The Purpose of Law School
Now that the academic year has ended, it’s time to catch up on what is happening in the world. Of particular interest is the news that Kim Kardashian plans on becoming a lawyer without attending law school. Or college. Bar exams are likely easier to pass with the help of a law school education, but is that the purpose of law school? Not all states allow law school to be optional, but does law school serve purposes other than just checking off a requirement?
Is the purpose of law school to educate us regarding the law? To teach us to “think like lawyers”? Or is law school a socialization process, as a lawyer explained to Ms. Kardashian/West on an episode of Keeping Up With the Kardashians? This attorney explained that law school doesn’t teach you the actual “stuff” and that Kardashian’s qualities put her way ahead of contemporaries in law school. I wonder if law school is meant instead to be a selection process.
Currently before the State Legislature are bills regarding the State Public Defender private bar appointment rate. Currently the rate is $40 per hour (the lowest in the nation), but the bill is proposing to raise the rate to $70 per hour. Recently a petition to the Wisconsin Supreme Court attempted to get the Supreme Court to raise the private bar rate of the public defender to $100 per hour. While the Supreme Court acknowledged the current rate as woefully inadequate, it did not take action regarding the public defender appointed rate, although it did raise the court-appointed rate effective next year to $100 per hour for all court-appointed lawyers.
Several years ago, the Wisconsin veterinary state convention focused on the legal standard of informed consent in the profession. Lawyers explained that this meant that veterinarians needed to provide all options to owners and that owners make the decision as to what options to pursue. Although this seemed simple enough, and certainly some veterinarians already practiced some degree of informed consent, some veterinarians were understandably concerned about discussing a “no treatment” option and some veterinarians practice in situations where discussions with owners may be difficult (e.g., production medicine) or the time involved would defeat the purpose of their services (e.g., high-volume spay/neuter clinics). But the take-home message was that veterinarians are not the responsible parties for making the decisions for clients and that veterinarians need to provide all of the options, and all of the information that clients need to make decisions. Informed consent protects both parties to the transaction.