has racial preference in admissions gone too far?

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

i'm all for affirmative action if it is used to actually help the people who came from unfortunate circumstances. however, in search for black/latino med students, have admissions accepted candidates with too low scores? does this ruin the hard work of all the asians/whites who got accepted as well as black students who got accepted by their own merit and will be looked down upon because of the negative perception of racial preference.

also, the med school system will do anything to help med school students graduate including letting them take another year or a leave of absence. this causes them to spend additional resources on a candidate that shouldn't have been accepted in the first place.

blacks with a 25 MCAT and 3.1 GPA having a 20% higher acceptance rate than asians with a 28 MCAT and 3.5 GPA?

i wonder how many med students who remediated or dropped out were accepted because of race or nepotism and had no business being in med school in the first place...

Where did you get those statistics? Please list your source

Originally Posted by FireTop

Where did you get those statistics? Please list your source

https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/appl...ethnicity.html

Affirmative Action is the most racist legislation that we have in effect. Basically, people use it as a crutch to "even out" things that happened in the past. Well here is news for you, my family came from a poor country in Europe and we never owned people like the Americans did. So why am I now discriminated against because of my skin color (white)? I say go the way that California did and Michigan. Ban it and let everyone be at a level playing field (strict meritocracy) by only taking into consideration GPA, MCAT, extracurriculars and other objective factors.

Also take a look at the attrition rates based on race: https://www.aamc.org/download/102346...aibvol7no2.pdf Table1, Page 2


"As a society, the US has made the implicit decision to sacrifice patients' health to political correctness."

If we have to have AA, it should be based on economics far more than race.

Originally Posted by Dr Love

this...

Originally Posted by Bernoull

this...

Yep.

Originally Posted by ronaldo23

If we have to have AA, it should be based on economics far more than race.

Yeah! Also I love the bluntness of the more "streetstyle" people

Don't you even start.

Of the 5 universities I applied to, I was accepted at the only one without a racial quota - oddly also the one considered more prestigious.

Wow, have you heard of cultural competency? When you graduate, you're more likely to serve people like you. Blacks and Latinos are well under represented, and their populations need more doctors that can understand their situation. Believe it or not, racism in America still exists. That's why diversity in professional fields is so important.

Test scores and gpa aren't the only factors in determining who gets in. As an Asian American and immigrant, I've seen the importance of

Originally Posted by Ineedhopenow

Wow, have you heard of cultural competency? When you graduate, you're more likely to serve people like you. Blacks and Latinos are well under represented, and their populations need more doctors that can understand their situation. Believe it or not, racism in America still exists. That's why diversity in professional fields is so important.

racism still exists?

not really

...(finishing post) racial and cultural understanding. Poor patient interaction with healthcare results in poorer health for the patient because they distrust the healthcare system.

What's worse than the inherent unfairness of AA is the actual lack of URM physicians in the US. Our current generation is paying for the sins of our fathers by using different yard sticks in medical admissions, but there's no other way in the short term. To reverse the education problems in URM populations the correct way (i.e. socioeconomic, cultural change) would take decades, and I can't blame admissions committees for using AA as a band-aid to reverse the racism that was built into the medical profession for decades.

*poor patient interaction with POOR healthcare PROVIDERS (due to lack of racial and cultural understanding)

Sorry for the typo. Replying from my iPod.

Originally Posted by jdh71

racism still exists?

not really

While I agree that racism in the traditional sense is rare in the US these days, the effects of racism prior are alive and well. In practically every major US city, and the remnants of segregation and white flight are obvious. And you don't have to think very hard to imagine how this lingering segregation leads to education inequalities, and so on.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

While I agree that racism in the traditional sense is rare in the US these days, the effects of racism prior are alive and well. In practically every major US city, and the remnants of segregation and white flight are obvious. And you don't have to think very hard to imagine how this lingering segregation leads to education inequalities, and so on.

What's the solution? Force everyone to live together?

Originally Posted by jdh71

What's the solution? Force everyone to live together?

Tough question. I don't have any good answers.

But I don't think living separately is an issue itself, except that it leads to a segregation of resources. If you look at historically Black/Hispanic areas of big US cities, you find a dearth of economic opportunities, which shows that it's more than just an issue of different ethnicities living in the same neighborhood.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

Tough question. I don't have any good answers.

But I don't think living separately is an issue itself, except that it leads to a segregation of resources. If you look at historically Black/Hispanic areas of big US cities, you find a dearth of economic opportunities, which shows that it's more than just an issue of different ethnicities living in the same neighborhood.

So it really whitey getting the hell out of the black part of town? Or is it that the people who have the resources to leave the ****ty party of town because they can, irrespective of race?

Originally Posted by ronaldo23

If we have to have AA, it should be based on economics far more than race.

I agree. I'm a URM but my mother is a physician so I was not disadvantaged. I was able to take MCAT prep courses and the like.

Money essentially evens the playing field - you get access to better schools, extra tutoring and prep courses, and your parent(s) are around to encourage and foster learning vs having to work multiple jobs.

I don't know the stats but I wonder if a URM who isn't disadvantaged is any more likely to do primary care than a white or asian from a similar economic background.

I've faced racism on an individual basis but I have not dealt with the institutionalized racism that comes with being a poor minority. I knew I deserved my spot because I had decent stats (33 MCAT) but I still felt like as an URM I had to go above and beyond in med school and it was just another motivating factor.

Originally Posted by jdh71

So it really whitey getting the hell out of the black part of town? Or is it that the people who have the resources to leave the ****ty party of town because they can, irrespective of race?

If Lil Wayne can be used as evidence:

"And mom don't cry, ya son can handle this; I got her out the hood and put her in the hills"

Originally Posted by jdh71

So it really whitey getting the hell out of the black part of town? Or is it that the people who have the resources to leave the ****ty party of town because they can, irrespective of race?

Going back to the 40's-60's, as black people moved into town, white people moved out to the 'burbs and took their businesses with them (this is "white flight"). The "segregation" we see today is largely the result of this event (Detroit is a stark example).

The issue gets even more complex when you start to consider the institutional racism that hung around until the late 70's (banks denying blacks mortgages in certain parts of town, employer discrimination, and so on). A lot of the inequality we see today is the result of real discrimination from just a few decades ago.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

I agree. I'm a URM but my mother is a physician so I was not disadvantaged. I was able to take MCAT prep courses and the like.

Money essentially evens the playing field - you get access to better schools, extra tutoring and prep courses, and your parent(s) are around to encourage and foster learning vs having to work multiple jobs.

This is the more fair approach, but it's not the true purpose of AA, right? It's my impression that AA isn't used to even the playing field, but it's being used to make the physician demographic mimic the US population's demographic. When I hear administrators discuss AA, they cite the idea that our so-called melting pot shouldn't be served by a physician workforce that is 99% caucasian.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

Going back to the 40's-60's, as black people moved into town, white people moved out to the 'burbs and took their businesses with them (this is "white flight"). The "segregation" we see today is largely the result of this event (Detroit is a stark example).

The issue gets even more complex when you start to consider the institutional racism that hung around until the late 70's (banks denying blacks mortgages in certain parts of town, employer discrimination, and so on). A lot of the inequality we see today is the result of real discrimination from just a few decades ago.

So we still get to blame whitey? Ok. How many years do you think it would be fair until the ****ty communities can be properly held responsible for their own problems?

If the definition of racism is to judge or treat someone differently based upon their race/ethnicity then affirmative action would be considered racist. It's simply an ugly form of collectivism where we put people into groups instead of treating them like individuals. Let's start treating people as individuals rather than putting them into categories.

I'm all for factoring in socio-economic characteristics of applicants and giving a leg up to those who did not have the same opportunities as persons from more prosperous backgrounds; however, I believe basing admissions on the color of one's skin is an antiquated practice that makes no sense to me in this day and age.

As a white guy, I don't have a problem with it and think its good for the healthcare system. In something like medicine, there is a huge value provided by having a wide variety of cultural backgrounds and values present.

Also, we always talk about the lack of access to healthcare providers, while there is a shortage in absolute terms, what the even bigger problem is that we have a hard time getting doctors to practice in certain areas. So many state schools give preference to students from the most underserved counties in their state b/c their stats have shown that those are the people who are most likely to choose to practice in undeserved areas.

For what it's worth, I do appreciate that you're more likely to get someone to go back to rural or inner city patient populations if they have already come from those populations. To that end I do think there is some utility in saving a few spots in a medical school class for people from those populations who make it clear that their interest is going back to those populations.

Originally Posted by jdh71

So we still get to blame whitey? Ok. How many years do you think it would be fair until the ****ty communities can be properly held responsible for their own problems?

I'm not saying whitey is the cause of the current inequalities, but the sentiment of "THIS IS 'MERICA, PULL YER SELF UP BY YER BOOT STRAPS' kind of misses the point. There's a lot of segregation and inequality that still exists in this country, and the cause of it is complex. Institutional discrimination definitely played a part.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

I'm not saying whitey is the cause of the current inequalities, but the sentiment of "THIS IS 'MERICA, PULL YER SELF UP BY YER BOOT STRAPS' kind of misses the point. There's a lot of segregation and inequality that still exists in this country, and the cause of it is complex. Institutional discrimination definitely played a part.

Even if I beg the question with you and completely agree. How long do we continue to blame the old stuff before we start to hold certain populations responsible for their situation? In 20 or even 40 years if things are still the way they are, do we still get to blame the old inequalities for current situations? How long does this get to be used as an excuse?

Originally Posted by jdh71

For what it's worth, I do appreciate that you're more likely to get someone to go back to rural or inner city patient populations if they have already come from those populations. To that end I do think there is some utility in saving a few spots in a medical school class for people from those populations who make it clear that their interest is going back to those populations.

I agree with this. Admissions should put more weight on where the applicant grew up, their family income, etc. An individual who grew up in a poor environment where it was harder to succeed should have some sort of advantage when it comes to admissions. I think this can be accomplished without using race as part of the criteria.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

While I agree that racism in the traditional sense is rare in the US these days, the effects of racism prior are alive and well. In practically every major US city, and the remnants of segregation and white flight are obvious. And you don't have to think very hard to imagine how this lingering segregation leads to education inequalities, and so on.

Racism and ethnic ostracism is alive and well in every part of the world. The europeans hate that the turks and people from the middle east are moving in to take advantage of their successful systems. The English hate that the Polish move in to their country to earn Pounds. And Americans have and always will discriminate against each other whether it be through race or where it is banned they will do it by not hiring you because you have been incarcerated (40% of the prison pop. is black) or you have bad finances or find some other way to make sure that only some people get what they want.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

This is the more fair approach, but it's not the true purpose of AA, right? It's my impression that AA isn't used to even the playing field, but it's being used to make the physician demographic mimic the US population's demographic. When I hear administrators discuss AA, they cite the idea that our so-called melting pot shouldn't be served by a physician workforce that is 99% caucasian.

No, it would be more like 40% asian and 50% white. Where did you get this 99% white number from?

Originally Posted by SoundofSilver

If the definition of racism is to judge or treat someone differently based upon their race/ethnicity then affirmative action would be considered racist. It's simply an ugly form of collectivism where we put people into groups instead of treating them like individuals. Let's start treating people as individuals rather than putting them into categories.

I'm all for factoring in socio-economic characteristics of applicants and giving a leg up to those who did not have the same opportunities as persons from more prosperous backgrounds; however, I believe basing admissions on the color of one's skin is an antiquated practice that makes no sense to me in this day and age.

Right on the money

For those of you that want to hear genetic theories (neanderthals interbreeding with homo sapiens) or other possible explanations of these racial differences there is a multitude of information on other websites and I won't go into this because it is extremely un-PC.

But in any case we have to realize this problem is not going to go away anytime soon. Having lived in NYC my whole life I see the racial disparities even though this is a supposed "liberal" city. White neighborhoods are 50%-200% more expensive to live in and people will pay these numbers in order to be away from the ghetto areas. The city has tried integrating neighborhoods by putting in cheap rent (government subsidized) projects throughout white neighborhoods but all it did was increase crime rate in these neighborhoods and decrease the property values. The people that lived in these projects didn't magically become successful.

For those of you in isolated small towns where it is 99% white I'd suggest you come to the big cities, take a ride or live here for a few months and see how it really is. Not how you see it on the news or other filtered sources.

Originally Posted by jdh71

Even if I beg the question with you and completely agree. How long do we continue to blame the old stuff before we start to hold certain populations responsible for their situation? In 20 or even 40 years if things are still the way they are, do we still get to blame the old inequalities for current situations? How long does this get to be used as an excuse?

It's a good question, I don't really have a good answer. I'm just not sure we'll ever be able to separate the socioeconomic climate in 1950's US cities from the self-perpetuating problems we see today. They have a particularly nasty domino effect.

Originally Posted by Shnurek

Americans have and always will discriminate against each other whether it be through race or where it is banned they will do it by not hiring you because you have been incarcerated (40% of the prison pop. is black) or you have bad finances or find some other way to make sure that only some people get what they want.

We were talking about "traditional" racism. There are ignorant and culturally-retarded people all over this country (have you watched ESPN at all during LINsanity? ), but using the colloquial definition, "racism" is very rare. Our respective opinions likely can't be changed on this, so I'll stop here.

Originally Posted by Shnurek

No, it would be more like 40% asian and 50% white. Where did you get this 99% white number from?

It was hyperbole.

Bottom line: under-represented minorities are..... under-represented. I think representation is the motive for AA, not socio-economic status (yes, it is less "fair" I agree).

Originally Posted by KinasePro

This is the more fair approach, but it's not the true purpose of AA, right? It's my impression that AA isn't used to even the playing field, but it's being used to make the physician demographic mimic the US population's demographic. When I hear administrators discuss AA, they cite the idea that our so-called melting pot shouldn't be served by a physician workforce that is 99% caucasian.

That's why I said I wondered if URM's who aren't disadvantaged are any more likely to serve the underserved than non URM's.

The general idea of AA was to level the playing field for minorities who didn't have access to the same quality schools, teachers, and extra tutoring.

I'm a URM who grew up in the burbs and I'm going into rads. Pretty sure folks like me aren't the purpose of med school AA.

Just because someone is a URM doesn't mean they want to do PC in a lower income area. That's why I believe economic background should hold more weight. Maybe more schools should have primary care tracks and use AA there.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

We were talking about "traditional" racism. There are ignorant and culturally-retarded people all over this country (have you watched ESPN at all during LINsanity? ), but using the colloquial definition, "racism" is very rare. Our respective opinions likely can't be changed on this, so I'll stop here.



It was hyperbole.

Bottom line: under-represented minorities are..... under-represented. I think representation is the motive for AA, not socio-economic status (yes, it is less "fair" I agree).

But it sort of defeats the purpose if those let in go on to treat the same exact patient demographic as non URM's

Unpopular, Devil's advocate opinion:

I am white + Hispanic. I had every advantage growing up in an upper-middle class household. I went to private schools. I had two married parents who were highly involved in my education. I had access to MCAT tutors if I wanted them (I didn't take them).

My former coworker fit just about every stereotype for an African American in education. She was raised by her mother and grandmother. She went to awful city public schools. She worked throughout high school and college and didn't have anything left to pay for prep classes, tutors, etc.

As I recall, the application lets you pick "disadvantaged" regardless of race. In all likelihood, more people of minority races will pick this status. Do you legitimately believe that because I had everything in life and did 4 points better on the MCAT that I will be a better physician than my coworker who had none of the benefits I was born with? She refused to check "disadvantaged" -- some people feel they'll be pitied or looked down on for this.

No, not every minority is disadvantaged. But I would guess that the majority of people who get disadvantaged status are from minority populations. I guarantee there are dozens if not hundreds of white males on this site who were rejected and who can identify with my coworker's life story.

Picking spots based on race is questionable of course. There are legitimate arguments for making decisions on race alone, but most of them don't hold water. But you can't really look at these stats and say that minorities got into school w/ lower stats based on race alone.

OK, flame away!

Originally Posted by SoundofSilver

I agree with this. Admissions should put more weight on where the applicant grew up, their family income, etc. An individual who grew up in a poor environment where it was harder to succeed should have some sort of advantage when it comes to admissions. I think this can be accomplished without using race as part of the criteria.

I totally agree with this.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

But it sort of defeats the purpose if those let in go on to treat the same exact patient demographic as non URM's

I see your point, and I agree that this is an oft cited reason for AA on SDN. And if that is the goal of AA, then it's not very effective.

But when I hear AA discussed by administrators & faculty at my medical school, their message is much more along the lines of "diversity for the sake of diversity." It's about destroying the perception that all doctors are white and asian, and on a larger level, creating Physician role models in the black and hispanic communities at large. The role models don't have to be PCPs in underserved urban areas, they can be neurosurgeons or researchers, too.

Originally Posted by jdh71

So we still get to blame whitey? Ok. How many years do you think it would be fair until the ****ty communities can be properly held responsible for their own problems?

The only fair way is for as long as the oppression lasted.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

Going back to the 40's-60's, as black people moved into town, white people moved out to the 'burbs and took their businesses with them (this is "white flight"). The "segregation" we see today is largely the result of this event (Detroit is a stark example).

The issue gets even more complex when you start to consider the institutional racism that hung around until the late 70's (banks denying blacks mortgages in certain parts of town, employer discrimination, and so on). A lot of the inequality we see today is the result of real discrimination from just a few decades ago.

Ever been to Detroit?

The admissions should be based on qualifications. Not race or economic background. Putting out incompetent doctors because they were previously poor in not an answer. It's not fair, but neither is life. Oh well though. I don't lose sleep on this.

Originally Posted by JP2740

Ever been to Detroit?

Never been.

For those interested, here's a short podcast (~10 min) on the origins of segregation in Detroit:

http://detroit.blogs.time.com/2010/1...so-segregated/

AA is about to revisited by the supreme court this year, so there might be some changes. In general I think it hurts all parties involved (whites, asians, URM's, patients).

Originally Posted by Ineedhopenow

Wow, have you heard of cultural competency? When you graduate, you're more likely to serve people like you. Blacks and Latinos are well under represented, and their populations need more doctors that can understand their situation. Believe it or not, racism in America still exists. That's why diversity in professional fields is so important.

Racial discrimination is NEVER the answer to racial discrimination.

Eventually the Supreme Court will wake up and stop this nonsense.

Originally Posted by surftheiop

As a white guy, I don't have a problem with it and think its good for the healthcare system. In something like medicine, there is a huge value provided by having a wide variety of cultural backgrounds and values present.

Also, we always talk about the lack of access to healthcare providers, while there is a shortage in absolute terms, what the even bigger problem is that we have a hard time getting doctors to practice in certain areas. So many state schools give preference to students from the most underserved counties in their state b/c their stats have shown that those are the people who are most likely to choose to practice in undeserved areas.

Hopefully when you are finished with med school and residency and have a cush job somewhere, the government will come to you and say "we're taking away your job and giving it to a black person. No hard feelings, right?"

After all, wouldnt that serve a "greater good?" A black doctor is more needed than you are; so you should be shown the door so we can achieve a greater common good.

Originally Posted by KinasePro

I'm not saying whitey is the cause of the current inequalities, but the sentiment of "THIS IS 'MERICA, PULL YER SELF UP BY YER BOOT STRAPS' kind of misses the point. There's a lot of segregation and inequality that still exists in this country, and the cause of it is complex. Institutional discrimination definitely played a part.

I agree with everything you said. Now you need to explain to us why racial discrimination is an acceptable "solution" to this problem you are talking about.

Where racial discrimination exists, it should be eliminated by any means OTHER than more racial discrimination.

Originally Posted by PrideNeverDie

i'm all for affirmative action if it is used to actually help the people who came from unfortunate circumstances. however, in search for black/latino med students, have admissions accepted candidates with too low scores? does this ruin the hard work of all the asians/whites who got accepted as well as black students who got accepted by their own merit and will be looked down upon because of the negative perception of racial preference.

also, the med school system will do anything to help med school students graduate including letting them take another year or a leave of absence. this causes them to spend additional resources on a candidate that shouldn't have been accepted in the first place.

blacks with a 25 MCAT and 3.1 GPA having a 20% higher acceptance rate than asians with a 28 MCAT and 3.5 GPA?

i wonder how many med students who remediated or dropped out were accepted because of race or nepotism and had no business being in med school in the first place...

Percentages don't mean anything unless you include an "N" number (or in non nerd speak... how many applied/accepted). Check it out, then you will see

Originally Posted by JP2740

The admissions should be based on qualifications. Not race or economic background. Putting out incompetent doctors because they were previously poor in not an answer. It's not fair, but neither is life. Oh well though. I don't lose sleep on this.

Anyone who graduates an accredited medical school and passes all 3 Steps should not be incompetent.

Medical school levels the playing field. Everyone has access to the same professors, most sources are free or really cheap, and extra prep classes are not needed to do well.

Someone who couldn't afford MCAT classes or even up to date books is at a significant disadvantage. It doesn't mean they're any less intelligent.

Originally Posted by Socrates25

Hopefully when you are finished with med school and residency and have a cush job somewhere, the government will come to you and say "we're taking away your job and giving it to a black person. No hard feelings, right?"

After all, wouldnt that serve a "greater good?" A black doctor is more needed than you are; so you should be shown the door so we can achieve a greater common good.

Umm... if your job can be taken away that easily and given to someone else, regardless of race, you're probably doing a really crappy job. Chances are, your'e upset because you feel discriminated against. Well guess what, people who don't have 30's on the MCAT and a 3.7 GPA are discriminated against when applying to med school. Those who barely passed the boards are discriminated against when applying to do ortho. GET OVER IT! The "race thing" doesn't have even have an inch on this numbers game we've been playing (and will continue to play) for years. So stop your whining and make yourself more competitive if you want something good for yourself --- geez.

Originally Posted by biologieguru87

Umm... if your job can be taken away that easily and given to someone else, regardless of race, you're probably doing a really crappy job. Chances are, your'e upset because you feel discriminated against. Well guess what, people who don't have 30's on the MCAT and a 3.7 GPA are discriminated against when applying to med school. Those who barely passed the boards are discriminated against when applying to do ortho. GET OVER IT! The "race thing" doesn't have even have an inch on this numbers game we've been playing (and will continue to play) for years. So stop your whining and make yourself more competitive if you want something good for yourself --- geez.

Well said