Andrew Sanders complains (Letters, THES , October 17) that "academic freedom and intellectual depth in law school programmes are grossly compromised because of interference from professional bodies".
For a law degree to be recognised as part of a lawyer's training it must meet the profession's criteria. As these requirements change, law degrees must change. How does this interfere with academic freedom? The professional bodies have not taken away anyone's freedom to design law degrees that do not meet their criteria.
However, market forces may dictate meeting professional body requirements or going without students, but that is not a question of academic freedom.
Hugh Brayne
Legal education consultant