MD/JD anyone?

BU Medical Sciences
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
beponychick

beponychick

SDN Angel
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2003
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,

I am very interested in pursuing a joint MD/JD degree. I am currently working in a NYC law firm on a medical product liability case and would really like to work on healthcare policy in the future. Is anyone else out there interested in this program, and if so, what are your reasons? Everyone always gives me funny looks after I mention that I am interested in both disciplines so it would be nice to talk to people who share the same interests.

Thanks a lot
🙂
Members don't see this ad.
 
hey,
I studied with a girl for the MCAT who wanted to get her JD/MD. I don't think people should give you funny looks!! 🙂
Anyway, I think people are usually turned off by it because it takes so long to complete, kind of like an MD PhD. Maybe you might have better luck posting in the section for MD/PhD candidates. They might have more to say over there. Good Luck!
 
I am interested in that for the same reasons as you are.

I am set to take the LSAT in June (before I matriculate) and I will be applying to law school this coming cycle. Here are some places with joint MD/JD programs:

UNC (I believe)
Duke
UMDNJ (or whatever the acronym is)
Yale
UPenn (MDJD options)
UVa (I have corresponded with both the law school and med school--and they said they would work "with you" to design a program--this is even easier now that Uva has an MPH degree which is kindof unofficial but you can get an MPH [starting this year] by taking classes across the graduate school of arts and sciences, law school and medical school).

Coops
 
Members don't see this ad :)
By the way:

Usually the hard spot for getting into these programs is the med school:

Duke, Penn, UMDNJ and UNC.

Yale is an entirely different story. Yale Law is a beast entirely of its own making. That is the weak point to the school. If you are lucky enough to get into Yale med do NOT assume you can get into Yale law. It requires higher stats than Harvard law to get in to with 1/3 the class size!

Coops
 
if you're interested in health policy, there are other - sometimes more pragmatic - options. I only bring this up because I know several people who have pursued the MD/JD for this reason and none of them decided to do both: it's always either medicine or law (out of the 3 I know, only one practices medicine) and any ambitions they had, for some reason or another, went out the door.

Some people interested in health policy pursue MBAs (some schools offer a health policy focus), masters in public policy, bioethics, or public health.
 
Hi Cooper,

So did you apply to all the schools you mentioned that have the dual MD/JD option? I actually graduated from UPenn this past May and took a course at Penn law school the last semester (Health Care Law). I have to admit that it was the best course that I have taken during all my undergrad years! So I definetly would like to pursue these interests further.

I did not apply to many dual degree schools. I have an interview at RWJ which is affiliated with Seton Hall Law School, and this is my number one choice. I also am planning on taking the June LSAT. 🙂

All the best...
 
I suspect the reason why some people are giving you funny looks is because doctors are often sued by MD/JD's. MD/JD's are sometimes found heading up insurance companies that profit by denying patients "experimental" medications and procedures. If you want to do the joint degree, more power to you, but I hope you will use it to advocate for doctors and patients and their interests instead of using it to make a buck over some tragic outcome.

This criticism is not directed specifically at you. You mentioned you were interested in health care policy. You will find a number of JD/MPH's in that field, I suspect. My friend is one. Its just a general apprehension of MD/JD's that I thought I would express in response to your post. Some of us feel that MD/JD's can't be trusted, and will want to know exactly what you plan to do with the degree, and whether you will be working on our behalf, or against us.
 
Health Policy is generally outside the realm of MPH's expertise. You can specialize in some sort of policy with MPH programs, but it is hardly the best option to pursue if you are interested in governmental or policy decision making.

MPH is more concerned with epidemiology and public health. Many go into family medicine or study the effects of disease on populations. Some are bioethicists, still others deal with some aspects of policy as you mentioned.

It's somewhat disheartening that so many physicians buy into the idea that its "us vs them" when it comes to lawyers of any kind. Lawyers have been vilified in nearly every aspect of society and now especially medicine.

Lawyers go into contract law, development and property law, divorce and criminal proceedings. A MINORITY of lawyers are actual trial lawyers, some above I have named. Don't forget, trial lawyers have defended our civili liberties for decades (ACLU).

Still a relatively small percentage of trial lawyers are personal injury attorneys. They probably deserve much of the rap they get. Within this are a smaller percentage who specialize in malpractice law. A few are MD.JDs, who can sue doctors, but are more frequently contracted by malpractice insurance companies and other lawyers as expert witnesses and consultants. The job of these physician-lawyers, is not to sue the pants off of doctors or cause them to close up shop, but rather see if a meritous claim is filed and a patient has really suffered damages at the hands of a negligent physician.

Since medicine is a field of compassion, meritorious claims should absolutely go forward, and patients should be able to collect in a fair way for damages sustained. You and the rest of the industry wouldn't want anything else. Bad doctors (and yes there are bad doctors) should not be able to run around with relative impunity hiding behind malpractice insurance.

The thing that has stalled malpractice reform is not so much democrats, but rather special interest of a subsection of trial lawyers. The law that almost went through the senate and did pass the house modeled on the MICRA ($250k cap in cali) law did not pass because it contained provisions to shield insurance companies, vaccine manufacturers, and others from lawsuits as well. It wasn't a simple provision just to shield physicians. Once again, this bill was a monumental battle of special interests and the trial lawyers did win round one.

Everyone agrees rising malpractice premiums are a problem, and everyone agrees something needs to be done to slow or stop this trend. Both GOP and Democrats believe this, the question is how do we get from point A to point B. Democrats, however, contend that high awards are not to blame for this. If they did concede that point, the legislation Bush proposed would not have been halted in the Senate ...

coops
 
I'm interested in getting a JD myself, although who knows if that will ever happen.🙄

But I'm an MD/MPH candidate right now, and my thinking is to practice for several years, and then pick up some legal training to add to my clinical/public health experience and move on to do healthcare policy and the like.

🙂
 
Right now I work at a governmental health policy research organization, so here are a few thoughts from my experiences to date.

MPH's are viable degrees for health policy work, but like Cooper said, other degrees like an MPP may be more fitting for strict policy work. MPP's tend to focus on analyzing public problems and enacting practical solutions and can be found working in many government agencies. I'm thinking of an MBA or an MPP myself for health policy work in the future.

Cooper, it's nice to think that physician-lawyers verify the merit of a malpractice claim and make their own judgment based on expertise in the two relevant fields. However, I question the extent to which that occurs in reality and hope you won't be disappointed in the future. There are doctors of all stripes, including ones who are simply self-interested.

Yes, rising malpractice premiums are a problem, but some studies have shown inconclusive evidence as to whether caps actually lead to lower premiums (CBO did one), so no one has really proven it in practice. The number of times a doctor has actually had to pay an enormous award is very, very small. The bigger problems are that premiums aren't linked to the quality of care a doctor provides, rather just their specialty, and that the trust in the doctor-patient relationship erodes in a lawsuit-happy environment.

Claims with merit should press forward so patients who have been wrongfully harmed can get their dues, but the IOM study on medical errors found that patients who had cause to take legal action for malpractice only did so less than 5% of the time. Many malpractice lawsuits are frivolous, and many potential ones with merit never happen.

Check out some of the alternatives being batted around: specialized health care courts that use court-appointed experts, local medical review panels that decide which claims have merit, and a worker's-compensation type system where many claims with merit that are the result of systemic errors (ie, not criminal neglect or intent by the doctor) are automatically awarded a set sum.
 
Periodic,

Good points. What you define in the last paragraph is usually called the "no fault" system. A law professor at U.Va. pioneered a form of this system that seems to be effective known as the early offer system.

Va has reformed some obstetrics tort with a no fault system in the Early 80s. As a result the Commonwealth enjoys, on average, 20% reductions on the average malpractice premiums nationally. We also have a $1.5 million total cap on all damages, economic and non.

Coops
 
I suppose that many suspect someone intent on an MD/JD of pursuing the degree for material reasons, rather than personal career fulfillment. It is possible to become a good doctor, or a good lawyer. The purpose of following both paths is a bit obscure, and it does not follow an altruistic theme. The three years you spend in law school could be spent becoming a much better doctor, or the four years in medical school could be spent training your legal mind.

Most JD's decide to pursue an MD after they have determined they are insufficiently qualified to attain their ambitions with a JD only. I won't comment on the aim of these ambitions, but I will suggest they are self-interested ones.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Having completed law school and the bar exam and practiced for a while, law school is a totally different animal than medical school. Your grade in a class is based on one exam..during the first year of law school where core subjects such as torts, real property, constitutional law sometimes you have 2 exams one in Dec a midterm and then a final in May that covers the entire year. Part of law school is tearing the students down mentally via the Socratic method. Medical school involves problem solving with lots of memorization. Law school is all about reasoning and not focusing on "the" answer. One's abilities to write and speak are crucial to success in law school and after graduation. I went to school with a surgeon who told me that the bar exam was extremely more difficult than the med boards. I do agree that MD/JDs usually focus on either law or medicine. Combining both careers can be difficult but not impossible.
 
I think technically MD/MPH can go into health policy, but it'll probably be more like doing health-services research and recommend policies to law-makers, those type of deals.

MD/MPH can't compare to MD/JD, obviously. Another thing you can consider (If you don't mind putting more time), is to get a MD first, and then later on go back to get a JD.

I know that some companies pay for employees to do MBA, and that may also be the case for some companies--paying some MD to pursue additional degrees such as JD. That way, you may end up saving money.
 
As to JDs pursuing Mds because they are self-interested and are not qualified enough to pursue their goals just with a JD is not entirely accurate. I suspect that people who believe this ..are young - right out of college - then med school and have no clue what the legal profession or the working real world is. Lawyers fight for social justice. People can pursue any degree they want. Lawyers who become doctors (and the other way around) can fight for patients and fight against HMOs and do extraordinary things. Knowledge is power.
 
Originally posted by JoeCoolMD
As to JDs pursuing Mds because they are self-interested and are not qualified enough to pursue their goals just with a JD is not entirely accurate. I suspect that people who believe this ..are young - right out of college - then med school and have no clue what the legal profession or the working real world is. Lawyers fight for social justice. People can pursue any degree they want. Lawyers who become doctors (and the other way around) can fight for patients and fight against HMOs and do extraordinary things. Knowledge is power.
Click to expand...

Well said. Many of our founding fathers were lawyers. Without a legal framework how could someone have constructed the constitution? I find it ironic that physicians to be, and I am one, are busy flaming those who want to pursue law in addition to medical work to be entirely self-seeking or out to destroy the medical establishment? Medicine is perceived to be a culture of megalomaniacs by many in the US, shouldn't we seek to erase that imagine rather than enhance it?

Shouldn't you be attacking MD/MBAs for the ills of managed care and profiteering?

Why don't we attack patients for bringing meritorious claims to lawyers and moving ahead with them?

Why don't we attack our own for being about 20 years behind in the airline industry with risk management and prevention?

Point being: attacking an entire group of physicians who seek to serve the US through a legal framework or even seek legal expertist to help, or change, the medical establishment in any number of ways is entirely unnecessary and unhelpful at best.

A healthy discussion requires that all sides acknowledge and seek diverse opinions rather than hinder them. It's simply poor leadership to dismiss the contributions of entire group of physicians.

Coops
 
Relax, JD/MD wannabes.

Maybe the reason why lawyers are so villified, not just by docs and med students, but by the general populace as well, is because of what we see them do.

Everytime some lawyer sues a doctor for everything he/she has off a technicality, or gets an obviously guilty person off a murder case, or decides to sue a fast food company with the sole reason of gettin' paid, it makes you think. Look at Johnnie Cochran, and lawyers like him. Its not a stretch to say that there are more money hungry, unscrupulous lawyers than there are doctors. And you can't dispute this fact.

If you want to improve the image of the law, do something GOOD for medicine, instead of ruining it from within.
 
"its not a stretch to say that there are more money hungry, unscrupulous lawyers than there are doctors. And you can't dispute this fact."

I would like to see this anecdotal evidence backed up by some proof. To argue that one can't dispute it requires first showing that it is true. And for the claim that people get both degrees for self-interested reasons, I call BS. I want to help docs that are currently getting screwed by the system. For too long medicine has simply taken a hands off approach to anything not directly related to patient care. Also, for me at least, to spend 6-7 years in school and hundreds of thousands of dollars on education would not be worth it, if only for "self interested" reasons.

Anyway, for Coops and the others, taking this road is a long and painful journey. As people have mentioned, you do not get a lot of support. Or you get stupid comments like, "you could sue yourself, or you could represent yourself in malpractice claims". As if I haven't heard that thousands of times by now.

I am in my first year of law school. Last summer I finished up the 2nd year of med school and took Step 1. I am actually at a different law school than I was for med school. While there are drawbacks to doing it this way, it allows you to go the best med school and the best law school that you can get in to. Law and med schools are certainly evaluating their applicants on much different criteria. I would be happy to answer questions you may have. Good luck with the LSAT. It is not the beast the MCAT is. I mean, you are done by lunchtime, how nice is that?
 
Japhy,

Where are you going to law school? to med school?

I thought you leave for law school usually after year three, so if you left campus after year 2 ... you are going to Duke med?

Thanks for the support,
coops
 
Yes I agree lawyers have an awful reputation in this country.
Guilty people walk free. Doctors commit negligence and still practice. Judges take bribes. HUman nature is what it is. Tort reform is essential, but it is not going to happen anytime soon. If you were accused of negligence but there was no negligence, would you NOT want a lawyer to be an advocate for you. If I ever get the chance to attend medical school, it is not to crucify medical doctors and the profession. People look and say things cannot be done or change. I look and say why not?
 
Originally posted by JoeCoolMD
Yes I agree lawyers have an awful reputation in this country.
Guilty people walk free. Doctors commit negligence and still practice. Judges take bribes. HUman nature is what it is. Tort reform is essential, but it is not going to happen anytime soon. If you were accused of negligence but there was no negligence, would you NOT want a lawyer to be an advocate for you. If I ever get the chance to attend medical school, it is not to crucify medical doctors and the profession. People look and say things cannot be done or change. I look and say why not?
Click to expand...

To the naysayers:
bootyshake.gif


😎
 
Originally posted by JoeCoolMD
Yes I agree lawyers have an awful reputation in this country.
Click to expand...

The "lawyer" stereotype sorta reminds me of the "ER Doctor" stereotype. Some people that I know always associate physicians with people who handle trauma and blood on a daily basis. Of course some do do those kinds of stuff, many others go on to practice in other areas, do clinical researches, involve in health education/prevention, etc.
 
Originally posted by JoeCoolMD
Yes I agree lawyers have an awful reputation in this country.
Click to expand...

There's an old joke: 99% of lawyers ruin the reputation for the other 1%.

I too am a lawyer, and will be a doctor in 3 more months. I can tell you one reason lawyers have a bad reputation is that the nature of legal ethics often makes lawyers do distasteful jobs. Someone has to represent the serial killers in court. Lawyers have a very strict code of ethics which is taken quite seriously. This contrast to medical ethics which are "law" in the same way.

I must say, however, that I believe one of the biggest problems in our society is that the lawyers are ethically bound to do what's in their client's best interest not society's. Our legal system has become a tax on every aspect of our lives. Of course it boosts insurance rates but it also raises the costs of every product we purchase. I'm talking about more than just liability. Business deals that used to be done with 10-20 lawyer hours now are done with 100 times that. Who pays for that? We all do.


Forgive my rant. With regard to comparing the Bar and the USMLE, it hard to do because the Bar truely is a pass fail test. I think the Bar exam is much more grueling to take. The studying is about the same. You study more for the bar, but its more interesting that most of the stuff on the USMLE.

Ed
 
I am a J.D., and graduated law school one week before starting my post-bacc pre-med classes. I hated law, and will never practice. I'm almost done with my post-bacc, and will apply to med schools in June.

Although I'll have the J.D. degree, I never plan to use it. I was disgusted with law and law school and never want to associate myself with lawyers and/or the legal profession.
 
Originally posted by Tofurkey
I am a J.D., and graduated law school one week before starting my post-bacc pre-med classes. I hated law, and will never practice. I'm almost done with my post-bacc, and will apply to med schools in June.

Although I'll have the J.D. degree, I never plan to use it. I was disgusted with law and law school and never want to associate myself with lawyers and/or the legal profession.
Click to expand...

wow...bitterness...care to elaborate and explain why you feel that way?
 
Originally posted by UCSBPre-Med1
Relax, JD/MD wannabes.

Everytime some lawyer sues a doctor for everything he/she has off a technicality, or gets an obviously guilty person off a murder case, or decides to sue a fast food company with the sole reason of gettin' paid, it makes you think. Look at Johnnie Cochran, and lawyers like him. Its not a stretch to say that there are more money hungry, unscrupulous lawyers than there are doctors. And you can't dispute this fact.
Click to expand...

This statement is absolutely ridiculous. For every so-called unscrupulous lawyer who "sues a doctor for everything he/she has off a technicality," there is another lawyer representing the doctor. For every lawyer who tried to get an "obviously gulity" person off a merder case, there is a lawyer who is trying to prosecute that person.
 
I considered it, especially since my boyfriend in currently pursuing a JD degree. Then I realized I'm not a masochist.
 
I think MD/JDs are gaining in popularity, especially because of the malpractice situation. If you are interested in MD/JD, there are a lot of prestigious law firms (such as Arnold and Porter) that will hire you to do science/healthcare law. I went on the website for Arnold and Porter and I couldn't believe the number of degrees people had. Some people had a bachelors, a PhD and then a law degree and others had MD/JD and they are working in pharmaceutical/patent law where they could use both their MD and JD.
 
Originally posted by LilyMD
This statement is absolutely ridiculous. For every so-called unscrupulous lawyer who "sues a doctor for everything he/she has off a technicality," there is another lawyer representing the doctor. For every lawyer who tried to get an "obviously gulity" person off a merder case, there is a lawyer who is trying to prosecute that person.
Click to expand...

How is it ridiculous? Say what you want, but more doctors (percentage wise) are doing better things for society than that same percentage of lawyers. Law can be a very unethical profession, and there are definately aspects of medicine like this as well, but just as what was said above, the structure of law has the lawyer looking out for the interests of his clients, not necessarily society as a whole. Medicine looks out for the patient, *and* societal well-being as a whole. The two are not mutually exclusive in medicine.

I'm glad you want to be lawyers, but I'll never trust the profession, and a lot of other docs feel the same way, regardless of how you try to paint such a good picture of it. The fact is, that your non-lawyer peers probably hate your guts, and that is a fact of your profession.
 
I wasn't make any kind of encompassing conclusion such as lawyers do more for society than doctors. I was simply pointing out the fact that for every lawyer suing a doctor for amputating the wrong foot of a patient and other medical mistakes, there is a lawyer representing that doctor. I haven't seen any doctors heading to court pro se. That's how that statement is ridiculous. It assumes that all medical malpractice involving plaintiff work, when you know full well that there is also defense work.

I agree with you that the law has many ugly sides - and I would prefer to be on the side of doctors. Although I have to say that I find it really obnoxious, this kind of "we are God" attitude I get from some doctors - as if you are above it, the rest of the world is accountable but you're not. Anyhow, doctors like you will only perpetuate this bad rap that the profession get. And your pompous ass is the reason why patients and lawyers will continue to sue doctors, bc you don't believe you owe them anything. Look the fact is, that if you amputate the wrong foot or give someone a transplant with the wrong donor blood, someone has to pay. Or do you think the family should just go home and be satisfied with the explanation of "complications"? I doubt you would feel the same way if it was your mother or father and they were the main breadwinner of the family. Granted, the current system is not working, but I don't think immunity is the answer. And unfortunately for you, I don't think the public or the legislatures agree with you either.
 
"Medicine looks out for the patient, *and* societal well-being as a whole"

Once you get to spend your days in the hospital you will realize this is not as true as you think it is. Honestly, I love how idealistic every pre-med is about medicine. Premeds truly hold docs up on a pedestal. And most of that is deserved. But once you see the day to day workings of a hopsital or clinic, you quickly realize that the patient does not always come first and medicine is not always looking out for the patient.

I understand where the hatred of lawyers coome from. Protecting the interest of your client can run counter to protecting the interests of society. All I am arguing is that medicine is not the pure humanitarian profession so many pre-meds make it out to be.
 
Hi Japhy,

I am just wondering what your reasons are for pursuing both an MD and JD. What do you eventually see yourself doing with both degrees? Will you practice medicine or law, or do both? Just curious what your plans are since at this point you have a taste of both law and medicine...

Thanks 🙂
 
beponychick,

At this point in my journey I plan on practicing medicine. I want to use my law degree to get involved in national health care policy issues. I could also see getting into hospital administration later in my career.

A JD would be helpful when consulting, or other such work. Of course there is always the option of teaching, either at med or law school.

So, to answer your question I do not really know how I will end up using both degrees. I am pretty sure there will be plenty of options.
 
I am also interested in getting both MD and JD degrees. I applied to schools with joint programs this year (Case Western, Duke, Vanderbilt, UPenn, Yale, UMich, Harvard--some of these programs are less formal than others). I did not end up getting into any of these medical schools, so the whole "joint" thing is not working out.

I plan to go to medical school for two years then take a three-year leave-of-absence to get the law degree. If I don't do it then, I don't see when I could ever do it (between med school and residency? after my residency, when I am finally ready to enter the workforce?)

I hope to go into international healthcare development and health policy work, primarily working in the realm of medicine but using my knowledge of law to improve the quality of my work.

There definitely are an increasing number of people pursuing this unique educational route. I met several at Duke and at Case Western. One of the deans at Case Law School warned against trying to somehow navigate your professional life between the two fields--that really is not a feasible goal. Instead, you need to find a way for your experience in one field to assist you in your practice in the other field.
 
I could see myself more readily as faculty at Virginia Law than Virginia Med. I know the feeling of conflict in the decision here...

CCW
 
Hi Guys,

I also thought about pursuing a JD/MD degree, but I don't think I'd apply to joint-degree programs. For me, I'd probably finish one program first and then move on to the next. Have any of you thought about this?

My reasoning is the type of law program I'd be able to get into would be much better than the medical school I'd be accepted to. Although my GPA is pretty high, my science GPA is 0.4 lower than my overall, which I think will hurt me in the application process (I'm a non-science major). Also, my LSAT is also very high (99th percentile), but I sure as heck don't have that kinda MCAT score.

I think for some people, if they truly excel in one application process more than another, they shouldn't sell themselves short by "dumbing-down" to the lower of the two - since you need to be accepted by both programs at the same school. For me, I'm hoping for an ivy league law school acceptance, but I'll go to pretty much any US medical school happily. Any thoughts?
 
Originally posted by AspiringDoctor9

My reasoning is the type of law program I'd be able to get into would be much better than the medical school I'd be accepted to.
Click to expand...

I was in pretty much the same situation you are in. I have been accepted to Duke, Michigan and Case Western law schools (all ones with joint programs) and am waiting for news on other schools (which I applied to later, when I realized how rough the med school application side was).

I am definitely going to begin medical school next year and then take the time off for law school (basically the arrangement joint degree programs have, but I'll spend 3 years in law school instead of just two). The only way I could see doing one and then the other is if you do law first. If you wait until after medical school then what do you do about your residency? You'll have three years away from the clinics when you start your residency. If you wait until after your residency, well, in my thinking by then you would be antsy to get into the real world of medicine.

At this point, I am anxious to start medical school, and more specifically to get the first two years done with (I am not excited about two years of hardcore basic sciences). I know I will forget some med stuff while I am in law school, so the transition back will be tough, but I'll be transitioning back into the part I expect to love the most--the clinicals.

I may very well end up "sacrificing" some law school prestige in order to make this all work. My pre-law advisor recommended going to UCLA law over any other program, mostly because it is a great program that is close to where I will be going to med school (USC). Obviously, it is lower-ranked than other schools I have gotten into, but it is still a good program, and it would be geographically (and financially) convenient for me. When we are out in the real world trying to put the MD/JD education to use, the prestige of the law school is really not going to make a huge difference anyway.
 
UF offers an MD/JD program too:

UNC (I believe)
Duke
UMDNJ (or whatever the acronym is)
Yale
UPenn (MDJD options)
UVa (I have corresponded with both the law school and med school--and they said they would work "with you" to design a program--this is even easier now that Uva has an MPH degree which is kindof unofficial but you can get an MPH [starting this year] by taking classes across the graduate school of arts and sciences, law school and medical school).
UF
 
There are some people who take a break from med school after the second year and go to law school before returning to med school to finish up. I am not in favor of this unless that place is Duke, because by the end of year 2, you are done with all of the required clerkships and basic science years (actually 1 year, Aug-July).

I think the preferred method is to go through med school and complete your required clerkships before matriculating in law school, whether that be at a separate law school where there is no program with the med school (med schools are really good about letting you leave without defaulting on loans, etc) or an official program that exists between the two schools. The reason being:

If you go to law school after basic science, spend three years and come back, you are going to be rusty for the clerkships, on the science, and this is NOT the year you want to fool around in med school--THE most important year bar none. This is where the bulk of that Dean's letter comes from.

If you go to law school after med school, you won't be able to practice medicine without your residency, and this may hurt your MD/JD education. Sure you have a medical education, but firms may be uneasy about hiring a physician who is unlicensed for either consulting work, etc. You could go to law school after residency, but financially this is a horrible idea. You also would lose am immense amount of clinical skills. This is certainly the least preferred method.

If you go to law school first, you will go to med school after that and after residency, you will have spent such a long time away from law ... well ... what's the point on going to law school and taking an 8-9 year reprieve from law (med school + residency) before actually using both degrees.

Most joint degree programs recommend completing the first three years (or 2.5 or 2 at Duke) of school, or however many it takes to finish your required clerkships before taking a leave of absence and enrolling in law school. I imagine the same holds true for those pursuing MBAs, etc.

I guess the prestige of the institution (if you have to 'dumbdown' or what not one school or the next) depends on which you want to focus on more. If you want to practice medicine in some form, it might be better to go to that great med school and the state law school if finances are a problem, and vice versa for wanting to focus on practicing law.

CCW
 
If public policy is what you want do an MPP. Try the Kennedy School, the Wilson School, NYU Wagner, JHU Bloomberg, Syracuse Maxwell, CMU Heinz or the UC Goldman School.
 
Originally posted by Cooper_Wriston
If you go to law school after basic science, spend three years and come back, you are going to be rusty for the clerkships, on the science, and this is NOT the year you want to fool around in med school--THE most important year bar none. This is where the bulk of that Dean's letter comes from.

If you go to law school after med school, you won't be able to practice medicine without your residency, and this may hurt your MD/JD education. Sure you have a medical education, but firms may be uneasy about hiring a physician who is unlicensed for either consulting work, etc. You could go to law school after residency, but financially this is a horrible idea. You also would lose am immense amount of clinical skills. This is certainly the least preferred method.

If you go to law school first, you will go to med school after that and after residency, you will have spent such a long time away from law ... well ... what's the point on going to law school and taking an 8-9 year reprieve from law (med school + residency) before actually using both degrees.
CCW
Click to expand...

I think you're right about the problems facing MD-JD's...the real problem is that whatever way you cut it, while you can obtain an education in both, you will rarely be an expert or knowledgeable in both areas. However, I disagree that there is a sequence or ordering of the educations that will avoid it, as you say:

Originally posted by Cooper_Wriston
I think the preferred method is to go through med school and complete your required clerkships before matriculating in law school...CCW
Click to expand...

The point is that for both MD's and JD's individuallly it is not enough to have the degree alone. Law school does not really prepare you for the practice of law and I've heard the same about medical school. Even if it did, it is widely understood that the most sought after doctors and lawyers are those with the moest experience. If you get your law degree after or before residency, you still have practiced much medicine. While you attended medical school and can place M.D. after your name, you will not be considered an expert in area of medicine. If you attend medical school after law school, you will not be considered knowledgeable in the area of health law, litigation or anything if you have not practiced for more than 5 years...The fact that you have a JD and MD will not put you on any academic track or in Congressional hearings if you have not done any research, published any papers/studies/reports, or had any practical experience in the area.

If you want to practice health care law, go to law school, take health care classes, work in a health care law firm during your summers and thereafter. If you want to teach health care law do the same...if you want to do focus on health care improvement or bioethics within the realm of practicing medicine, go to medical school, practice medicine, serve on boards, write papers, do presentations, etc.
 
There is a common myth that a MD/JD is a useless combination and you should just get one or the other depending on your tastes.

I think the argument here has some foundation, but I just don't buy into it.

There is a website entitled "MD/JD: Don't do it" and is a common citation by internet gurus against those who want to pursue this path. However, there are numerous websites advocating both degrees as well. In fact, there is a professor at Columbia Law School my friend has had a class with who is an MD/JD and he specializes in health law.

CCW
 
Originally posted by Cooper_Wriston
In fact, there is a professor at Columbia Law School my friend has had a class with who is an MD/JD and he specializes in health law.

CCW [/B]
Click to expand...

I had a class with this JD/MD proff at Columnia Law School. Can't remember what it was though. Proof, by the way, that at least there is a job for people with both degrees.

I'll be an MD/JD as well (have the JD already and start med in the fall).

I've been on these forums for about six months now and have rarely seen a generally more unhealthy attitude among one group about another. The degree to which young MD's (you do NOT see this sort of thing amoung more mature MD's) villify attorneys is really sometimes breathtaking. For some inexplicable reason one line of attack almost always rears its head in these threads - that MD's are somehow more altruistic, caring, and important to society as a whole than JD's, and therefore their very existence has some greater existential value. Aside from the fact that this is patently untrue on its face, I find the propensity of young MD's to advance this argument curious. It seems kinda defensive in and of itself. It's never in response to a similar accusation by an attorney, it doesn't help explain why insurance premiums are so high, it just seems like a kind of ad hoc "well, who cares what you say. . .at least I'm better than you are" invective - exactly the kind of thing an eight year old might say on the playground. I've never understood it.

I agree with the poster above who said that a lot of premeds and med students look at the altruism of medical doctors through rose-colored glasses. One only has to have lived in the "real world" for a few years (whether among doctors or otherwise) to realize that NO profession corners the market on altruism or greed, as the case may be. Having spent four months shadowing young doctors (interns and residents), they behaved among themselves and towards their patients EXACTLY like one would expect any other 26 year-old to behave. Sometimes cruel, sometimes childish, sometimes greedy, sometimes tired and sometimes utterly impoverished of empathy. Sometimes great. It depends on the person.

I've determined for myself that the incidence of doctors who could give two ****s about the well-being of thier patients is EXACTLY the same as the incidence of attorneys who could give two ****s about thier client. There are plenty of bad actors on both sides.

Judd
 
Originally posted by juddson
I've determined for myself that the incidence of doctors who could give two ****s about the well-being of thier patients is EXACTLY the same as the incidence of attorneys who could give two ****s about thier client. There are plenty of bad actors on both sides.

Judd
Click to expand...

Very eloquent argument. IMO, the truth resides somewhere between the idea that physicians do not own altruism altogether and your above statement, but probably closer to your above statement. Thats my .02.

Judd, where are you enrolling in med school in the fall and what made you decided to go to med school? Do you hope to add an element of law to your practice or is the MD to supplement the JD or are you switching careers altogether?

CCW
 
the prof at columbia is bill sage. brilliant guy. very informative and knowledgable.

juddson, good luck with med school. the atmosphere is so much friendlier than law school. and i hope that you find it more interesting.
 
Originally posted by Cooper_Wriston
There is a common myth that a MD/JD is a useless combination and you should just get one or the other depending on your tastes.

I think the argument here has some foundation, but I just don't buy into it.

There is a website entitled "MD/JD: Don't do it" and is a common citation by internet gurus against those who want to pursue this path. However, there are numerous websites advocating both degrees as well. In fact, there is a professor at Columbia Law School my friend has had a class with who is an MD/JD and he specializes in health law.

CCW
Click to expand...

I don't think it's myth at all. I intend to be an MD/JD, although I would have never set out to do so. In law school, there were 4 MD's in my class. I'm not saying they don't exist. I'm not saying they don't get jobs. The professor at Columbia with a MD/JD who teaches Health Care proves it. However, the JD who teaches Health Care Law and/or Bioethics Law in every other law school (with only a JD and no MD) proves that you don't need an MD to get there. I'm just saying that the jobs they get, they could've gotten with just one degree and area of expertise that intersects with law/medicine. Additionally, I think it's very hard to practice both. There are exceptions and I think they most apply when the person has been out of school in practicing in one area for many years - 15 years for example - then went to law school, and found a way to work part-time in both areas. However, very hard to do as a dual degree graduate or even 5 years out.
 
Originally posted by japhy
the prof at columbia is bill sage. brilliant guy. very informative and knowledgable.

juddson, good luck with med school. the atmosphere is so much friendlier than law school. and i hope that you find it more interesting.
Click to expand...

yes, that's right, Bill Sage. I remember now. Christ, I can't recall what class he taught though.


In any event, I don't subscribe to some of the unhappiness expressed in thread regarding law and the law school experience. I enjoyed law school a hell of a lot, and found it extremely interesting. As ed madison said, I'm sure the Bar was more interesting than the USMLE's are going to be.

Judd
 
Japhy,

How did you know the name of the proff at Columbia?

Judd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
  • Poll Poll
Pursuing JD, then MD?
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
Med Ed
Med Ed
toastedbutter
MD/JD Help
Replies
14
Views
1K
Obnoxious Dad
Obnoxious Dad
medicaljumbogumbo
2025: MD medical student AMA!
Replies
3
Views
583
medicaljumbogumbo
medicaljumbogumbo
S
WAMC 3.27, JD, Military
Replies
3
Views
605
LunaOri
LunaOri
electricalspray
Reapplying after turning down MD acceptance
Replies
5
Views
2K
watchMedoiit
watchMedoiit
Top