be ok, provided the attorney was not using the title to mislead.
Dear Sidebar, We knew it! Signed, the SPFH again.
And that is the crux of the problem. When someone is referred to as “doctor,” generally we do ascribe a certain level of intellectualism or heightened professionalism to the person (whether they deserve it or not). Medical doctors are specialists in health. Ph.D.’s are purported masters within a very narrow realm of academia. Doctor’s of Theology are respected as experts in all things God. But, a juris doctor really is just an attorney.
Now that does not imply that attorneys are lacking in academic ability. It just means that the profession of law is much more a practical profession than it is an academic one. We are counselors, advisors, and advocators, for the most part. What we are “expert” in is the law and how it is to be applied. Because the law is so general, even our title must indicate our professional diversity. To call us doctors –because of cultural norms, historical tradition, or pure arrogance – could be misleading and detract from our representation.
While the title, “doctor” is a rather generic one in professional or academic circles, only one profession is uniquely and ubiquitously known as, “Esquire.” And, yes, I am quite proud of that.
Copyright: Jeremiah G. Dys, Esq. May not be used absent express, written permission. Please contact the author for permission to reprint.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Whether or not he is "proud" of being an esquire, which really means very little, a juris doctor, and therefore a lawyer, is a "doctor". Lawyers are doctors and hold doctorates. Indeed, the very first doctorates, nearly 1000 years ago, were exclusively for lawyers. In England, India, etc., physicians get bachelors degrees but call themselves, "doctor." At the very least, a lawyer who earns a doctoral degree should be able to call himself or herself "doctor." This is obvious!
I hardly think it's "professional humility". Lawyers don't, as a part of their education, have to take comprehensive exams (the bar exam is not a part of the education). They don't do research, they don't have to write a dissertation. That three year law degree is closer to a masters, not a real doctorate.
I suppose that makes lawyers the chiropractors equivalent in medicine. Yea, three year of schooling is a master. Rarely goes anyone earn a Ph.D in science in 4 years. 6 is the average
Actually, law students do a lot of research, the legal profession is all about research. Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about. Also, law students do write a dissertation, it is called the advanced legal writing requirement. I don't understand the comment comparing lawyers to chiropractors because there is no alternative in law. Learn about the subject you are talking about before you bash it.
I believe the research being referred to here is original research, primary research, not the kind of research law students do, but the kind a chemistry student or physics student does--experiments in the lab or field. I don't even think there is an equivalent in law school. Yes, I agree, the J.D. is the cognate of a master's degree in every other discipline. In the circles I know of, it would be considered tacky for a lawyer to go by "Dr."
It appears that the commenter who stated that the law degree does not require original research is an idiot troll. For those of you who are not lawyers, have not attended law school, and do not have juris doctorate degrees, original research on new and established ares of the law is a requirement in the study of law because the law is not finite nor stable. The law, or jurisprudence and it's interpretation changes daily, which requires continuing education, training, and research on the new techniques of its application both in and out of the courtroom. Publication of original research is required in bar reviews or in courses outside of the law review, published by the law school and such requirement continues beyond graduation. The bar exam itself has no equal in any other discipline. A Masters degree, attending full time, takes two years. A law degree, with full time attendance requires three, with a two day exam. Often, clases are necessary after 3 years of formal law school just to take the bar exam. And contrary to such commenter's uninformed opinion, a law student is examined by written essay and orally in every course and takes approximately 5 courses each semester. I doubt the circles such commenter reports being a part of include those in the legal field and hopefully aren't as ignorantly presumptuous as such commentor. "Dr" is usually used by a lawyer who teach a legal subject in an educational institution such as an undergraduate program. Since a lawyer achieves doctorate level education, it is appropriate.
The rule, I believe, for terming oneself "doctor" in academia is whether or not one holds a terminal degree. JD is not the terminal law degree. I am happy to address anyone who holds an SJD as "Doctor" but not one who holds a JD. Even professors who hold JDs or LLMs should be called "Professor"; even university presidents who hold JDs or LLMs should be called "President". Neither of these is a "Doctor". Get a terminal degree if you want the prefix.
Post a Comment