I don’t know if this is applicable to the field of law, but I’m a mechanical engineer by education and license, however I currently work in finance, not at all in mechanical engineering anymore, not for years. BUT I still consider and call myself a mechanical engineer, and I still hold the state licensure.For the chart:
Lawyer = someone who holds a law degree and works as anything but. An example = a doctor is someone who went med school and now works at Starbucks.
Actually, now that I think about it “lawyer” is really a job role, not a degree, right? So technically she could continue to call herself a “JD” (not sure if she is one) and that would be correct, but not “lawyer” since she ISN’T A LAWYER. I think? Like someone with a PhD is still Dr. XYZ, but not a “lawyer” if working at Starbucks currently. Someone who knows, please weigh in.I don’t know if this is applicable to the field of law, but I’m a mechanical engineer by education and license, however I currently work in finance, not at all in mechanical engineering anymore, not for years. BUT I still consider and call myself a mechanical engineer, and I still hold the state licensure.
I DON’T go around bragging about my “busy mech engineery lifestyle” (Elle: “busy, lawyerly lifestyle”) or claim to be employed as a mechanical engineer at my company (Elle: “I’m in-house counsel at a securities regulator”). But I do continue to call myself a mechanical engineer, as do all my colleagues who now work outside the ME field.
Does it not work that way in law?
Rick T. MillerShe'll probably end up with an older dude who is a socially awkward loser and any other non-desperate woman wouldn't give him the time of day. No truly ELIGIBLE bachelor will put up with her twisted psyche for long.
I agree with your point, my dad is a ceramic engineer but mostly does sourcing now, when people ask it is is easier to say he is a ceramic engineer, same for other engineers I know who don't directly engineer anymore, being an engineer helps them with their job. But I think in elle's case a lawyer is a job title. In a case where you have to be licensed to work in that area I think calling yourself a lawyer when you don't have that job title is wrong. There are lots of healthcare jobs where pharmacists, nurses, physicians etc can work and aren't doing typical day work to what you expect, but in their job description it still requires you to be licensed to do that job. In those cases you are still a physician or nurse or pharmacist, bc your job requires that for you to keep your license do your job. With elle's job yeah it helps that she did law degrees but it isnt necessary and when you have a job where you have to pass the bar/board/licensure exam and you do a job that doesn't require that licensure that's when I think you can't really call yourself xyz.Actually, now that I think about it “lawyer” is really a job role, not a degree, right? So technically she could continue to call herself a “JD” (not sure if she is one) and that would be correct, but not “lawyer” since she ISN’T A LAWYER. I think? Like someone with a PhD is still Dr. XYZ, but not a “lawyer” if working at Starbucks currently. Someone who knows, please weigh in.
Rick T. Miller
To call yourself a lawyer, you MUST pass the bar. But in almost all jurisdictions, you are additionally required to pass a second exam called the MPRE (Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam), which is basically a test on lawyers' ethics and standards of conduct. Without passing BOTH of those exams, one cannot call themselves a lawyer as they have not met the prerequisites to practice law in their respective jurisdiction. After you pass these two exams, you get sworn-in to the State Bar (some Bar Associations do HUGE swearing-in ceremonies, but you can always do a private ceremony with a judge who may have been a mentor to you). Then you get your bar card, and congrats, you're a full-fledged attorney!Actually, now that I think about it “lawyer” is really a job role, not a degree, right? So technically she could continue to call herself a “JD” (not sure if she is one) and that would be correct, but not “lawyer” since she ISN’T A LAWYER. I think? Like someone with a PhD is still Dr. XYZ, but not a “lawyer” if working at Starbucks currently. Someone who knows, please weigh in.
Lol! Basically you’re saying she ain’t young OR professionalWhy is she still calling herself a 'young professional'? She's not old, but she's nearly a decade into her 'career' at this point. To me, a young professional is someone who is in their first graduate job/first few years of their career or is perhaps pursuing post-grad education in relation to a specific profession. There are lots of people at my firm who are senior associates and on their way to becoming partner by their early/mid 30s.
100% she's running around town playing dress up in tie dye and chunky sandals, YET AGAIN like she did as a Florida resident in Lily and as a lawyer in blazers and dresses, as what? In house counsel at a tech company? Okay Eleanore Lecocq.Hands down the reason she moved to Seattle is because it sounds cool, hip and trendy. None of those adjectives describe Granny Eleanor.
I don’t know if this is applicable to the field of law, but I’m a mechanical engineer by education and license, however I currently work in finance, not at all in mechanical engineering anymore, not for years. BUT I still consider and call myself a mechanical engineer, and I still hold the state licensure.
I DON’T go around bragging about my “busy mech engineery lifestyle” (Elle: “busy, lawyerly lifestyle”) or claim to be employed as a mechanical engineer at my company (Elle: “I’m in-house counsel at a securities regulator”). But I do continue to call myself a mechanical engineer, as do all my colleagues who now work outside the ME field.
Does it not work that way in law?
I agree with this analysis and also the assertion that it is a bit pedantic, but it's still a commonly-held belief in the industry. I graduated law school and then had a few months before I could take the bar, and my mom would joke that I was a lawyer, but it was truly uncomfortable to refer to myself as that when I didn't yet have my license. And I wouldn't refer to myself as that when people asked. It was always "I'm in the process of licensure." Because the job requires the license, the idea is that a person who is qualified to "lawyer" is someone who has passed these certain milestones and has proven themself in this way. So when a person doesn't have the licensure or isn't doing the job that the licensure allows them to do, it's almost like "because you have the license which is supposed to mean you're qualified to do X, and then you choose to go and do Y, then how can you say you're X because you're choosing to do less than you're qualified to." I think because lawyers are required to have the license, we take the license seriously.I agree with your point, my dad is a ceramic engineer but mostly does sourcing now, when people ask it is is easier to say he is a ceramic engineer, same for other engineers I know who don't directly engineer anymore, being an engineer helps them with their job. But I think in elle's case a lawyer is a job title. In a case where you have to be licensed to work in that area I think calling yourself a lawyer when you don't have that job title is wrong. There are lots of healthcare jobs where pharmacists, nurses, physicians etc can work and aren't doing typical day work to what you expect, but in their job description it still requires you to be licensed to do that job. In those cases you are still a physician or nurse or pharmacist, bc your job requires that for you to keep your license do your job. With elle's job yeah it helps that she did law degrees but it isnt necessary and when you have a job where you have to pass the bar/board/licensure exam and you do a job that doesn't require that licensure that's when I think you can't really call yourself xyz.
I feel like it is a very fine line and maybe a bit pedantic but that's how I feel. If she was in house counsel that would apply to like the healthcare jobs I mentioned but she's not even in-house counsel.
Also if she couldn't make it with Rick, she won't make it with anyone, but that's just my opinion
Not on the first day of law school but rather Orientation Day, all the Deans gave brief speeches welcoming my class to the school, etc. We were all floating on a cloud, all bright-eyed, bushy-tailed idealists thinking we were going to save the world.I agree with this analysis and also the assertion that it is a bit pedantic, but it's still a commonly-held belief in the industry. I graduated law school and then had a few months before I could take the bar, and my mom would joke that I was a lawyer, but it was truly uncomfortable to refer to myself as that when I didn't yet have my license. And I wouldn't refer to myself as that when people asked. It was always "I'm in the process of licensure." Because the job requires the license, the idea is that a person who is qualified to "lawyer" is someone who has passed these certain milestones and has proven themself in this way. So when a person doesn't have the licensure or isn't doing the job that the licensure allows them to do, it's almost like "because you have the license which is supposed to mean you're qualified to do X, and then you choose to go and do Y, then how can you say you're X because you're choosing to do less than you're qualified to." I think because lawyers are required to have the license, we take the license seriously.
For me, being a lawyer is about more than the degree I have. It's a way of thinking and a way of life. Law school works because it tears down the way you think and completely restructures your brain to think "like a lawyer." And this may sound ridiculous, but it's true. On my first day of law school, we were all excited and my professor just punched the shit out of us and goes, "Once this is over, you will have the power to sentence someone to death. The power to bankrupt someone. The power to change people's lives completely for the better and for the worst. If you can't respect this power and also the responsibility that comes with it, then you need to leave now." That's stayed with me completely. I take this job seriously, and it's frustrating to me how Elle throws it around as a marketing tool to make herself look impressive.
That's my experience. I'm interested in varying opinions.
For me, I think once you go through the required education and are actually licensed, then you are a lawyer. It is such a right of passage that after going through all that hard work, I wouldn't want anyone taking that away from me just because I don't fit what they think of as a lawyer.I agree with this analysis and also the assertion that it is a bit pedantic, but it's still a commonly-held belief in the industry. I graduated law school and then had a few months before I could take the bar, and my mom would joke that I was a lawyer, but it was truly uncomfortable to refer to myself as that when I didn't yet have my license. And I wouldn't refer to myself as that when people asked. It was always "I'm in the process of licensure." Because the job requires the license, the idea is that a person who is qualified to "lawyer" is someone who has passed these certain milestones and has proven themself in this way. So when a person doesn't have the licensure or isn't doing the job that the licensure allows them to do, it's almost like "because you have the license which is supposed to mean you're qualified to do X, and then you choose to go and do Y, then how can you say you're X because you're choosing to do less than you're qualified to." I think because lawyers are required to have the license, we take the license seriously.
For me, being a lawyer is about more than the degree I have. It's a way of thinking and a way of life. Law school works because it tears down the way you think and completely restructures your brain to think "like a lawyer." And this may sound ridiculous, but it's true. On my first day of law school, we were all excited and my professor just punched the shit out of us and goes, "Once this is over, you will have the power to sentence someone to death. The power to bankrupt someone. The power to change people's lives completely for the better and for the worst. If you can't respect this power and also the responsibility that comes with it, then you need to leave now." That's stayed with me completely. I take this job seriously, and it's frustrating to me how Elle throws it around as a marketing tool to make herself look impressive.
That's my experience. I'm interested in varying opinions.
@LegalEagle5 So I’m now a corporate litigator, but before I was a commercial transactional attorney, which I believe is a lot like in-house but for a multitude of clients as opposed to one. And I still consider that the work of a lawyer. In fact, it never crossed my mind that it wasn’t because I was hired as a “lawyer,” paid like a lawyer, and someone without a law degree and certification could not have done the job. So I didn’t at all mean to imply that in-house is not a real lawyer job. I think it’s a job most lawyers would love! But you’re still a lawyer. I just see a difference between doing that and say, working as an interior designer and saying you’re a lawyer because you have a law degree.For me, I think once you go through the required education and are actually licensed, then you are a lawyer. It is such a right of passage that after going through all that hard work, I wouldn't want anyone taking that away from me just because I don't fit what they think of as a lawyer.
For example, as in-house counsel my job looks very different from what many may think of as a lawyer. Much of my work has been the same as work I did when I was a paralegal (the difference just being that I don't have an attorney directing my actions). In fact, I would say only about 60% of the questions I get asked by the business are truly legal in nature. I have never been to court and, although technically I could because I am licensed, I certainly never would say that is something I have the skills to do. That's what we hire outside counsel for. There are just different types of lawyers, but the commonality is the required education, testing, and licensure maintenance requirements.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?