has racial preference in admissions gone too far?

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

Originally Posted by Nasrudin

Might I suggest, as a more descriptive moniker--bridgefordeliberatelyand repeatedlymissingthepoint.

If you think I'm going searching about for some charts and graphs you've got the wrong chap. I'm interested in experience metaphor and reading cultural narrative. This leaves me open to the flash of data and such but not to the boredom of spending time sniffing around just to prove you a point. The questioning, conjecture, and provocation is more my stock and trade. If I make you uncomfortable, I've made my point. If not, then you are truthful and upright and therefore my point is not directed at you. If you're defensive I already know I've hit the mark. Lazy. But more enjoyable than debate. For me.

But to answer you persistent misrepresentation of my questions. For the set of those to which talent, and hard work, and social skill do not apply, not many I would imagine, would trouble with medical school. And the same which was instructive for them--what's given to them as birthright is their own achievement, the same as is instructed by race-based handout.
For us, these are the determinants of a successful career. Always will be. Feel free to take it easy, don't continue to learn, or be a consistent douche to prove otherwise.

And rules of thumb are apt enough. Drives an expensive car at twenty something without previous career beyond college. Then takes racially restricted selection criteria as de facto compensation for past due payment ancestral grievance.

I observe and report. I don't research dig and debate. Take it or leave it.

Personally I was more impressed that my general impression about the widening gap of medical school matriculants was proved uncannily accurate by the previous poster than your intrigues with confusing statistics. I looked at your graphs. Might as well have been in Chinese. Any chance actual radiance is forthcoming.

I don't mean any disrespect BUT you say alot but say nothing at the same time. It's quite intriguing, I've never seen anything like this. This thread has been beat to death and the only thing I can add is that there is no point in killing yourselves over something you cant control. Live your life and be happy. There will always be someone at a disadvantage no matter what race. Someone will always have the upperhand over someone. What can you do? My time is better spent with my family, studying for the mcat. Urm will argue that Orm have the advantage and vice versa. Who cares? I don't. At least not after reading this thread.

Originally Posted by Brigade4Radiant

Sure you can suggest it but may I give you a moniker such as youarenotgoodatthis and stopmovingthegoalpost?

You can't back up the points you "observe". I didn't waste much time at all posting those links. You can't be bothered to take 5 minutes and glance at the articles but you can take 5 minutes typing a long-worded response that could have been easily summarized in two sentences? Also, don't be so arrogant as to believe that you have made me feel uncomfortable.

Even if we use your definition of achievement, those URMs deserve their spots because they have to work hard and succeed in order to keep it. Also they don't really trouble with medical school any more than any other student.

I also don't think you looked at my graphs because beneath them are something called "paragraphs" which explains the graphs in the links. If those graphs looked like Chinese to you then you're going to have a really hard time reading the medical literature as a future physician.

You "observe and report" but don't actually bother to actually be educated at what you observe and report. Your little anecdote of a minority driving an expensive car and then not having any prior career besides college is pretty shallow. The fact that you think that it is empiric is pretty troubling.

For a guy that types a lot and tries to be overly "eloquent" you sure do have a talent of saying barely anything at all. If I'm missing the point it's because you aren't making any points or just really horrible at articulating them.

I looked at what your reference was saying and couldn't figure out how it was germane to this question which has remained unanswered in the many threads on this topic:


If....please note again the conditional...if....you are well-to-do URM with a high quality education background whose parents are likewise And you a accept benefit by race alone....Then...I ask repeatedly.... How do you look at yourself in the mirror and not see a machiavellian thug and a moral equivocating worm who leaches off the good if misguided intentions of society?

Because if you can answer that with any honesty--IF IT PERTAINS TO YOU--then we can arrive at some real solidarity with agendas and programs to address the type of disparity that effectively divide the US into functioning communities and failed states of violence dispair and poverty.

It takes me only a minute of talking with someone within all of the racial groups I have experience with to tell their social class with decent accuracy. And nothing would make me happier than to see all of the kids from tough backgrounds get a fair shake in life.

You don't like me or my style. I don't give a sh!t, I am exploring the meaning of my existence without concern for that.

But don't act like you're answering my question by relating correllative statistics that don't pertain to it. And if ain't you than I'm not talking to you.

An additional thought that I would like to put forth is this:

How sad. And insulting to all. That on the Left there is this assumption that if someone disagrees with them. Then necessarily it must be for the most morally base reasons.

Well, he's not for AA in blanket form, ooooooo, scandalous! A racist behind the liberal lines.

Well, no, this is exactly the sort of social religious piety that leads to being duped. By charlatans and cultural whores of all sorts.

My last point, I hope.

Affirmative Action isn't put in place to help the disadvantaged. It is simply a way to increase the representation of under-represented groups in medicine. Yes, it is prone to self-selection, as is medicine, or any other form of higher education for that matter. No, it isn't fair. And no, it isn't flawless. But as it stands, its one of the few solutions we have to increasing the representation of Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans in medicine. Even with these affirmative action programs, the representation of these groups are still pitiful, unfortunately.

Originally Posted by PantherPride

Affirmative Action isn't put in place to help the disadvantaged. It is simply a way to increase the representation of under-represented groups in medicine. Yes, it is prone to self-selection, as is medicine, or any other form of higher education for that matter. No, it isn't fair. And no, it isn't flawless. But as it stands, its one of the few solutions we have to increasing the representation of Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans in medicine. Even with these affirmative action programs, the representation of these groups are still pitiful, unfortunately.

Interesting...so if a group is "under-represented," surely there must be some pre-determined figure at which their representation can be deemed adequate. If I think I am "under-paid," I must have an idea for what I think is fairly paid, beyond which I could admit I am "over-paid." What is it? Who decides it, and on what basis? Is it really their decision to make?

And what if there aren't enough people from group A interested in fulfilling the "demand" for an optimal representation of their respective group? On the other hand, what if there is a surplus of those interested from group B? Are we justified in excluding them from entering into a field that is supposedly dedicated to "helping" people?

How many black / hispanic vs. white/asian students apply to medical school? Isn't that a pretty glaring omission? Not to mention that the demographics of the final class is still overwhelmingly white and asian. Hopefully in medical school they teach how cherry-picked numbers can give a false impression because this is a textbook example.

I'm white and male and accepted. Not on my first try, but I didn't blame an imaginary eskimo or whatever, I blamed myself. I guess I should have called the reverse racism waaaaahmbulance instead.

Originally Posted by scarshapedstar

How many black / hispanic vs. white/asian students apply to medical school? Isn't that a pretty glaring omission? Not to mention that the demographics of the final class is still overwhelmingly white and asian. Hopefully in medical school they teach how cherry-picked numbers can give a false impression because this is a textbook example.

I'm white and male and accepted. Not on my first try, but I didn't blame an imaginary eskimo or whatever, I blamed myself. I guess I should have called the reverse racism waaaaahmbulance instead.

Originally Posted by Marcus Brody

Interesting...so if a group is "under-represented," surely there must be some pre-determined figure at which their representation can be deemed adequate. If I think I am "under-paid," I must have an idea for what I think is fairly paid, beyond which I could admit I am "over-paid." What is it? Who decides it, and on what basis? Is it really their decision to make?

And what if there aren't enough people from group A interested in fulfilling the "demand" for an optimal representation of their respective group? On the other hand, what if there is a surplus of those interested from group B? Are we justified in excluding them from entering into a field that is supposedly dedicated to "helping" people?

Predetermined figure? Why are you looking too far into this? They want the racial proportion of our physicians to at least resemble that of the population they're taking care of. Blacks and Hispanics make up 13% and 16% of the US population, respectively, yet each only represents around 3% of physicians. Hence, they're underrepresented

And we have over 40 thousand people "interested" in going to med school every year, but more than half of them are going to be rejected. And it won't be because of affirmative action

I have this thread to thank, at least as a catalyst if not a cause, for a stupendous shift in my thought process. From it's irony. Not from it's ostensible subject matter.

Thinking about the unbelievable stupidity of the knee-jerk leftist arguments. With hours of audio of my mentor, Christopher Hitchens' essays in my ear. That as a pretty determined left minded person-- most of what I think...or now used to think... is bullsh!t.

And I've acquired an appreciation for Obama's presidency. Not at all leftist. But pragmatic.

So, victory is yours. I leave the field altogether different than when I started. And I am no longer afraid to discuss what I really think for fear of rejection by some overwhelming majority. Better alone and independent than on some pilgrim's progress to somewhere predetermined.

Thank you. You f'n dolts. For making me see my doltish ways. And for inspiring the courage to go my own way. We all must do this. Become a marx or a trotsky at the expense of losing your position in the party. risking the comfort of the flock. or. end up a stalinist. self-assured and morally certain.

Originally Posted by Marcus Brody

Interesting...so if a group is "under-represented," surely there must be some pre-determined figure at which their representation can be deemed adequate. If I think I am "under-paid," I must have an idea for what I think is fairly paid, beyond which I could admit I am "over-paid." What is it? Who decides it, and on what basis? Is it really their decision to make?

Is this really such a mystery? One common "optimal figure" is the proportion of a group within the overall population of the United States of America. There are all sorts of reasons why that's not always achievable or desirable, but did something along those lines never occur to you? The Decision is made when people make babies. No man behind the curtain necessary.

Originally Posted by scarshapedstar

How many black / hispanic vs. white/asian students apply to medical school? Isn't that a pretty glaring omission? Not to mention that the demographics of the final class is still overwhelmingly white and asian. Hopefully in medical school they teach how cherry-picked numbers can give a false impression because this is a textbook example.

I'm white and male and accepted. Not on my first try, but I didn't blame an imaginary eskimo or whatever, I blamed myself. I guess I should have called the reverse racism waaaaahmbulance instead.

X2

Don't know how this will go over, but I'm white and my people were horribly discriminated against for decades after arriving (Irish). Never got to be on the upper hand in any of the race stuff, and I grew up in bad economic conditions with a single mom. I worked my way through high school and college (actually didn't finish HS in traditional sense) and I worked by butt off so I could get into med school. Now I'm here. Why don't I get the same help (especially financially) through school that my black friends get? I come from very similar background but have less melanin. What's the deal with that?

Originally Posted by aslan

Don't know how this will go over, but I'm white and my people were horribly discriminated against for decades after arriving (Irish). Never got to be on the upper hand in any of the race stuff, and I grew up in bad economic conditions with a single mom. I worked my way through high school and college (actually didn't finish HS in traditional sense) and I worked by butt off so I could get into med school. Now I'm here. Why don't I get the same help (especially financially) through school that my black friends get? I come from very similar background but have less melanin. What's the deal with that?

My great grandparents could never own an Irishman as a pet, nor did we have to pass a Civil Rights Act for your Irish parents to integrate with English kids.

Originally Posted by ijn

My great grandparents could never own an Irishman as a pet, nor did we have to pass a Civil Rights Act for your Irish parents to integrate with English kids.

Is prior history of slavery and/or necessity of passing the Civil Rights Act a requirement of affirmative action? Because Hispanic URM's, Native American URM's, etc. would beg to differ.

Originally Posted by SteinUmStein

Is prior history of slavery and/or necessity of passing the Civil Rights Act a requirement of affirmative action? Because Hispanic URM's, Native American URM's, etc. would beg to differ.

All told I think the Native Americans had it worse than the slaves or the Irish, what with the whole genocide thing.

Originally Posted by scarshapedstar

All told I think the Native Americans had it worse than the slaves or the Irish, what with the whole genocide thing.

Most of them actually died from diseases they were not resistant to. That yes, the Europeans brought over.

Originally Posted by SteinUmStein

Is prior history of slavery and/or necessity of passing the Civil Rights Act a requirement of affirmative action? Because Hispanic URM's, Native American URM's, etc. would beg to differ.

I think the point that Irish is not a similar cultural history to Blacks in this country. I'm Jewish, I'd contend that I have a similar cultural background to the Irish in this respect (not enslaved, not requiring civil rights acts to allow me to marry into another culture, but still discriminated against, kept out of certain parts of society, etc.), but would not suggest I have a similar cultural history to blacks or native americans.

Here's a quick question for affirmative action supporters: do we continue affirmative action until representation in medicine is approximately equal to the general population or do we need to continue it indefinitely into the future because of the disadvantaged history that minorities have suffered through?

Originally Posted by aslan

Don't know how this will go over, but I'm white and my people were horribly discriminated against for decades after arriving (Irish). Never got to be on the upper hand in any of the race stuff, and I grew up in bad economic conditions with a single mom. I worked my way through high school and college (actually didn't finish HS in traditional sense) and I worked by butt off so I could get into med school. Now I'm here. Why don't I get the same help (especially financially) through school that my black friends get? I come from very similar background but have less melanin. What's the deal with that?

Firstly beyond the few specifically race-based scholarships that are handed out (and lets not forget that since these are put in place by community groups, you can get aid for being italian american, or vietnamese etc) there is no financial advantage.

However more importantly, what you're looking for is an addition of socioeconomic disadvantages, not a replacement of AA. If you walk into a store (and you're not a teenager), you don't have to worry about being followed around because the owner thinks that you're going to steal. You aren't identified as "other" and treated as such, because for the majority of the country you're indistingushable from the majority. So in your day to day life you face no disadvantages because of your cultural background, and you don't have to worry about adcoms and professors devaluing your work because they can ID you as other. Even having to worry about the issue at all decreases student performance on average. You and your family also don't have to worry that your doctor is treating you differently, or experiementing on you, because you're not a part of their "group" which is the face reason why medical schools are so worried about minority representation in schools (it affects general care for minorities).

AA wasn't just designed to deal with the historical artifacts of racism, its still dealing with the current day effects of racism that can only exist because minorities are so underrepresented. What you face are lingering socioeconomic effects from your family's origination story, and the majority of aid is need based.

Most probably, your friends are just embarassed to tell you exactly how badly off their families are.

Originally Posted by SteinUmStein

Here's a quick question for affirmative action supporters: do we continue affirmative action until representation in medicine is approximately equal to the general population or do we need to continue it indefinitely into the future because of the disadvantaged history that minorities have suffered through?

Affirmative Action in med schools would serve no purpose if all groups were represented somewhat well in medicine. It will phase out the closer we get to that

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

No but the ones who have said to me "F you N***er" definitely are.

I'm not trying to suggest things in this country haven't improved or that the white population is dominated by racists. Just myself and minority friends still experience racism not uncommonly even post-Obama

Comments like this in this thread are just sad.

Because someone insulted you then you are entitled to medical education with
lower criteria and credentials. I have been called "communist" (I'm Russian) in the same kind of
light you were called the "n word", One is 'racist', the other nationalist.
So why do I need a 30 MCAT, because I'm Caucasian?

Unfortunately we will never see the argument of what AA effectively does, what it accomplishes, and what are it's consequences. Proponents of AA would shrink from any attempt to use SES as a better measure of disadvantage because why?

If URM's are disadvantaged then this wouldn't hurt their chances at opportunity. But what would it do? What would it mean use strictly SES as the measure of what to use when attempting to level a playing field--perhaps an unrealistic goal in itself?

What it would do is wreck the livelihood of those who make the racism game their business. It would take food off the table of thousands of people who ply the wares of "whitey did this to us!" or "look at all the ways we're oppressed" or "Until white people understand their crimes we can never move forward!"

These are uncomfortable ideas. To say that the field will never reset itself to make it fair. That the only way up is through entrepreneurship, hard work, education, and the construction of functional communities from within. The slow tedious work of climbing the social ladder. First the community college. Then the skilled trades and nursing jobs. And the small businesses. And the educational achievement in the open field of competition. Level or not. This is far more and far more radical than just the selective recruitment of already highly qualified URM applicant to prestigious universities--or basically the majority of the sdn sample population--for the empty promise of "diversity for a select few."

That--If it could be faced by any URM community. Unafraid to seize it's own freedom of opportunity in america--would be the same ingredients for success anytime, anywhere.

How long this idea of waiting for the world to right itself first before demanding internal success will last will be exactly how long this tragic experiment of Paternalism will keep eroding and corrupting--particularly the black community--from within.

And there will be plenty of people who will benefit from the experiment. Namely those who make a living on extolling the lengths of external white racism as both solution and problem.

None of these white people who guiltily side up with AA are here to help you. They're here to make themselves feel better. And yet what they have to say is applauded. While AA detractors are attacked as racist.

Notice any potential irony here? Just a shred perhaps?

Ah another AA thread....it seems out of all the subjective criteria that the admission committes use to screen applicants, this seems to be the most radical. let me guess, is it because only a select few benefit? This may come as an eye opener but the admission committes dont just take race into account they take....personality, economic situation, family history, social history. it can be argued I and many of my classmates got into our first choice school because of who we were associated with (parents that were alumi/physicans). Even post medical school a lot of you guys will be shocked to fine out that getting into certain places is more who you know more so than how high your step scores are.

Originally Posted by neurosx

Ah another AA thread....it seems out of all the subjective criteria that the admission committes use to screen applicants, this seems to be the most radical. let me guess, is it because only a select few benefit? This may come as an eye opener but the admission committes dont just take race into account they take....personality, economic situation, family history, social history. it can be argued I and many of my classmates got into our first choice school because of who we were associated with (parents that were alumi/physicans). Even post medical school a lot of you guys will be shocked to fine out that getting into certain places is more who you know more so than how high your step scores are.

No ****. Like I said earlier, as a white male, when I didn't get in I blamed myself and reapplied. I had many issues to address. I didn't call up Rush Limbaugh.

Here's the dumbest part. For every black kid that gets in, there will be 100 white kids who are rejected. And chances are about 25 of them will be convinced that he took "their" spot. Even though this flunks the basic arithmetic test, somehow they'd all win the big game of musical chairs that we call admissions if it weren't for those people.

Unwarranted self-importance and resentment spring eternal...

Originally Posted by TwisterTwain

Because like was already brought up,
this: http://www.economics.harvard.edu/fac.../emilygreg.pdf
and this: http://psp.sagepub.com/content/28/5/659.short
and this: http://pss.sagepub.com/content/11/5/365.short
and this: http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/69/5/797/
oh maybe a bit of this: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...72775710001111

basically a whole host of factors that will affect minority students purely on the basis of their being a minority, and especially a minority with a history of poor treatment and intelligence denigration. Think of how long its taking women to recover from that factor alone.

The rational has never just been proportional representation. These factors affect test performance, how well they interview, and whether they even bother to apply. The history matters. Beyond direct biased effects of subjective evaluations, you can depress the grades and performance of a minority student JUST by dropping them in the situation that they routinely face their entire education, where they are one or two in a sea of 100+. When is AA no longer necessary? When 100s of studies like this aren't showing the gap every year. Qualifications are tested on the outgoing end, so AA has no effect on physician quality. At the very least it demonstrates that Meharry's success isn't accidental.

So then you have to ask the question why you would attempt to eliminate something that directly deals with what you're trying to address - that due to systematic and structural reasons your evaluation methods simply don't work on large swaths of the population because of how they are and have been treated because of their race and gender? These are factors completely seperate from socioeconomic status as an additional complicating factor on minority stats. Minorities are graduating and passing the boards in large swaths, so I don't really buy the "underqualified" storyline. It neatly sidesteps the general sucess as a whole, which makes the "misrepresented" storyline make more sense IMO.

For example the study that determines that students are "hurt" and "mismatched" does so purely on the basis of ending GPA and not on educational outcome or job outlook (I mean wouldn't you expect that going to Harvard versus community college would automatically change the grade you come out with?). However based on their qualifications, minority students were still doing better than their stats would have predicted, and those stats while off of the mean was still well within the standard deviation of the student population without them, so they were "hurt" less than the rest of the school's lower performers.

Anyway, done, because having read through this from the beginning I know exactly how likely this convo is to ever end.

I love how most of ya'll glanced over this. Education research proves this time and time again, that students perform better when they have a teacher of the same racial or cultural background (84% of public school teachers are white). When our society actually does the work to ensure that educators are trained in cultural competencies that will support all children whether they share the same background, then perhaps we can claim that we have done enough for URMs to believe that the playing field is level.

Before I was a teacher, it was easy for me to claim that URMs are just resting on their laurels and just not trying, but after teaching in Compton and Inglewood, I realize that the bias I have based on not sharing the same culture with my students is apparent. I am in no way racist, but misbehavior is different in each culture, expectations of behavior is different in each race and it is hard to change your own archetypes while in practice. To put it plainly, I used to believe AA was unfair, but after trying to end the achievement gap, I realized I had my own small part in creating it through my own unconscious bias that took a lot of work to undo in my students. I know it is hard to believe that white privilege still exists without Jim Crow, but the systematic effects of hundreds of years of racism in this country were not going to be erased by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 65. And to another point, do these stats that we are arguing about take into account the Historically Black Medical Schools? I mean, if they want a 24 to be their standard, what is stopping anyone else with that score from applying (contrary to popular belief, you can apply to a HBCU without being black, you actually have a better chance getting a scholarship at an HBCU if you are white with the under representation and all).

Originally Posted by Re3iRtH

Comments like this in this thread are just sad.

Because someone insulted you then you are entitled to medical education with
lower criteria and credentials. I have been called "communist" (I'm Russian) in the same kind of
light you were called the "n word", One is 'racist', the other nationalist.
So why do I need a 30 MCAT, because I'm Caucasian?

I never used that as an argument for AA. If you see my other posts in this thread you would see that I argued SES should be used and not race.

Me and another poster got into discussion about whether or not racism still exists in this country and that's where the above quote came into play. It was never used to support AA as I don't believe in AA. Middle and upper class URM's don't need AA and AA actually harms us because it damages our credibility with non-URM's who make assumptions.

I'm a URM but I came from an upper middle class family and didn't need or want AA. I didn't steal anyone's spot as I had a 33 MCAT and I proved I belonged by getting a 260, AOA, and having a 3.94 GPA.

To me AA is always going to be a huge issue because it leaves people on one side feeling like they have to defend themselves, and the other side can feel cheated.

This is how I have always thought about AA:

1. Does AA provide an objective advantage?- I think the answer here is a clear yes based on data from the AAMC. Is it perfect in assessing for factors outside of the objective measures, no, but it's the best we have for comparison and the findings are pretty clear.

2. Why do we have AA?
a) To reciprocate for the social injustices of the past and present- While this makes sense on its face, the reality is at some point it needs to stop. We dont make the children and grandchildren of murderers continue to pay restitution to the families of victims. In previous instances of genocide worldwide, while those committing the said acts were villified it was not expected that future generations would be forced to or provide additional reparations.
b) Diversity is important as patients want to be treated by physicians they can related to.- This certainly makes sense but I would ask why its not make this across the board. I certainly don't see this being done for police officers/firefighters, and recently this was ruled unacceptable with white firefighters being given compensation for such policies. Why should this only apply to graduate education?
c) Young students need role models they can relate to.- Everyone wants role models. I'm Asian and I don't see the NBA, NFL, NHL, etc. being forced to reduce their objective standards to create a balance of ethnicities and an appropriate balance of Asian athletes. Again, why only in a few areas should this be forced.
d) To better distribute health care providers to underserved areas- While this is certainly inriguing and ideal, I don't know of significantly data showing tha AA leads to this. The rationale makes sense but that does not make it proven.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

I never used that as an argument for AA. If you see my other posts in this thread you would see that I argued SES should be used and not race.

Me and another poster got into discussion about whether or not racism still exists in this country and that's where the above quote came into play. It was never used to support AA as I don't believe in AA. Middle and upper class URM's don't need AA and AA actually harms us because it damages our credibility with non-URM's who make assumptions.

I'm a URM but I came from an upper middle class family and didn't need or want AA. I didn't steal anyone's spot as I had a 33 MCAT and I proved I belonged by getting a 260, AOA, and having a 3.94 GPA.

If I was in your position AA would make me furious. The vast majority of patients and colleagues that you interact with will not know your numbers, but they will know about AA. I think you're being cheated as much or more than any rejected Asian or Caucasian applicant.

I honestly think everyone is overestimating the power of AA. I mean if AA was such a powerful decision tool for adcom wouldn't there be more representation of URM medical students and doctors. The truth is that only a tiny percentage may get into medical school with poor stats because they are URM. And if they do get in the Adcom saw something in them that they felt they were qualified for medical school. I dont think anyone should feel that a URM took there spot. If you get into medical school you probably deserve to be there. And I have not seen any studies that say these underqualified URM's are bring down the quality of medical school education because they are flunking out or because of their low grades. It does make you wonder why URM are underrepresented in the first place, and why ORM are overrepresented.

Just for more clarity for the people against AA don't assume that URM's believe that they are entitled to a medical school education b/c of their skin with poor stats. I do agree that AA is not perfect, but I do know that we need more URM doctors.

Originally Posted by aslan

Don't know how this will go over, but I'm white and my people were horribly discriminated against for decades after arriving (Irish). Never got to be on the upper hand in any of the race stuff, and I grew up in bad economic conditions with a single mom. I worked my way through high school and college (actually didn't finish HS in traditional sense) and I worked by butt off so I could get into med school. Now I'm here. Why don't I get the same help (especially financially) through school that my black friends get? I come from very similar background but have less melanin. What's the deal with that?

Originally Posted by ijn

My great grandparents could never own an Irishman as a pet, nor did we have to pass a Civil Rights Act for your Irish parents to integrate with English kids.

The Irish had it reeeally bad in the U.S. They weren't slaves of course, but they were called "inside-out n******" and "Boston "n******."

Oh...and I anticipate seeing new immigrant groups continue to rise to the top, leaving AAs behind and crushing the idea that this country keeps the brown man down. I have numerous Guatemalan and Mexian friends whose parents are illegal immigrants and don't speak a word of English--I would say that's a greater hardship than your great-grandmother was a slave or your grandmother wasnt't allowed to vote. And they're all in college and headed to the middle class. Just saying. I'm for AA though; it ends up hurting more than it helps. Fine by me.

Been trying to find this article I read a while back, but can't. From what I remember when the California schools got rid of affirmative action, certain minority attendance was hit very hard, BUT the white numbers only went up by 0.5% (don't quote the number) the void was filled by asian attendance. I'm a 6'7 conservative bearded white man from a very poor Texas upbringing about to marry a half mexican/ half black girl from california. I can respect a number of peoples perspectives. Many groups have been oppressed. I come from the last desegregated school district in America. (unofficially, but by force). Affirmative action is probably needed but there are cost. Many people will say they probably got it bc of AA when a minorty gets something, or at least think maybe thats why even if it isn't actually the case. Thats a bad problem because it takes away from the great accomplishments of minorities. There is a lot to say about socioeconic circumstances and admissions bc it means a lot, but in the end, people of the same color are more likely to go serve a large underserved community of their exact same color and when poor people get money they happy they are not moving back to a poor area. Thats the only thing that comes from gaining income.
But in closing, fellow white people we didn't lose a spot because of affirmative action... an Asian did. Long live Texas and the Cowboys

Originally Posted by SteinUmStein

If I was in your position AA would make me furious. The vast majority of patients and colleagues that you interact with will not know your numbers, but they will know about AA. I think you're being cheated as much or more than any rejected Asian or Caucasian applicant.

I don't like it but I can understand the intent. I just think the execution needs to be better. AA just serves as another motivator to me to do as well as possible.

Originally Posted by dreamweaver1988

The Irish had it reeeally bad in the U.S. They weren't slaves of course, but they were called "inside-out n******" and "Boston "n******."

Oh...and I anticipate seeing new immigrant groups continue to rise to the top, leaving AAs behind and crushing the idea that this country keeps the brown man down. I have numerous Guatemalan and Mexian friends whose parents are illegal immigrants and don't speak a word of English--I would say that's a greater hardship than your great-grandmother was a slave or your grandmother wasnt't allowed to vote. And they're all in college and headed to the middle class. Just saying. I'm for AA though; it ends up hurting more than it helps. Fine by me.

That was a very insensitive thing to say. You can't compare and measure the fact that someone's grandmother was a slave to someone's parent's were illegal immigrants. No one is saying this country is keeping black people down, but every culture has been allowed some time of economic advantage.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

I don't like it but I can understand the intent. I just think the execution needs to be better. AA just serves as another motivator to me to do as well as possible.

I like your attitude, props to you for rolling with it and using your energy to better yourself.

Originally Posted by Medicinewoman85

That was a very insensitive thing to say. You can't compare and measure the fact that someone's grandmother was a slave to someone's parent's were illegal immigrants. No one is saying this country is keeping black people down, but every culture has been allowed some time of economic advantage.

Really, that logic makes no sense. "Every culture has been allowed some time of economic advantage" Question: when were Asians given a heads up because to my knowledge Asian immigrants suffered through many of the same social injustices as other minorities over the past century but have traditionally been excluded from AA programs.

Originally Posted by dreamweaver1988

The Irish had it reeeally bad in the U.S. They weren't slaves of course, but they were called "inside-out n******" and "Boston "n******."

Oh...and I anticipate seeing new immigrant groups continue to rise to the top, leaving AAs behind and crushing the idea that this country keeps the brown man down. I have numerous Guatemalan and Mexian friends whose parents are illegal immigrants and don't speak a word of English--I would say that's a greater hardship than your great-grandmother was a slave or your grandmother wasnt't allowed to vote. And they're all in college and headed to the middle class. Just saying. I'm for AA though; it ends up hurting more than it helps. Fine by me.

I 100% disagree with that statement brother/sister, not because of it's sensitivity, but because it's incredibly wrong. No offense to my Guatemalan and Mexican brothers, but those Jim Crow laws were not directed at them, but at the former slaves, and believe it or not, those laws still have an effect on our society. Society did not FULLY direct it's hatred at them, but at AA, thereby exponentially increasing our economic struggles. I am in no way lessening the struggle of other groups, but yeah, that one statement was not right.

Originally Posted by wagy27

Really, that logic makes no sense. "Every culture has been allowed some time of economic advantage" Question: when were Asians given a heads up because to my knowledge Asian immigrants suffered through many of the same social injustices as other minorities over the past century but have traditionally been excluded from AA programs.

I may be wrong but Asians are able to easily qualify for small business loans and they are over represented in medicine. That came out wrong but what I meant to say is that everyone has had economic challenges and/or advantages. I feel like it was inappropriate to compare one atrocity to an economic disadvantage (ie. slavery vs immigrant parents).

Originally Posted by SteinUmStein

I like your attitude, props to you for rolling with it and using your energy to better yourself.

Negative energy that you can't change can only be dealt with in two ways. One is to ignore it and the other is to use it as motivation. I like to use hate as motivation. Medicine is hard and draining, any motivation helps IMO

Some people have raised the opinion that AA is bad because even 'qualified' URMs will be viewed as 'less' (less educated/qualified/intelligent/deserving/hardworking/capable...). These sentiments exist outside of the discourse on AA. People do believe that URMs are 'less'. That's part of the reality of prejudice and racism within this country. Removing AA isn't going to fix that.


Someone asked why proponents of AA are against SES taking a greater roll in admissions. I haven't seen posters that are against SES as a factor. I see posters that are against *removing* AA and replacing it with SES. I think SES should continue to be an important factor in admission decisions.

Originally Posted by Teach4us2MD

I love how most of ya'll glanced over this. Education research proves this time and time again, that students perform better when they have a teacher of the same racial or cultural background (84% of public school teachers are white). When our society actually does the work to ensure that educators are trained in cultural competencies that will support all children whether they share the same background, then perhaps we can claim that we have done enough for URMs to believe that the playing field is level.

Before I was a teacher, it was easy for me to claim that URMs are just resting on their laurels and just not trying, but after teaching in Compton and Inglewood, I realize that the bias I have based on not sharing the same culture with my students is apparent. I am in no way racist, but misbehavior is different in each culture, expectations of behavior is different in each race and it is hard to change your own archetypes while in practice. To put it plainly, I used to believe AA was unfair, but after trying to end the achievement gap, I realized I had my own small part in creating it through my own unconscious bias that took a lot of work to undo in my students. I know it is hard to believe that white privilege still exists without Jim Crow, but the systematic effects of hundreds of years of racism in this country were not going to be erased by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 65. And to another point, do these stats that we are arguing about take into account the Historically Black Medical Schools? I mean, if they want a 24 to be their standard, what is stopping anyone else with that score from applying (contrary to popular belief, you can apply to a HBCU without being black, you actually have a better chance getting a scholarship at an HBCU if you are white with the under representation and all).

I agree with what you've said. It also supports my thoughts on AA for people that aren't at the low end of the socioeconomic ladder. You speak to Compton and Inglewood, but I think your experiences are more broadly reaching. A Hispanic or a Black child growing up in the suburbs still faces those same pressures that you have outlined. I think this is something that people fail to realize. Even though it can be difficult to see, difficult to prove, and uncomfortable to talk about, prejudices and inequalities still exist in this society and have dramatic effects on people.

Originally Posted by Miss Alyssa

Some people have raised the opinion that AA is bad because even 'qualified' URMs will be viewed as 'less' (less educated/qualified/intelligent/deserving/hardworking/capable...). These sentiments exist outside of the discourse on AA. People do believe that URMs are 'less'. That's part of the reality of prejudice and racism within this country. Removing AA isn't going to fix that.


Someone asked why proponents of AA are against SES taking a greater roll in admissions. I haven't seen posters that are against SES as a factor. I see posters that are against *removing* AA and replacing it with SES. I think SES should continue to be an important factor in admission decisions.

Why do you believe upper and middle class URM's need AA? I'm a URM but had more advantages than most whites or Asians in this country. I've dealt with racism plenty and money doesn't fix everything but I've been able to go to one of the best public schools in the country and an elite private university. I didn't need AA to get into med school and it shouldn't be applied to folks like me especially with the faulty assumption that I'm going to practice in an under served area.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

Negative energy that you can't change can only be dealt with in two ways. One is to ignore it and the other is to use it as motivation. I like to use hate as motivation. Medicine is hard and draining, any motivation helps IMO

Exactly bruh. At the end of the day, it's all about what YOU do to overcome any injustice or negative situation. Negative energy/unfavorable events can serve to either hinder you or strengthen you. I, like MDC, choose to be strengthened.

Originally Posted by wagy27

Really, that logic makes no sense. "Every culture has been allowed some time of economic advantage" Question: when were Asians given a heads up because to my knowledge Asian immigrants suffered through many of the same social injustices as other minorities over the past century but have traditionally been excluded from AA programs.

I agree that some asian groups suffered, but for the most part it was a different and temporary suffering (at least in this century). Japanese internment camps were horrific, but otherwise Asian Americans were discriminated against mainly by a refusal to allow them to immigrate. Because Asian immigration was made legal in the 60s the majority of Asian immigrants in the states are recent, within 1-2 generations.

They should benefit from AA - or at least the poor Vietnamese ones who fled here and ended up essentially replicating fishing villages, and the asian families that have lived here for generations. However asian americans tend to be excluded from programs that are looking for underrepresented populations, but there are also plenty of programs that accept them as a minority population. My college definitely counted asian Americans when reporting its minority enrollment numbers, and I've worked at plenty of places that did the same.

Otherwise there's a pretty simple selection effect that happens when you're looking at the Asian American population that's doing stellar here. They aren't just naturally better than everyone else. They work hard but an equally disproportionate number of the ones accepted to medical school have many of the same advantages that we complain about for rich white students.

To come to America legally can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Look back at the charts that I posted previously. One shows that the Asian American population is far more likely than even the white population to have parents with advanced degrees. Another shows that about half of those students are also foreign born. That's a direct effect of our immigration system. Children of immigrants and immigrants themselves tend to be richer and more educated than the general population and then also do better. Our immigration system gives priority to immigration to people who already have advanced degrees, and who are already rich comparatively to the rest of their compatriots. By default, people who move to another country are the most proactive of their people. Meanwhile its harder in a lot of countries to get that advanced degree in the first place. It goes a lot further than the stereotype of the rich foreigner.

A lot of the students who make it to medical school therefore benefit both from educated parents AND from not having to struggle all the way through the US school system. Its the root of the stereotype that "asians are all good at math". Anyone from a foreign system starts doing advanced math in elementary school that we may not see until high school here. So you have to remember that when you try to mass Asian students into a cohesive whole, you're mostly looking at the 1% money or intelligence-wise of something like a 1/3 of the worlds people, and all of North America has a population equal to 5% of the world. We just accept them, then refuse to honor their parents degrees so they end up going back through school and working as nurses, and then wonder why their kids don't perform the same as other kids if you look just at economic levels. Meanwhile even legal immigration from countries that are close to the US are biased in favor of poor, uneducated employees willing to work in kitchens.

There are many studies that have shown that the asian families that have lived here for generations have suffered for it, and ARE discriminated against. For example, while as a whole they make more than the general white population, on a job by job basis, there's a wage gap and low representation at the tops of industry. However it doesn't look like they're being discriminated against because as a result of their immigration they're mildly worse off from above average. It's obvious when you're worse off starting at the bottom of the pile and it matters more practically because there's no place to fall, but the same morally.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

Why do you believe upper and middle class URM's need AA? I'm a URM but had more advantages than most whites or Asians in this country. I've dealt with racism plenty and money doesn't fix everything but I've been able to go to one of the best public schools in the country and an elite private university. I didn't need AA to get into med school and it shouldn't be applied to folks like me especially with the faulty assumption that I'm going to practice in an under served area.

I don't think upper and middle class URMs need AA for admissions. While you have done fine, it doesn't mean that others will also do fine. Some people may be more effected by the pressures in the post that I quoted.

How many spots are we taking about here? My class have 6 AA out of 175. What about yours?

Originally Posted by PantherPride

Affirmative Action isn't put in place to help the disadvantaged. It is simply a way to increase the representation of under-represented groups in medicine. Yes, it is prone to self-selection, as is medicine, or any other form of higher education for that matter. No, it isn't fair. And no, it isn't flawless. But as it stands, its one of the few solutions we have to increasing the representation of Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans in medicine. Even with these affirmative action programs, the representation of these groups are still pitiful, unfortunately.

Sorry, but 'underrepresented' doesn't fly in a profession that demands excellence. Might work for midlevel business jobs. There's an under-representation of 5'10" white guys on the Celtics, but I haven't gotten any phone calls from Doc Rivers lately. It should be blinded to gender and race. In fact, the more the race card is played in the name of 'equality' the more it draws a divide. Regardless of your upbringing, your merits are your merits. Let them stand for themselves.

Originally Posted by Mr Cookie Pants

Sorry, but 'underrepresented' doesn't fly in a profession that demands excellence. Might work for midlevel business jobs. There's an under-representation of 5'10" white guys on the Celtics, but I haven't gotten any phone calls from Doc Rivers lately. It should be blinded to gender and race. In fact, the more the race card is played in the name of 'equality' the more it draws a divide. Regardless of your upbringing, your merits are your merits. Let them stand for themselves.

Exactly this. There is no AA for pilots or astronauts, and I would argue a career in medicine requires similar levels of skill and academic merit. Selecting for anything other than merit is a disservice to our patients.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

Why do you believe upper and middle class URM's need AA? I'm a URM but had more advantages than most whites or Asians in this country. I've dealt with racism plenty and money doesn't fix everything but I've been able to go to one of the best public schools in the country and an elite private university. I didn't need AA to get into med school and it shouldn't be applied to folks like me especially with the faulty assumption that I'm going to practice in an under served area.

And AA isn't about you. The point of AA is that amazing people will be amazing anywhere, but that the world has to be fair to "okay" people as well. I think you misread the quote, the posters point wasn't that if SES is considered, it should be as a part of an interaction variable with race.

However the reality is that when you see a high SES URM doing well and getting into schools they shouldn't because of their GPAs, most of that is the effect of the middle class advantage they already have. Beyond better prep, middle class status gets you into high schools that colleges will lower their gpa requirement for. For example, my prep (even though it was public!) school had a portfolio showing where students were getting with their GPAs and it didn't come anything close to what schools say their average scores are. Like a 3.1 non-URM accepted to Amherst and Princeton nowhere close. Everyone has a story about the black kid in their prep class with a B average that got into an amazing school...most of those people are ignoring the fact that their entire school got into amazing schools, and someone definitely had lower grades than the black kid.

However, if you apply SES criteria only to the AA population, the only thing you accomplish is ignoring the disadvantage of the middle class AA population while pumping the prospects of the middle class not AA population. If what you're trying to accomplish is an elimination of all unfair advantages of the system to truly pick out good people, you have to apply SES aids to everyone AND AA aids until people can come up with systems that see people for what they are.

Originally Posted by Mr Cookie Pants

Sorry, but 'underrepresented' doesn't fly in a profession that demands excellence. Might work for midlevel business jobs. There's an under-representation of 5'10" white guys on the Celtics, but I haven't gotten any phone calls from Doc Rivers lately. It should be blinded to gender and race. In fact, the more the race card is played in the name of 'equality' the more it draws a divide. Regardless of your upbringing, your merits are your merits. Let them stand for themselves.

And the question of how we define merit for doctors doesn't apply at all? AA students pass the USLME. They make it through their residency. They pass their boards. They serve populations that need serving, either because they have no doctors, or they have no doctors that won't discriminate against them. Almost no one drops out of medical school. Ergo the AA system doesn't affect accepted applicant merit at all. That is because the application process is NOT AN ACCURATE evaluation of how well you do the thing you will be doing.

It's easy to complain when the rules stop benefiting you, but it seems to be so much harder for you to provide objective data as to why they were better before. The reality is that the application process establishes basic qualifications (like here is my 3.0 minimum to apply), and then looks into a crystal ball to decide who might be the best personality and worker. There are plenty of people rejected from medical schools that would be fine doctors, there are ten applicants for every spot and schools can almost pick at random and find a good fit. The problem is that you're looking for acceptance to define something about your worth.

Meanwhile we have plenty of data that says:
1) we changed the name on an application and suddenly the applicant wasn't qualified
2) we trained a group of woman and men or blacks and white to interview in the same way, our feedback was that the women were more likely to be b*%$# and the blacks were more likely to be scary while the white men were go getters and shoe-ins
3) we ask teachers to evaluate two trained actors blacks students were labeled disruptive misbehaving and sent for harsh discipline while white students were simply labeled active and talked to
4) we asked psychologists to evaluate student behaviors, black students were far more likely to be labeled ADHD, but hey if the students were displaying ADHD, they were far less likely to be properly diagnosed
5) or worse yet, we had doctors evaluate a patient and changed the race in the history, doctors were far more likely to say the blacks needed the less effective treatment or nothing was wrong than they would for a white patient

so come back and explain exactly what you mean by merit. We're trying to tell you that the system dismisses the merit of AA students

Originally Posted by TwisterTwain

And the question of how we define merit for doctors doesn't apply at all? AA students pass the USLME. They make it through their residency. They pass their boards. They serve populations that need serving, either because they have no doctors, or they have no doctors that won't discriminate against them. Almost no one drops out of medical school. Ergo the AA system doesn't affect accepted applicant merit at all.

I don't think you can safely come to that conclusion using either your previous statements or the data that the AAMC provides on all accepted applicants.

Originally Posted by TwisterTwain

It's easy to complain when the rules stop benefiting you, but it seems to be so much harder for you to provide objective data as to why they were better before. The reality is that the application process establishes basic qualifications (like here is my 3.0 minimum to apply), and then looks into a crystal ball to decide who might be the best personality and worker. There are plenty of people rejected from medical schools that would be fine doctors, there are ten applicants for every spot and schools can almost pick at random and find a good fit. The problem is that you're looking for acceptance to define something about your worth.

This is simply not how the medical school admissions process works, and I do not think the previous poster was saying that acceptance defines an applicant's worth at all.