 |
| Marcel Strigberger |
Albert Einstein said, “Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.” Do these professions generate similar value to society?
My parents always wanted me to pursue one vocation or the other, making it seem like these were the only professions in existence. My childhood was like living in a world of Baskin-Robbins but only ever coming across vanilla and chocolate.
Actually, as a kid my dream calling was to become a streetcar operator. However, as the Montreal Transportation Commission phased out all trams by the early 1960s, this option was out, unless I would have considered moving to Toronto (perish the thought!).
This left law or medicine. As I was squeamish, even passing out in the health pavilion at Montreal’s Expo 67 while watching a heart surgery film, this left law.
But of the two professions, although I believe lawyers provide as much as or more value than physicians, I have concluded doctors are accorded greater esteem than lawyers are, at least on a crisis per capita basis. You would never dial 911 to get a lawyer. True, if, say, your spouse slaps you with a claim seeking 110 per cent of your net worth, you’d rather call a lawyer — unless the initial shock gives you a heart attack.
Furthermore, doctors also often get certain perks. I have heard how physicians let the airlines know they’re doctors and that they would be ready for emergency duty especially if upgraded no charge from economy to business class. I tried this ploy once, telling the check-in clerk I was a lawyer ready to help out in an emergency situation, suggesting I get a complimentary business class accommodation. She replied, “If you’re a lawyer, you should be well able to afford business class.” OK, I tried.
I once flew overseas when a flight attendant accidentally spilled some hot coffee on a passenger. An announcement came over requesting the assistance of any doctor. In 15 seconds, the lady had three doctors at her side. I felt like helping too, but what could I possibly have done? Offer to draw up her will?
Lawyers actually face more undeserved criticism as we try to ply our profession. One of the most common questions we get is, “How can you represent a client knowing he is guilty?”
Doctors, on the other hand, with that Hippocratic Oath, are expected to treat that same criminal, no problem. Suggestion: maybe we should also come up with a comparable oath, thereby allowing us to represent the vilest of criminals without making us look like we are in concert with the likes of Josef Stalin. Maybe, rather than Greek, we can come up with some Roman name. Then, when asked that question, we can simply shrug and say, “Hey, we have to. It’s the Claudius oath.” The questioner would no doubt understand, and say, “Of course. Lawyers are honorable and conscientious.”
I am, of course, talking of medical doctors, not PhDs — or other Ds. Say if someone were to slip on a veggie at Sobeys and the cry of “Is there a doctor around?” went out, it would not help if someone like Dr. Ruth ran over and tried to comfort the injured victim, saying to him, “Lie still — and don’t get aroused. By the way, did you know zucchini is a phallic symbol?”
The word “doctor” has become synonymous with the concept that if you bring your problems here, the doctor will fix them. Hence, a perusal through the local telephone directory finds outfits such as Dr. Pipes, Dr. Roof, and Dr. Deli,
Aren’t these guys about the first you would call on if you needed help fixing your pipes, your roof or your pastrami sandwich?
The law firm nomenclature would not work for these callings. I doubt a mob would beat a path to these aforementioned tradespeople were they to be called something like Henderson, Findlay, and Rosenberg, and — Roofers.
At least we lawyers are more gracious, willing to share the glory of a great legal case with our clients. For example, any landmark case is remembered not by the lawyer but by the name of the key players. The rule in M'Naghten's Case, which deals with the century-old plea of insanity, is so-named after Mr. M'Naghten. He killed someone and got away with it when his brilliant lawyer saved him from the hangman by propounding the principle of not guilty by reason of insanity.
Same deal with the rule in Hedley Byrne, which allowed economic loss damages caused by negligent statements, or Miranda, dealing with rights upon being arrested (Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v. Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465; Miranda v. Ariz., 384 U.S. 436 (U.S. June 13, 1966)).
Doctors, on the other hand, hog all the glory. The diseases are frequently named after the physician who discovered the ailment. I am thinking of Crohn’s disease, Parkinson’s disease or Alzheimer’s disease. Even salmonella was named after Dr. Daniel E. Salmon. And he wasn’t even a typical doctor. Salmon actually worked for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. He was a veterinarian. Salmon too hogged the glory (pun unapologetically intended).
You never hear about the unfortunate patient at all. Well, maybe one. But I don’t think the poor sufferer was glorified by doctors calling the disease “elephant man’s disease.”
At least we lawyers humanize the process. We do care. How’s that for providing value?
Of these binary professions I am happy and proud to say I chose the right one. Nothing wrong with chocolate.
Marcel Strigberger retired from his Greater Toronto Area litigation practice and continues the more serious business of humorous author and speaker. His book Boomers, Zoomers, and Other Oomers: A Boomer-biased Irreverent Perspective on Aging is available on Amazon, (e-book) and paper version. Visit www.marcelshumour.com. Follow him @MarcelsHumour.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.