Talk:Doctor of Law

why this change to "Doctor of Law" and the redirect from "Doctor of Laws"

The JSD/SJD should not be included herein as this degree is not translated by any academic institution anywhere or any dictionary as "Doctor of Law" or "Doctor of Laws". It is the science of law that is studied for research. In medicine, for example, the research degree is less confusing because it is labeled a PhD, but such PhD is never called "Doctor of Medicine". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.242.28 (talk) 02:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is already an article about "Doctor of Laws," or LL.D. This article is about all the degrees that are called "Doctor of Law," or "Doctor of Laws." The reason why both "Doctor of Law" and "Doctor of Laws" is in the same article, is that in some jurisdiction there is some inconsistencies in application of the term, and they are sometimes used interchangeably (such as in the United States before 1960, as evidenced in Eells, W. et al. Academic Degrees: Earned and Honorary Degrees Conferred by Institutions of Higher Education in the United States. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington D.C. 1960. on page 159 and others). Zoticogrillo (talk) 22:34, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This action only adds to the confusion by commingling a page for "Doctor of Law" and "Doctor of Laws." There is already a page for the Juris Doctor degree. And, there is no need for a page on the LL.D. There is no need to confuse the matter any further and lead one to believe that there is any substantive similarity between the two degrees. This is a drastic change to the “Doctor of Laws” page. No other entry-level law degree is included in any of descriptions for the other countries since this page is about the highest-level law degrees (PhD equivalents). The page should revert to its original form. The LL.D. page should likewise be removed. If you look at the very fine training matrix someone added to the page, we now end up with an anomaly whereby one goes from a J.D. to the LL.M., and then to Doctor of Laws, which includes the J.D. Somehow, we need to properly depict the J.D. as the entry-level professional training degree in law (albeit with the word doctor in it), which should not be confused with the Doctor of Laws. Mv-22 (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

previous discussion on "Doctor of Laws"

Please see previous discussion on this article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Doctor_of_Laws I will fix this oddity later. Zoticogrillo (talk) 22:35, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Practical or not-I have never meet an S.J.D. or even heard of one practicing! As such they are so rare it is preposterous to even equate them to Doctors of Law. Indeed, it is very difficult for most to get into LLM program much less get into one of these S.J.D programs ( which requires a prequisite LLM!).

These SJD degrees are being used systematically around the world to cheapen the acomplishment and degree of work necessary to obtaion the Juris Doctorate-the real and only recognized Doctor of Laws! And by cheapen I mean professionally,economically and Academically!!

Indeeed, it is not understood that not only one out of 20 Law Schools offer this program ( I believe 22) but that the attendance is so minimal that as one can see-many if not most attendants are from other countries whose attendance is mandated and paid for by that country!

There are very few and I would say none of the actual participants of American Law on daily basis who attend

these programs, need these programs or have the time or resources to attend. Despite the Severely small amount of these students for S.J.D. and their Negative impact on American Law and Practice, these S.J.D. programs negatively exist and aversely affect Juris Doctorates Globally as their worth are diminished by the misperceived conceptions that degree holders of SJD are numerous and effective in America practice of Law when in affect their numbers do NOT even compare to the actual numbers and holders of the typical PhD degress!

It is absurd to compare PhD to SJD as PhD Programs and Participants exist in sugnificant numbers throught America and practice while SJDs do not!

These SJD students and holders of such degrees are merely victims of those Law Schools greedy enought to attempt to increase their revenue and reputation artificially and do not care if the hurt their prior graduates and holders of Normal Juris Doctorates in their battle of market and wits for a Rare-never used Degree in America!

Indeed, In Asia for example has sent a few students to University just solely to reduce the pay of the normal Juris Doctorates. Congratulations to all the foreign attendees-how many 80 o/o?

Next Time take the S.J.D. course on line where it belongs!! By jeffrey

The SJD does not compete with the JD. One needs the JD first to practice law. For those lawyers who wish to take graduate study in law, they do so through the LLM and then the SJD/JSD. Not everyone desires to pursue graduate study for so many years. Just ask any PhD or SJD. It isn’t easy. But there are many advantages to US academics who hold the SJD. This degree makes them eligible for more legal scientific-based grants and to be on par with their colleagues in other countries. Hardly any country in the world, except the United States, allows lawyers to teach law in law schools without a master’s degree and a research doctorate after their first level law degree. That is why many students come to the US for their law doctorates (research). Just take Harvard Law School for example. First, it lists its “graduate program” as having only two degrees: LL.M. and SJD. As for the SJD it says, “The Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.) is Harvard Law School's most advanced law degree, designed for aspiring legal academics who wish to pursue sustained independent study, research and writing. In recent years we have created a vibrant intellectual community of young scholars from around the world, most of whom will secure teaching positions in their home countries, the U.S., or third countries. We currently have over 70 S.J.D. candidates overall (some 50 in residence) representing more than 30 countries, drawn primarily from among Harvard's top LL.M. graduates. Ultimately, candidates are expected to produce a dissertation that will constitute a substantial and valuable contribution to legal scholarship. Next it describes the are five stages to the S.J.D. program:

• Completion of a study plan which includes course work • Successful completion of an oral examination • Two presentations at the S.J.D. Colloquium • Submission and acceptance of a doctoral dissertation • Successful oral defense of the dissertation

The first two of these requirements—preparation and completion of a study plan, and successful completion of the oral (general) examination—are normally completed during the first year of study. The S.J.D. candidate normally completes the remaining requirements—presentations at the S.J.D. colloquium, submission and acceptance of the dissertation, and oral defense of the dissertation—during the 36-month period following completion of the oral examination. Each S.J.D. candidate pursues the degree under the supervision of an overall faculty supervisor selected by the candidate and approved by the Committee on Graduate Studies. Normally this supervisor must be a full-time member of the Harvard Law School faculty.

Now that doesn’t sound like an online program to me. And how an LL.M. and a SJD from Harvard cheapens their JD, I don’t know. Actually, in many cases those who get their law degrees from Tier 2, 3, & 4 law schools often try to raise their credentials by obtaining a graduate law degree from a Tier 1 school (if they can get in!) Any lawyer who desires to work the docket should not pursue such advanced degrees. It would be a pure waste of money. It would be like an MD in a general practice pursuing a PHD in medicine. Requem001 (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

The University of Chicago Law School, Emory University Law School, Fordham University Law School, Washington University Law School, etc., all graduate JD students with the degree, "Doctor of Law", which is simply the Latin to English Translation of Juris to Law and Doctor (teacher) is same. Doctor of Law. How can this be an argument? I do not know of one law school that has ever, at any time, graduated a JSD/SJD with the title Doctor of Law. It is "Doctor of Juridical Science" but not Doctor of Law which, like the Doctor of Medicine (MD), is designed for the professional doctorate and not the research doctorate. Could all of the above-referenced law schools and others (simply go to these law school websites for explanation) be incorrect? Could Black's Law Dictionary be incorrect? How about Harvard University that translates the Juris Doctor the same as Black's, as "Doctor of Law.' The Harvard website reference is:http://www.law.harvard.edu/academics/registrar/commencement/jd-diploma-translation.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.209.6.176 (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The JSD from Harvard is translated to English by Harvard as Doctor of Juridical Science. See Harvard's website: http://www.law.harvard.edu/academics/registrar/commencement/sjd-diploma-translation.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.209.6.176 (talk) 02:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Black's law dictionary and any Latin dictionary will tell you that Juris Doctor translates in English to Doctor of Law. There are Wiki contributors who wish to ignore this reality. In fact, the University of Chicago's JD (and true with some other law schools) reads the English translation: "DOCTOR OF LAW" on the diploma. Note this is not for its Juridical Science degree which reads "Juridical Science". Some Wiki contributors want to cheapen the law degree by calling the professional doctorate not a doctorate. That is silly and it would mean that an MD is not a doctor because it also is a professional as opposed to a research (sometimes called academic) doctorate. Problem...can't deny the dictionary can you!!!

Doctor of Juridical Science and Doctor of law both refer to the same topic: both are sometimes referred to as "Doctor of law," both are used (in some country or another) as a terminal/academic/research degree in the field of law, both vary from country to county, and both are confusing similar to the JD here in the US. I realize there is a difference between a JSD and a "Doctor of Laws," but I believe that the difference can be flushed out in a single article. As currently written, both articles are referring to the same topic--the lead sentence of Doctor of law links to JSD, and the first sentence of Doctor of Juridical Science says it is "sometimes also referred to as a Doctor of Laws" (linking back to Doctor of law). Also, the United States subsection in both articles is nearly identical. Stephen (talk) 04:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are a wide variety of legal and educational systems in the world, only some of which incorporate, or indeed could accommodate, a JSD degree. The JSD degree is only one of a type of a degree. The term, "Doctor of Law," or "Doctor of Laws" has over time and in different countries been used to refer to different degrees (including research, professional and honorary degrees). Although it would be convenient if all systems were identical, and used the same hierarchy and terminology in their degrees, that's simply not the case, and therefore the wiki articles must be open enough to accurately describe these differences in use of the term. Zoticogrillo (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't notice that someone had tried to change the subject of this article by replacing some of the terms in the introduction of the article. I changed it back to clarify the subject/scope of the article. Zoticogrillo (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose such a merger. The S.J.D. stands for "Scientiae Juridicae Doctor" (Doctor of Juridical Science) not Juris Doctor (Doctor of Law). They are not the same degree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.205.242 (talk) 08:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, oppose such a merger. The distinction between a S.J.D./J.S.D. and a J.D. is great, and merging the articles would provide further confusion. A Doctor of Juridical Science degree takes longer years of study (than a J.D.), requires, in most cases, a prerequisite LL.M. degree, and is an academic degree (as opposed to a professional degree that is the J.D.).Clygeric (talk) 19:29, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, I am not nearly so worked up over the proposal one way or another. I would see them merged because juridical science reeks of sloppy translation, and the juxtaposition will either legitimize it or expose it as a too-close translation of words (rather than the concepts they represent). Even Latin and Greek stand exposed to the occasional bad translation. My economic stake in the outcome is that the clearer the matter, the more confidently professional translators can proceed with choices liable to affect some individual's right to work at gainful employment. Krazy Kat observed (during WWI) that language allows us to misunderstand one another. In a marketplace of concepts and ideas, allowing free and open comparison shopping makes more sense than barricading fiefdoms behind hermetically-sealed barriers of separatist obscurantism.translator (talk) 02:26, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The articles should not be merged. The two degrees are unrelated and distinct. True they sound the same and are both degrees awarded by universities, but the similarities stop there. The argument for integration is grounded in those two superficial and trivial similarities.

The terminal academic degree for jurisprudence is the scientiae juridicae doctor which translates into English as Doctor of Jurisprudence or Doctor of Juridicial Science. The Doctor of Juridicial Science is not a mistranslation; it is correct. The Doctor of Laws or Legum Doctor is an honorary degree conferred at the will of a university. The Doctor of Juridicial of Science is an earned research degree that takes approximately four to six semesters of graduate level study at a law school to earn AFTER earning a Juris Doctor and Master of Laws. By the logic of this proposal, the articles on a Doctor of Laws could be merged with any degree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juststop205 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, I also agree that Juris Doctor is distinct from Doctor of law and Doctor of Juridical Science. Juris Doctor looks fine, but Doctor of law and Doctor of Juridical Science both need serious work. They have improved a bit over the past few months, but the Argentina subsections in both are still nearly identical, and there is conflicting info between the two articles. Since there seems to be strong opposition, the best approach will just be to clean up and clarify the differences. Stephen (talk) 05:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I support the merger, a J.S.D. and a LL.D are both doctorates of law, and there would be tonnes of overlap between the topics. As per the people above, J.D. should have its own article given that it is a first professional degree and not a doctorate. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 00:58, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor of law is too generic of a term. The official title of this degree is the title of this article. Zoticogrillo (talk) 20:54, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion has been inactive for more than a year, therefore I will assume it is closed, and will remove the proposal from the article page. Zoticogrillo (talk) 20:54, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why Doctor of law, not Law

All the other Doctor of Subject articles have a capitalized Subject. Even within this article, the only place that Doctor of law appears is in the name of the article – it is Doctor of Law everywhere else. Is there a reason this page name should be inconsistent with both internal and external usage? If not, is there any objection to a move (with a redirect, of course)? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Doctor of law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:24, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Doctor of law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:25, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Doctor of Law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110620002834/http://www.globecampus.ca/in-the-news/globecampusreport/why-change-to-a-jd-degree to http://www.globecampus.ca/in-the-news/globecampusreport/why-change-to-a-jd-degree/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.law.gwu.edu/ACADEMICS/DEGREES/Pages/sjd.aspx
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/ContactGraduateProgramsOffice.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:06, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]