In the late 1960s, the rising number of American law schools awarding J.D.s led to debate over whether lawyers could ethically use the title "Doctor". Initial informal ethics opinions, based on the Canons of Professional Ethics then in force, came down against this. These were then reinforced with a full ethics opinion that maintained the ban on using the title in legal practice as a form of self-laudation (except when dealing with countries where the use of "Doctor" by lawyers was standard practice), but allowed the use of the title in academia "if the school of graduation thinks of the J.D. degree as a doctor's degree". These opinions led to further debate. The introduction of the new Code of Professional Responsibility in 1969 seemed to settle the question – in states where this was adopted – in favour of allowing the use of the title. There was some dispute over whether only the Ph.D.-level Doctor of Juridical Science should properly be seen as granting the title, but ethics opinions made it clear that the new Code allowed J.D.-holders to be called "Doctor", while reaffirming that the older Canons did not.