right arrow
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04

Ph.D and M.D.

2»

Replies to: Ph.D and M.D.

  • ophioliteophiolite 1020 replies34 threadsRegistered User Member
    vercingetorix:

    Agreed except for one point. Not all PhD programs require profiency in two languages. It varies greatly between departments and programs.
    · Reply · Share
  • vercingetorixvercingetorix 201 replies17 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    Ophiolite - thank you. I stand corrected. I assumed that since my department required two, all others did.
    · Reply · Share
  • twilightdarlingtwilightdarling 189 replies27 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    Wow.

    I did not expect the responses nor the debate that I received. This year's case is a murder trial and the two expert witnesses differ in the time of death which is important to the case. I was wondering whether I can make my expert witness (M.D. from Standford) more credible than the opposing expert witeness (Ph.D in psychology from UCLA then Certificationin Adv. Forensics from University of Northern California).

    Thank you for the responses. What exactly does M.D. and Ph.D stand for?
    · Reply · Share
  • ophioliteophiolite 1020 replies34 threadsRegistered User Member
    M.D. = Medical Doctor; PhD = Doctor of Philosophy
    · Reply · Share
  • UCLAriUCLAri 14509 replies231 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    Hard to make one more credible based on credentials there (both have great credentials.)

    Try going on their histories, if you know them. Or, if you really need to discredit the poor, unassuming Bruin (for shame!), focus on a slip in his or her testimony. Otherwise, you're not going to be able to say, "ladies and gentlemen, I propose that the PhD before you is less of a human being than this wonderful, prestigious MD!"

    Yeah...
    · Reply · Share
  • twilightdarlingtwilightdarling 189 replies27 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    lol. I wasn't going to do that. That is going to make me look stupid, not the expert. Even if there was a difference in "pestige" for the witnesses, I would just hint at it with a carefully worded question. I was just wondering, that's all. And I finally know what MD and PhD stands for. Learn something new every day.

    And I love UCLA and I don't like Stanford (don't throw things at me). But I am prosecution and the defendant is definitely guilty. =)
    · Reply · Share
  • UCLAriUCLAri 14509 replies231 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    And I love UCLA and I don't like Stanford (don't throw things at me)

    Oh have a sense of humor, kid. I said "for shame," which nowadays is hardly ever used seriously.
    · Reply · Share
  • twilightdarlingtwilightdarling 189 replies27 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    err... i knew you were joking. i was too.

    kid? i wish i was still a kid. no worries.
    · Reply · Share
  • UCLAriUCLAri 14509 replies231 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    Usage of kid = turn of phrase.

    :p

    I love teh Internets.
    · Reply · Share
  • twilightdarlingtwilightdarling 189 replies27 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    this is why i avoid AIM.

    but truthfully though, kid sounds good right about now when I am procasinating. brit lit essay... >,<

    Btw, I looked at your profile. How do you like teaching in Japan?
    · Reply · Share
  • UCLAriUCLAri 14509 replies231 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    It pays the bills. :p
    · Reply · Share
  • HImomHImom 34315 replies391 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    To impeach an expert, it is helpful to know how much experience they have had in the subject matter at hand, in this case recreating the time of death & the analyses relevant to it.

    Psychology doesn't lend itself to this type of analysis, but forensics does. You can expect your expert to be examined on his/her familiarity with this type of analysis as well. Not all MDs are experienced at estimating the time of death--would depend on their training & experience & what factors they used to come up with their estimate.

    Good luck--sounds like your case is quite interesting. Of course, you can try tripping up experts on their testimony, procedures followed, etc.
    · Reply · Share
  • shagpinshagpin 85 replies9 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    In Mock Trial usually its stipulated that the credentials are acceptable....if so dont waste your time.

    My expiernce has been that people who attempt to attack the credentials of another witness(in mock trial) simply take away valuable time from their other team mates.

    Just a heads up.
    · Reply · Share
  • quagmire123quagmire123 224 replies47 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    This thread is amusing, since I'm actually working on the same case as twilightdarling...it's Dr. Stone vs. Dr. Choi. I agree with shagpin by the way, since in stipulation number 9, I believe, it states both experts are qualified. Don't try to attack an expert's credentials, because you won't get anywhere with a 8 minute argument with the expert about a PhD vs. MD, when we only get 10 minutes for cross exam. I'm not sure which side I'm on yet since try-outs are still going on, but I was defense last year and read the case from a defense's point of view...NOT GUILTY ;).
    · Reply · Share
  • twilightdarlingtwilightdarling 189 replies27 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    i was on defense for the past two years and i still think i am defense half the time. like today we had a run through and i didn't even realize i had to give my opening statement. :)

    i was just trying to get idea last night. i was just exploring my options. even though most expert witnesses are at par with each other, there was a trial (i forgot the name) where one witness was more hands-on and the other was more theory. we honed it on that. it worked well. anyway, to simply hint at lack of credibility sometimes only take one question. then wrap it together in the closing.

    anyway, i already finished my cross. Dr. Stone is by far more credible but not based on credentials. ;) of course, it will need polishing.
    · Reply · Share
  • HImomHImom 34315 replies391 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    In "real life," sometimes a LOT depends on the actual witness who testifies and how credible they appear. I'd be surprised if "mock trials" are not similarly affected by whomever plays the role of the witnesses as well.
    I agree that you should not waste time & energy fighting any stipulation, but it IS fair to mention the practical experience of your expert vs. the other expert but not dwell on it. This could affect the weight to be given the testimony.
    · Reply · Share
  • whartonalumwhartonalum 608 replies2 threadsRegistered User Member
    One intersting thing about MD's is that you can't practice medicine with just the degree... you need to go through residency first.

    I am personally partial to PhD's because the degree takes more time (unless you blaze through your dissertation and have prior coursework from a masters degree), and involves creating your own independent research, which I enjoy. It's different kind of nerdy :)
    · Reply · Share
  • DrMomAbqDrMomAbq 1 replies0 threadsRegistered User New Member
    An MD is not considered a terminal degree by the US Dept of Education or the European Research Council - there are higher degrees you can get in medicine, such as the Master of Surgery or the Master of Medicine (think of this as akin to the LLM in law). A Ph.D. is a terminal degree, full stop.
    · Reply · Share
  • PHenomenon88PHenomenon88 1 replies0 threadsRegistered User New Member
    While I agree that it's relatively pointless to compare the two, if one insists on doing so the Ph.D. is by far more rigorous and prestigious.

    Historically speaking the term "doctor" was reserved for the Ph.D. while one attended technical or trade school for an applied degree in medicine, the precursor to the MD. Today, the Ph.D. teaches the MD. MDs do not have the knowledge or expertise to fully teach medical curriculum in over 90% of American medical schools and in many countries, including Canada, an MD is equivalent to a bachelor's degree. Consider the charge of a Ph.D. vs. MD, the Ph.D conducts medical research and develops novel ideas that are tested on animal models and then clinical trials on human subjects. Medical liaisons (Ph.Ds) explain the science to pharmaceutical companies which then allocate more money for research and the development of patented medications and treatment interventions which are then simplified, i.e., the science is dumbed down, and then taught in medical school.

    In sum, Ph.D. solve public health crises on a large scale, MDs apply the Ph.D.s' work and relays the information to laypersons.

    Don't get me wrong, it does take a level of expertise to do mini experiments on individual patients to decide which cocktail of drugs is best for them, however, the cocktails of drugs wouldn't exist without the Ph.D., the true scientists. As someone who's taught medical education for a number of years, I can attest to when you tell a group of MDs that you have a Ph.D., respect is given. Also don't believe the salary hype. Scientists/Ph.D.s with an excellent track record of publications are paid well just like MD's with specialized training, such as surgeons. I hope this helps.

    Signed,
    A Doctor
    · Reply · Share
  • Erin's DadErin's Dad 33093 replies3778 threadsSuper Moderator Super Moderator
    Please use old threads only for research.
    · Reply · Share
This discussion has been closed.

Recent Activity