The widespread interest evidenced in the matter of "doctorates," and the use and abuse of degrees, is reflected even in the comments of the staid "Journal of the American Medical Association," of December 22, 1945. Inasmuch as there is considerable current discussion in our worker ranks, our institutions, and our journals otter this matter, we felt that our MINISTRY readers would be glad to have this editorial in its entirety for the viewpoint expressed and the light it sheds on the entire question. It is reprinted here by permission of the "Journal of the American Medical Association."--Editors.
The Term "Doctor" in America
D. Edward M. Repp of Philadelphia has a question for the medical Emily Post. His daily work requires occasional conferences with his druggist and also with the head of a laboratory who examines specimens. Should he address these associates as doctor or mister? In the neighbor hood where he resides are also an osteopath, a chiropractor, and a chiropodist. These, too, he meets occasionally while en route on his medical tasks; he never knows whether to say "doctor" or something different.
A similar question disturbed Hugh J. McDonald,* who discussed the subject not long ago in the Journal of Higher Education. A survey of the graduate degrees awarded by the colleges and schools of New York State during 1937 re veals thirteen types of doctors' degrees awarded during the year. The term "doctor," originally the equivalent of teacher or instructor, according to McDonald, seems to have originated among the Romans, who applied it to anyone who delivered public lectures or addresses on philosophic subjects. Later in the twelfth century the term was a title of honor borne by men of learning. It was first made an academic title at the University of Bologna in Italy, which received from the emperor the right of appointing doctores legum (doc tors of laws). The University of Paris followed in 1145. Then the popes granted the universities the right of appointing doctores canonum et de cretalium (teachers of the canon law). Eventually the study of civil law was combined with 'canon law, and the title was changed to doctor utriusgue juris (teacher of both laws). The faculties of theology and medicine followed in confer ring the title, but it had been in use for two and a half centuries in other fields before it was conferred in medicine.
The degree of doctor is now conferred in so many areas of learning that the result is'confusion. McDonald feels that the conferring of the doctoral degree is in need of a thorough house cleaning. The degree of doctor of philosophy (Ph.D.) is 0-ranted for three years of full-time study and examination and the preparation of a thesis following the bachelor's degree. The degree of doctor of science (D.Sc.) is granted for an identical pro gram when the major part of the work is in science. Many times in education, history, literature, economics, sociology, and natural sciences the Ph.D. seems to be granted for meeting a standard of mediocrity. Some of the titles of theses have become the butt of humorous remarks, a typical example being a thesis on "The Length of Sentences in Spenser." The conclusion of this important thesis, which was three hundred pages long, was that the sentences in Spenser were of three types—long, short, and those which could not accurately be described as either "long" or "short."
As McDonald points out, in the field of ill-health the assortment of doctorates now includes the degree of naprapathy, which can be had in ninety days without any entrance requirements; doctor of chiropractic in from one to four years, depending on the school, with the minimum entrance requirement usually just an elementary school education; doctor of surgical chiropody in from eighteen months to three years, with an entrance requirement like that of chiropractic; doctor of optometry three to four years after high school graduation; doctor of osteopathy a minimum of four years, with one year of college work as prerequisite; doc tor of public health, with as yet little standardization and, incidentally, available to graduates in bacteriology or related fields after three years' study. McDonald believes that some of these people have about as much legitimate claim to a doc tor's degree as would a hotel dishwasher to a D.D.W. Then there are also doctors of medicine, doctors of dental medicine, doctors of veterinary medicine, and doctors of dental surgery with better standardized requirements.
The confusion among degrees granted in the field of law is apparent when one remembers that lawyers can get the degree of Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.), Doctor of Jurisprudence (J.D.), Mas er of Laws (LL.M.) and Doctor of the Science of Jurisprudence (S.J.D.). Each year about a thousand honorary degrees are awarded with Doc tors of Laws, of Humane Letters, of Science and of Engineering. The spurious degrees in the field of theology are equally a problem.
Educational authorities might well consider the desirability of some standardization in this area so that the degree of doctor, regardless of the field of learning in which it is applied, will have real significance. Furthermore the public should be able to determine from a title the actual qualifications of the man who adorns himself with it. Finally, the economists who devote themselves to propaganda for revolutionizing medical care persistently trade on their doctor of philosophy degrees, and thus perpetrate a fraud on the public, who take it for granted that these "doctors" are physicians.
* Hugh J. McDonald, "The Doctorate in America," Journal of Higher Education 24: 189 (April) 1943.
