DUI and applying to pharm school?

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

rrr

Considering the nature, irresponsibility, and reckless endangerment to others that all go along with getting a DUI charge...i'm sure some ADCOMs will take it into consideration.

Both of the supplemental apps that I filled out asked about DUI/drug convictions explicity. You need to get this problem taken care of (ie. make sure this incident doesn't make it onto your record). And, above all, never let it happen again. Call a cab, take a bus or walk when impaired. Don't let a few minutes of inconvenience ruin your life, or worse, someone else's.

Originally Posted by insipid1979

Considering the nature, irresponsibility, and reckless endangerment to others that all go along with getting a DUI charge...i'm sure some ADCOMs will take it into consideration.

I second this. There is never an acceptable reason to drive impaired.
Never, ever. It shows extremely poor judgement and selfishness.

That said, I have a friend who got into pharmacy school with a DUI. He was upfront about it on the application, showed remorse and talked about what he was doing to make sure it never happened again.

You should get a lawyer and get the charges reduced.
But you'll still have to tell schools about it regardless of the outcome.

And for god's sake, think about someone besides yourself the next time you've had a few and decide to get behind the wheel of your car. I know I said that rather harshly, but when you drive impaired you endanger not only yourself but everyone around you. Just DON'T do it.

You can get a DUI for being under 21 and having anything to drink. A friend of mine got a DUI at 20 after drinking one beer because he was driving his two completely toasted (also underage) friends home.

He was able to get into law school because he explained it. Dont know what your situation was/is.

I have a dwi (its called DWI in texas).
Before making the decision to try and get into pharmacy school, I was law school bound, and I talked to a few people, including a few different lawyers.

The scoop is this: It will show up on your application. The adcoms will know about it, and it definitely won't do you any favors.
BUT, its still very possible to get accepted to graduate programs with a DWI or DUI. Its not the end of the world, however, keep in mind that the first time, its forgivable, second dwi, might as well kiss that **** goodbye.
Do not let it happen again.
I cannot stress that enough.

I myself, adhere now to strict rules when i drink. If I have ANYTHING to drink, I'm talking even one light beer, I do not drive. Once I crack open that first beer, whatever location I crack that thing open at, thats where I'm sleeping that night, unless I get someone else to drive me home.

Like I said, if you're a competitive applicant, a DWI isn't going to keep you out of pharmacy school.
If the charge is brought up during an interview, offer an explanation.
Personally, I got my dwi while I was attending university at UT-Austin.
If you know anything about that university, or that town.. you know its pretty much non stop party party party. Also, I didn't strike any vehicles at all. The only thing I had a collision with was grass.

As President, I would permanently ban convicted drunk drivers from the profession of Pharmacy.

Attempted murderers have no place in the health sciences.

Hhaha, how simplistic of you


I'm not going to get into the philosophical debates surrounding this issue, but I'm glad you're never going to be in a position to do anything about it, no offense meant.


Dwis/duis are definitely no joking matter, and horrible things do result from people driving while intoxicated, but to directly equate any person convicted of a dwi as a murderer is obnoxious.

Originally Posted by Rebecatfl

rrr

It happened and you cant change that it did. All's you can do is learn from it, in which case I hope you did. Explain yourself and see what happens. Adcoms are human beings too.

Yes, you can still be accepted into pharmacy school with a DUI on your record. I'm in pharmacy school now and another student got one the year before he got accepted. Just make sure you fill out the section of the application that asks about any run-ins with the law. Most (if not all) schools will do a background check on you after being accepted and you don't want this to be an unpleasant surprise to the school.

Wow I found reply's to this thread rather surprising, I thought he would be screwed. Would marijuana possession be looked down upon more? My record is clean im just curious because this also seems to be a quite common offense among young people.

Random question: supplemental application mentions "a charge against your license" or something. I'm assuming a speeding ticket that's not on your record (because you took driving school) does not count?

Well, it's becoming easier and easier to get into pharmacy school so it doesn't surprise me that acceptance isn't limited by criminal convictions. While I don't agree that all drunk drivers are murderers, it does give me pause to think that someone who is predisposed to drug abuse will be around medications with abuse potential. I'm sure not everyone that gets caught drunk driving is an abuser but I do have to call into question their decision making ability. Let's hope that these transgressions were the result of youthful indulgences and they don't translate to adulthood.

Can't you check your "record" by going to the local police department?

I'm not sure if tickets cleared by driving school are off your record completely or not. When I joined the Navy, I disclosed a speeding ticket I had when I was 16 because I'd rather admit to it than have them find it and ask me why I didn't.

Originally Posted by pharm B

Can't you check your "record" by going to the local police department?

I'm not sure if tickets cleared by driving school are off your record completely or not. When I joined the Navy, I disclosed a speeding ticket I had when I was 16 because I'd rather admit to it than have them find it and ask me why I didn't.

I have a friend that got a DUI and he had it expunged from his record. I'm not exactly sure what it took for him to have it removed, but it happened.

I would take pharm B's advice and check your record out and talk with a lawyer about getting that off your record. Its worth the headache to do that instead of explain yourself in your supplementals and possibly interviews.

I don't have a DUI (thank God) but I know people who got accepted to pharmacy schools with other charges like underage drinking, etc. One of those schools was a religious affiliate school with strict no-alcohol rules even if you are of age, so it is definitely possible to be accepted. I really doubt it will be easy to get an acceptance with an illegal drug charge though. The adcoms are human, and I'm sure some of them get a little tipsy at their holiday parties... BUT being that it is DUI you should probably show a track record of trying to get some help or improve upon what you did so that they know you will be safe candidate for pharmacy.

With that said... if it is already on your record I'm not sure how the whole "expunged" thing works because I always thought it took like 7-10 years for you to do that, but they best policy is honesty. Even if you have adjudication withheld it is not actually withheld, and you need to disclose that. They will appreciate your honesty and maturity.

Originally Posted by Tinkerbell22

I don't have a DUI (thank God) but I know people who got accepted to pharmacy schools with other charges like underage drinking, etc. One of those schools was a religious affiliate school with strict no-alcohol rules even if you are of age, so it is definitely possible to be accepted. I really doubt it will be easy to get an acceptance with an illegal drug charge though. The adcoms are human, and I'm sure some of them get a little tipsy at their holiday parties... BUT being that it is DUI you should probably show a track record of trying to get some help or improve upon what you did so that they know you will be safe candidate for pharmacy.

With that said... if it is already on your record I'm not sure how the whole "expunged" thing works because I always thought it took like 7-10 years for you to do that, but they best policy is honesty. Even if you have adjudication withheld it is not actually withheld, and you need to disclose that. They will appreciate your honesty and maturity.

I agree with showing a track record of getting help. It shows remorse and if you cant get it off of your record that will help.

DUI is a bit more severe than underage drinking. Show some remorse, talk about it on your supplementals. I think you will be fine. Michael Vick can get 2 years for killing dogs and Dante Stallworth gets 30 days for driving drunk and man slaughter? The system is messed up. Im willing to bet someone on adcoms has driven drunk.

It depends on what state you live in.

In texas, you cannot get something expunged if you were convicted of it.
That means you can only get certain charges expunged if you were granted deferment or something like that.

Also, certain crimes are not eligible for deferment either.

A

DUI tickets and fees are a huge money maker to local government. The average DUI drinks and drives like 50 times before getting caught...just to show you how dangerous it is...usually not very. The limit has been lowered so much it's as dangerous as someone talking on the cell phone or being deprived of sleep for a day +/- a few hours. A doctors who has been awake for days is like having a surgeon bong a 6 pack 15 minutes before the operation.

IMO, it's way over blown but because there is always that one tragedy, the laws regarding drinking and driving is much stricter than it should be. Not only that, in this state, the police can cite you even if you're under the limit. There are so many laws that regulate our actions that they can practically get anyone on.

We live in one heck of a world. Forgive and love your neighbor.

Originally Posted by jung1

DUI tickets and fees are a huge money maker to local government. The average DUI drinks and drives like 50 times before getting caught...just to show you how dangerous it is...usually not very. The limit has been lowered so much it's as dangerous as someone talking on the cell phone or being deprived of sleep for a day +/- a few hours. A doctors who has been awake for days is like having a surgeon bong a 6 pack 15 minutes before the operation.

IMO, it's way over blown but because there is always that one tragedy, the laws regarding drinking and driving is much stricter than it should be. Not only that, in this state, the police can cite you even if you're under the limit. There are so many laws that regulate our actions that they can practically get anyone on.

We live in one heck of a world. Forgive and love your neighbor.

You're justifying driving while intoxicated? Really?

Sure, forgive and love your neighbor, but don't protect him from the consequences of a foolish decision.

Originally Posted by jung1

DUI tickets and fees are a huge money maker to local government. The average DUI drinks and drives like 50 times before getting caught...just to show you how dangerous it is...usually not very. The limit has been lowered so much it's as dangerous as someone talking on the cell phone or being deprived of sleep for a day +/- a few hours. A doctors who has been awake for days is like having a surgeon bong a 6 pack 15 minutes before the operation.

IMO, it's way over blown but because there is always that one tragedy, the laws regarding drinking and driving is much stricter than it should be. Not only that, in this state, the police can cite you even if you're under the limit. There are so many laws that regulate our actions that they can practically get anyone on.

We live in one heck of a world. Forgive and love your neighbor.

So is cheating and stealing okay too then? Pharmacy schools are very tolerant of people that really shouldn't be forgiven! Sometimes I wonder why that is so...then I realize well its properly b/c there is a new pharmacy school opening up everyday...so they will take pretty much anyone.

Originally Posted by pharm B

You're justifying driving while intoxicated? Really?

Sure, forgive and love your neighbor, but don't protect him from the consequences of a foolish decision.

That's not what I'm saying. Let's see that leet RC skills of yours. I'm saying the law has gone too far in defining legally intoxicated and in punishing people. There is a reason they call it legally intoxicated because it has nothing to do with state of intoxication. For most adults, 0.08 is the point where you become less safe...not a danger.

A number of other things like talking on the cell and listening to music is MORE dangerous than the 0.08 BAC level but the consequences of that are far less severe. It's prejudice, pure and simple. Drinking and driving has been demonized.

How about that ditzy teen who crashes the car because she's doing her nails? Obviously, she's a ditz and a terrible danger to society. Let's throw her in jail for two weeks, the same sentence for a county with mandatory sentencing laws. My point...LET THE CONSEQUENCES FIT THE ACTION!

It doesn't even matter because you can get a DUI even if you're UNDER the limit. By the time the charges dropped, you'd would've paid thousands in fees and fines. It's almost systematic at how the Govt can impound and sell your belongings even before you go to trial.

But what you say don't surprise me. I've met someone who thinks everyone who went to prison deserves it. Does exonerated mean anything?

I think what was done is a past thing, and what to come is more valuable than what had already happened. The past gave you no option, but the future does; so as long as you take it seriously and be persistent - not just for application matters but for the rest of your life, others should be more than happy to forgive and accept.

Originally Posted by jung1

Drinking and driving has been demonized.

Hasn't been demonized enough. Something like 12,000 to 16,000 people (yes, that's a big variation, I've seen different figures, so sue me) die each year in the U.S. from drunk driving. Total driving deaths in the U.S.? 40,000. Total homicides in the U.S.? 18,000.

Drunk driving is a big deal. Unfortunately, plenty of idiots drive drunk, so you can't really increase the punishment inflicted for drunk driving, since irresponsible jurors will say, "That could be me."

How about that ditzy teen who crashes the car because she's doing her nails?

If you can prove she was painting her nails, go ahead. But for all we know, nail painting is safer than driving drunk. It's not really a systemic problem.

It doesn't even matter because you can get a DUI even if you're UNDER the limit. By the time the charges dropped, you'd would've paid thousands in fees and fines.

I do agree the legal system could be improved in that regard.

Originally Posted by jung1

The limit has been lowered so much it's as dangerous as someone talking on the cell phone or being deprived of sleep for a day +/- a few hours.

Talking on the cell phone and being deprived of sleep AND driving IS dangerous too. Why do you think some states have made it illegal to talk on the phone and drive. I cannot tell you how many times I've almost gotten into an accident because the other driver was talking on the phone and almost crashed into my car.

They lowered the levels because different people get drunk at different stages. One friend of mine has one drink, and she's totally tipsy and drunk. Another friend of mine can down 8 shots, and still be fine. Where do you draw the standard? You have to be on the more careful side, not the less. You also have to account for the fact that alcohol can change the way you think. Many people THINK they are fine when they've had a couple drinks, but they are unaware of the fact that their senses and reactions have slowed down from drinking.

It's a slippery slope.

Originally Posted by jung1

DUI tickets and fees are a huge money maker to local government. The average DUI drinks and drives like 50 times before getting caught...just to show you how dangerous it is...usually not very. The limit has been lowered so much it's as dangerous as someone talking on the cell phone or being deprived of sleep for a day +/- a few hours. A doctors who has been awake for days is like having a surgeon bong a 6 pack 15 minutes before the operation.

IMO, it's way over blown but because there is always that one tragedy, the laws regarding drinking and driving is much stricter than it should be. Not only that, in this state, the police can cite you even if you're under the limit. There are so many laws that regulate our actions that they can practically get anyone on.

We live in one heck of a world. Forgive and love your neighbor.

Drunk driving certainly isn't a victimless crimes. Thousands die per year from drunk driving, if anything DUI laws should be stricter.

However, I do agree that our criminal justice system is pretty messed up. I think the drinking age should be lowered to 18 (if you can die for your country at 18 why shouldnt you be able to drink? or at least those enlisted in the military). I also think our drug laws should be more focused toward public health, rather than treating drug users as criminals (especially with soft drugs like marijuana).

Ok, we've gotten pretty far off topic so im gonna stop there, lol.

.

Originally Posted by jung1

That's not what I'm saying. Let's see that leet RC skills of yours. I'm saying the law has gone too far in defining legally intoxicated and in punishing people. There is a reason they call it legally intoxicated because it has nothing to do with state of intoxication. For most adults, 0.08 is the point where you become less safe...not a danger.

A number of other things like talking on the cell and listening to music is MORE dangerous than the 0.08 BAC level but the consequences of that are far less severe. It's prejudice, pure and simple. Drinking and driving has been demonized.

How about that ditzy teen who crashes the car because she's doing her nails? Obviously, she's a ditz and a terrible danger to society. Let's throw her in jail for two weeks, the same sentence for a county with mandatory sentencing laws. My point...LET THE CONSEQUENCES FIT THE ACTION!

It doesn't even matter because you can get a DUI even if you're UNDER the limit. By the time the charges dropped, you'd would've paid thousands in fees and fines. It's almost systematic at how the Govt can impound and sell your belongings even before you go to trial.

But what you say don't surprise me. I've met someone who thinks everyone who went to prison deserves it. Does exonerated mean anything?

I'm pretty sure the reason drunk driving is such an issue is because 1) it's rampant because college kids are stupid and 2) people are injured often in drunk driving related accidents. you can look up statistics if you want, but i'm fairly sure drunk driving related accidents are higher than teen painting nail accidents. the reason why there have been new cell phone laws instated is most likely because of the insurgence of people getting cell phones, and txting/calling while driving, and then getting into accidents.

you sound like a person who drinks and drives, or knows someone who got a DUI, and you find that the penalty was harsh to you personally. but think about it, does law enforcement really have time to make laws specifically targetting only the drunk drivers that kill someone? are we going to measure how "drunk" you are and how great your tolerance for alcohol is before you are charged? like, how is that a deterrence at all. i think the more important question is why, why, do you have to drive at all if you drink.

Not penalizing someone for driving over the limit is like not penalizing someone who played Russian roulette with a handgun pressed to your head just because they didn't happen to fire from the chamber with the bullet. We punish the risky behavior, not just the consequences.

There are people who get into school with DUIs. You have to disclose it if asked. I would expect to see a question about drug or alcohol related offenses the typical application and I would not expect it to be limited to felony convictions.

Exactly, unsafe driving habits can be as or more dangerous than 0.08 BAC...but for most places, it's just a ticket. They won't seize your car for that. But have ONE drink and drive and your life can sink in the toilette. How can anyone say that's not a double standards?

People freak out because it's the leading cause of death for youngsters but even if everyone survived until 30y/o, the average lifespan would only go up a couple years because so few youngsters die in the first place.

The numbers are saying you have a better chance of getting MURDERED than dying in a drunk driving accident. 12k only accounts to less than half a percent of of total deaths in the United States a year! The average offender drives 80-2000 times before they are apprehended. If it was sOo dangerous, they'd be smashing into fire hydrants all the time!

Originally Posted by jung1

Exactly, unsafe driving habits can be as or more dangerous than 0.08 BAC...but for most places, it's just a ticket. They won't seize your car for that. But have ONE drink and drive and your life can sink in the toilette. How can anyone say that's not a double standards?

If you could consistently prosecute other unsafe behaviors, I'd be all for it. Talking on your cell phone without a headset is now illegal in CA... but maybe if you violate that law, you should be punished more harshly. Of course, how much different is that from talking to friends in a car? Should you be punished for having friends in your car while you drive? They could be distracting you!

So again, drunk driving is easy to consistently enforce, and I don't think it's an unreasonable burden. You cannot make it illegal to have food in your car (you could be eating it!!), or other passengers (you could be talking!!) Or, to take the nail polish example, should it be illegal to have make-up in your car?

Or, as the current system entails, you just have to avoid drinking and not carrying an open alcoholic beverage. I know it pisses off those of you who would like to drive drunk, but I'd much rather have a bit of a double standard than have my ability to transfer food (or have an open container of food in my vehicle!!!) outlawed.

The numbers are saying you have a better chance of getting MURDERED than dying in a drunk driving accident. 12k only accounts to less than half a percent of of total deaths in the United States a year!

Or, to put it another way (and using the 16K figure), then we could effectively eliminate MURDER in our society if everyone chose to only drive sober. Also, keep in mind those figures include gang violence.

Besides: total deaths also includes natural causes. I do want granny to live as long as possible, but there's a difference between granny dying of natural causes and Little Timmy getting his head crushed in by a drunk driver.

Originally Posted by jung1

Exactly, unsafe driving habits can be as or more dangerous than 0.08 BAC...but for most places, it's just a ticket. They won't seize your car for that. But have ONE drink and drive and your life can sink in the toilette. How can anyone say that's not a double standards?

People freak out because it's the leading cause of death for youngsters but even if everyone survived until 30y/o, the average lifespan would only go up a couple years because so few youngsters die in the first place.

The numbers are saying you have a better chance of getting MURDERED than dying in a drunk driving accident. 12k only accounts to less than half a percent of of total deaths in the United States a year! The average offender drives 80-2000 times before they are apprehended. If it was sOo dangerous, they'd be smashing into fire hydrants all the time!

You still don't understand the concept of deterrence. You think that drunk driving isn't that big of a deal because "not that many people die", yet you don't consider that the harsh penalties set by the law might have something to do with it. We went to a party where a frat guy was at the door not allowing anyone to have their keys unless they had a sober driver because of checkpoints. Do you think there would be these kinds of precautions if the penalty for drunk driving was just a slap on the wrist?
Additionally it's a lot easier to have laws regarding your BAC, a measurable quantity, than it is for how distracting your friends are when you drive.

Originally Posted by Rebecatfl

rrr

Let me get back to the original question.

When was your DUI? How do you explain that you made a really stupid decision, and what will make the admissions committee - and the board of pharmacy in your state - believe it won't happen again? It's not an absolute bar to acceptance, but you ARE going to have to talk about it and you'd better have a damned good explanation.

The OP made this thread in May of 2006. You may have to speak louder.

Although this is a hoot! In 2007, OP was asking this in another thread

what if it's a misdemeanor dui that was dropped to a reckless driving and a fleeing and eluding a cop felony that was dropped completely? No convinction on the felonly....

Originally Posted by pharm B

The OP made this thread in May of 2006. You may have to speak louder.

I'm a genius. Maybe by the time I get to 1000 posts I'll remember to check the dates. Who bumped this? Anyway, hopefully someone reads my advice anyway. It sounds like the OP and like-minded individuals don't get it. If you're getting DUIs and trying to get away with it, you don't deserve to be in pharmacy school. If you made a terrible mistake and learned from it and want to move forward, you should be given a second chance. It's not about what you did but about why did it and whether you're likely to do it (or something similar) again.