Back in 2006, I enjoyed some debate in the legal world spurred by the title of our legal degrees. Most people that go to law school earn a Juris Doctor. In the earlier part of the twentieth century, it was an LLB instead, a bachelor of law. There are some lawyers out there that insist on calling themselves "doctor."
Should Lawyers Call Themselves Doctors of Law? The issue in Florida arose because some felt the term "doctor of laws" in a lawyer's advertisement was "misleading," but not if "that was the phrasing used on the lawyer's diploma." Some disagreed and argued this was "a cultural issue." A member of the Board of Governors in that 2006 debate "noted that in Spanish-speaking countries it is customary to refer to attorneys as doctors in law, and common for clients to refer to their attorney as 'doctor.'”
In 2011, the Above the Law Blog published an article titled Any Lawyer Who Calls Himself 'Doctor' Like a Ph.D. Should Get Punched in the Mouth. I won't ruin it for you. You will have to read the story to see what that lawyer's opinion is. The author is a bit dismissive of others as well, noting "I don’t even think Ph.D. holders should call themselves 'doctors' unless they can prescribe medicinal marijuana or something." That is a bit harsh, knowing that no one in America can prescribe marijuana, being that it is illegal in all 50 states and all.
An interesting series of arguments appear on LinkedIn authored by Alexander Whitaker, a university President (2020). The author makes arguments with his perceptions of this title in the practice of law: "it could mislead clients into thinking their attorney had some sort of specialized expertise beyond that of a normal lawyer." In academia, the author sees challenges in that (1) its use harms "credibility with our PhD colleagues," and (2) It "would seem to suggest some insecurity about one's academic bona fides without such a title." That "insecurity" argument might cut both ways?
The logic path Dr. Whitaker propounds is, in part, based on the fact that there is no dissertation involved in earning a juris doctor. If that logic path be our guide, then a valid inquiry might be whether medical doctors, chiropractors, and nurse practitioners prepare and defend a dissertation. Or not. Perhaps in some instances, there is room for debate? Or, perhaps there are sounder arguments than the dissertation distinction?
Nonetheless, the Florida Bar Board of Governors decided later in 2006 that "it is alright for a lawyer who has a juris doctor degree to say in a Spanish-language ad that he is a 'doctor en leyes,' or doctor of laws. But, the Bar News article cautioned "Some board members said they might vote differently if the ad was in English." That seems like a bit of a "that depends" answer. I'm not saying the Bar would tell you not to put "doctor" in your lawyer ads, but there is a chance they might.
According to Medical Justice, the question is not all that settled even if you went to medical school. That post is largely California-centric and so it must be taken with a grain of salt (states are largely different and independent, so make no assumption your state is the same). But, it is also humorous in its cautioned approach. It notes that in California, graduating from a medical school may not be enough. The author suggests that if you lack a medical license then referring to yourself as "doctor" may put you "at risk for being charged with a misdemeanor. That's potentially serious.
Admitting that the analysis is somewhat complex, the Medical Justice author asks "How about Dr. Dre, the rapper? Or Dr. J, Julius Irving, the former professional basketball player? And, of course, PhDs? JDs? What about them?" That is obviously tongue-in-cheek. That said, what an honor to be lumped in with Dr. J? Is there any reason we cannot all refer to ourselves as professional basketball players?
One commenter there noted "Have you ever known of a Ph.D. answer a call on a plane for a doctor? Seriously?" No, but I did see a random guy answer such a call once. It worked out fine because he had stayed in the right hotel the night before. There is also mention in this article regarding a psychologist filming a television show in California. Humorous or not? perhaps depends on perspective.
I know a fair few attorneys who teach at various colleges and universities. They are commonly referred to as "doctor." Contrary to President Whitaker's advice, this occurs. I strive to keep my students from referring to me that way, as well as discouraging "professor," and other such laudatory titles. I have found over the decades that the use of such terms does periodically inflame the emotions of the full-time faculty. My university identification says "instructor" and that is good enough for me. Some students lament that is an awkward title to use, and I encourage them to just use "mister," or "Dave," instead. I will answer to "hey you." I have had many titles over the years, and been called many things that are not fit to print here (yes, I hear you; no it doesn't bother me).
This topic returned to me when I read an interesting piece on Microsoft Network. It centers on an individual who is in an internal medicine residency, having finished medical school. He recounts a recent family gathering at which his cousins, "a chiropractor, and . . . . a nurse practitioner" held forth reminding him that they "were doctors too." This gentleman essentially told them those "aren't the same things as a physician at all." I found myself wondering if they were in California?
This apparently led to family discord and discussion. At least one family member agreed with the medical doctor and asked the cousins to stop using the title. That did not settle the issue. The cousin who is a nurse practitioner "uninvited" the M.D. gentleman from a "grand opening of her private practice." She reportedly "said she only wanted people who would cheer her on to attend." She might want to write a dissertation on something and get a Ph.D.?
Some might posit that a family member could be cheered on as an individual in general terms. Is the title one prefers a "make or break" in terms of cheering? ("You can only come to my grand opening if you call me 'Your Grace'; if you won't call me that, you are not cheering me on"). The original Reddit thread is interesting. Many took time to comment. One of the challenges with Reddit is the volume of responses and the difficulty in drawing a consensus. That said, there are a few comments there that are rather dismissive regarding the cousins.
The whole point of the discussion may be focused upon what one wishes to be called. Is there a degree of hubris involved in titles? Perhaps. Should you be proud of what you have achieved? Certainly. Is there some chance of culture playing a role? Apparently. Can the law provide us guidance? In California.
In July 2021, I penned You Can Call Me Dave. At the end of the day, there is no point in being dismissive or insulting to anyone. If you desire to advertise your juris doctor, check with the Bar. If you find yourself in an academic environment or a particular cultural environment and wish to be called "doctor," why not? Well, President Whitaker makes a reasonable case for why not, but one might disagree. The Medical Justice article makes for sound arguments to consider also. But, seriously, watch out for the author from Above the Law Blog though. You might get punched.
