Has anyone on here considering med school seen this?

[qldking]

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Medstart108]

Its not as bad as you think qldking. Parents often help, scholarships, loans etc. The income from being a physician is usually plenty enough. The people with trouble are the people who have an arts degree, don't have a scholarship and/or their parents can't help.

 

[qldking]

Its not as bad as you think qldking. Parents often help, scholarships, loans etc. The income from being a physician is usually plenty enough. The people with trouble are the people who have an arts degree, don't have a scholarship and/or their parents can't help.

What about people who only match into Family Medicine and have loans accruing while they max out at 150k salary?

 

[Medstart108]

What about people who only match into Family Medicine and have loans accruing while they max out at 150k salary?

Well, obviously you won't be rich but you'll eek a living out. How about the Arts students with loans accruing maxing out a 30k salary? Yeah, i think they have it "just a bit worse".

 

[foody]

@qldking, I think your post title should be changed to: Has anyone considering education seen this?

Debts, loans, financial aid all come with the territory of becoming educated. Whether you go to private high school, college, med school, graduate school whatever, the student can seemingly get screwed by the system if they don't make the right decisions in life. And some get screwed despite the decisions they've made. Like @Medstart108 said, those with arts degrees can get the shorter end of the stick. In my opinion you have to either be a creative motivated art savant to make it in liberal arts or change your career to investment banking in order to pay off your loans in less than 10 years. Which is why I didn't major in English lol. Making $50 bucks an hour tutoring the sciences is working out nicely for me. Not putting down liberal arts majors, I just knew I didn't have what it takes to make it in those fields.

I've seen a lot of your posts warning people about the downfalls of going abroad to medical school (expensive, high risk etc.). They are well-intentioned I'm sure as you must have had a lot of trouble in your own life to want to warn strangers on the internet. BUT with that said, you might as well warn students about the downfall of going to medical school locally. As an out-of-state applicant, I would be paying exorbitant amount of money to a private medical school.

Well my point is, that people will do plenty of research about the pros and cons of medical school/money. That is why this forum exists. However, putting posts like whyyyy go to med school??? is kind of useless here. People browsing these forums have already weighed the pros and cons. If they haven't then yes I fear for them and am glad you post the crazy posts you do. But I think you need to also address the other sides of the argument, like how medicine can be fulfilling for someone and how it allows to pay off loans in ten years or less. I wouldn't be able to do that with working just in research or a field like engineering. Maybe I've done the math wrong, but there is a lot of statistics out there that back up what I'm saying.

 

[pitman]

Some people should seriously consider not going to college, or maybe going to a public community college, or a trade school.

 

[qldking]

It always cracks me up how disgraced former UQ MBBS Head of School Wilkinson would regale us of his tales saving the starving baby Africans in the deepest depths of the sub-Saharan region and now he is head of Fundraising at Macquarie University, lol.

Oh well. UQ only has 600 students per class with a total of 730 internships in QLD but this guy got what he wanted and now he has a cushy job while young medical graduates' futures are in permanent limbo.

 

[foody]

@qldking, what the heck are you talking about? Your posts are really starting to annoy me. I'm not defending the issues that led to the step-down of David Wilkinson BUT get your facts straight. Do you just talk randomly and supplement random information from your head? He is NOT the head of fundraising but the deputy vice chancellor. Seriously double check yourself.

http://www.mq.edu.au/pubstatic/abou...nt_and_advancement_professor_david_wilkinson/

 

[BubblegumPop]

David Wilkinson wasn't stepped down, he simply changed jobs.
http://www.medicalobserver.com.au/n...er-given-med-school-place-ahead-of-343-others

"Professor Wilkinson told the commission that he had advised Professor Greenfield that given his daughter’s failure to meet the university’s stated requirements, to make such an offer there was little that could be done.

However, feeling pressured to act and fearing that his career prospects may have been jeopardised by his failure to pursue the issue for the vice-chancellor, Professor Wilkinson contacted Professor Keniger who ultimately made the decision to offer Ms Greenfield a place in the medical school."

 

[bearded frog]

​

 

[pitman]

He did leave on his own accord, in part because of the scandal (which would be a smart time for any Head to step down).

@qldking, what the heck are you talking about? Your posts are really starting to annoy me. I'm not defending the issues that led to the step-down of David Wilkinson BUT get your facts straight. Do you just talk randomly and supplement random information from your head?

Yes, he does. With no firsthand knowledge or other evidence, qldking will assert his thought bubbles as fact.

Wilkinson did not create the medical student tsunami, there are not 600 students per class, and he has actually reduced (by negotiating Ochsner) the number of int'ls at UQ Australia in the clinical years and beyond.

I find it highly unlikely that criminal charges could have been charged against anybody, let alone Wilkinson. The SOM actually abided by its own (externally) approved rules, akin to how US schools openly practice nepotism (e.g., "family legacy"). So, unseemly for Australia, an essentially classless country priding itself of the "a fair go", but not illegal. Unless there have been developments otherwise that one would like to reference here.

 

[bearded frog]

​

 

[pitman]

Again, I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that UQ broke the law when accepting the VC's daughter, but the decision was on the face of it legal (it was also consistent with thoroughly vetted, publicly available policies of the uni that describe exceptions to merit-based selection, and how to deal with conflicts of interest).

The CMC, after all, was limited in its investigation to considering whether any laws were broken during the *investigation* (essentially, if misleading testimony was given after the fact). I'm pretty sure it also concluded that no laws were broken.

Below are posts I made in 2011 to an Australian forum on the matter in response to similar assumptions that the SoM broke laws in its acceptance of the VC's daughter:

New Admissions Policy is out. The pertinent changes are below:
(2011)
http://www.uq.edu.au/student/GeneralRules2011/2011AdmissionRules.pdf
4.9 Power to waive compliance
The vice-chancellor, after consultation with the executive dean, may, under exceptional circumstances, direct that strict application of these rules should be waived in respect of a particular applicant, subject to such conditions as the vice- chancellor may impose.

(2012)
http://www.uq.edu.au/student/GeneralRules2012/2012AdmissionRules.pdf
4.9 Power to waive compliance
The vice-chancellor, after consultation with the executive dean (not to be delegated) and the president of the Academic Board, may, under exceptional circumstances, direct that strict application of these rules should be waived in respect of a particular applicant, subject to such conditions as the vice-chancellor may impose.

(2011)
4.5 Special admission
4.5.1 The president of the Academic Board may, in exceptional circumstances, increase the rank assigned to an applicant, or authorise the offer of a quota place.
4.5.2 An applicant under Rule 4.5.1 may include an applicant nominated through an approved special admission program who has been recommended for the offer of a quota place by the associate dean (academic).

(2012)
4.5 Special admission
4.5.1 The president of the Academic Board may authorise the offer of a quota place to an applicant nominated through an approved special admission scheme who has been recommended for the offer of a quota place by the associate dean (academic).

------------------------
So as I predicted, the 'exception' clauses have just been tightened a bit -- the Power to Waive Compliance now requires the exec dean himself/herself and not a delegate, along with a third person, to approve of the exception (to normal acceptance criteria, such as academic); and Special Admission by the president of the Academic Board is now limited to admission to a pre-approved 'scheme' (e.g., rural quota).

And the Code of Conduct did not disallow accepting a family member under any of its admissions policies (including via the above exceptions to merit-based selection) so long as the decision to accept was not made by a family member:

5.3 Personal relationships

5.3.1 A conflict of interest can arise where a staff member makes or participates in decisions affecting another person with whom the staff member has a personal relationship (such as near relative, spouse, close friend or personal associate). There are a number of situations in the course of a staff member's duties in which a conflict may arise, for instance, in the marking of student assignments or examination papers, in appointment, supervision and promotion of staff and in the awarding of research or other financial assistance to staff or students. Where such a conflict arises in a clear case, a staff member should withdraw himself or herself from the situation. Where the relationship is not so close, the staff member should discuss the issue with someone in authority.[8] For example, a member of the academic staff should not participate in decisions relating to assessment or the determination of a grade for a close friend, and a member of staff should not participate in decisions relating to the appointment of a relative."
(http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/?page=24987 )

Note that the Deputy VC claimed to have made the offer, not the VC -- in accordance with the above policy. Both lost their jobs.

Such a Code of Conduct allowing the above discretion to waive normal merit-based selection was not unique to UQ, either. Below, for example, was UMelbourne's relevant policy:

"Eligibility for special admission
3
Although a person may not be eligible under section 2 for admission to a course, the Board may, in special cases-

declare the person to be eligible for admission to the course; and
impose any conditions in relation to completion of qualifications ordinarily required for admission to the course or otherwise as the Board thinks fit.
"

(http://www.unimelb.edu.au/Statutes/r111a2.html )

And favoritism based on family connection (such as legacy) is alive and well in public unis in the US, too.

I would however welcome references with analysis of the above showing how the acceptance was illegal.

 

[bearded frog]

​

 

[pitman]

Nothing you've posted says that the acceptance was illegal, or that Wilkinson broke any law (read your own bold statements -- pretty clear legaleze!), nor do you give any analysis. It doesn't address my above posts re: the Code of Conduct, which was vetted as being legal (in fact, your above is consistent with what I just said -- the CMC was very quickly limited to looking at whether testimony was misleading (your "dishonesty" clause as applied in the real world), since it was immediately apparent that abiding by the public Code is not being dishonest! And in the end, there was no finding that any laws were broken (the "dishonesty" criterion not being demonstrated, among other things).

Your inferences are your own characterizations based on your assumptions around what it means to have any inconsistencies in testimony. I am stating the simple facts that the parties were not breaking any laws, nor found to have broken any laws, in accepting the VC's daughter, and such an action is not even what the "dishonesty" clause refers to, while Wilkinson's testimony did not indicate that laws were broken, with no finding that he or the other parties were being dishonest.

 

[bearded frog]

​

 

[pitman]

My take is/has been that they were forced to resign because the nepotism made the uni look bad, irrespective of whether uni policy was adhered to.

Greenfield and Keinger argued the acceptance was merely negligent and not intentional. Do you honestly believe they accidentally accepted his daughter when she didn't meat the electronic cut offs?

I have no idea what it means to unintentionally accept someone.

---------------------------------
[edit]
Having just read the report, I think that the issue boils down to Keniger claiming in email that the VC's daughter was admitted on merit, additionally claiming that he got this notion from Wilkinson and not having any independent information of her academic status. Wilkinson meanwhile claimed that he indicated to Keniger that any acceptance would not be based on merit.

Wilkinson, however, was not in a position to accept the VC's daughter. If he were "forced" to do anything by Greenfield, it was simply to call Keniger who could then make the decision (thus getting around the Conflict of Interest policy of UQ -- which I have understood to be the cynical intention of the circularity of the communications). Not a big deal in my mind. Therefore I don't buy the argument that Greenfield had unduly pressured him to do anything of consequence, so long as Wilkinson didn't withhold the academic status of the VC's daughter from Keniger, who should have verified it anyway.

I agree that the affair was seedy, and I think it was a critical mistake (in terms of wanting to eat the cake, too) for Keniger to claim in email that the acceptance was based on merit (I had thought UQ/Keniger admitted it was a manual admission not based on merit, which, ironically, would have been in accordance with UQ policy despite being unseemly). Keniger's excuse was that he relied on what he was told by Wilkinson, and Wilkinson's excuse was that he told Keniger.

If Keniger told the truth, then the issue would be whether Wilkinson misled Keniger. If Wilkinson told the truth, then Keniger misled the uni as to the merits of the VC daughter's acceptance. Either would be misconduct, but not because the VC's daughter was accepted. And in the end, there could be no finding of illegal activity.

So I stand by my statement:

I find it highly unlikely that criminal charges could have been charged against anybody, let alone Wilkinson.

...and apologetically retract my comments that UQ's position was that it (Kenig) accepted the VC's daughter under the pretence that it was done independent of academic merit, and thus admit that one or more parties can reasonably be inferred to have been dishonest. Oh the irony.

 

[bearded frog]

​

 

[qldking]

@qldking, what the heck are you talking about? Your posts are really starting to annoy me. I'm not defending the issues that led to the step-down of David Wilkinson BUT get your facts straight. Do you just talk randomly and supplement random information from your head? He is NOT the head of fundraising but the deputy vice chancellor. Seriously double check yourself.

http://www.mq.edu.au/pubstatic/abou...nt_and_advancement_professor_david_wilkinson/

What do you suppose the job description of Vice Chancellor of CORPORATE ENGAGEMENT entails?

Come on now, man.

These are the sorts of people who are going to screw your future. Take a stand instead of blindly defending their reprehensible actions.

 

[pitman]

um. yeah. Most people understand that attracting/maintaining funding is integral to the responsibilities of any VIP of any uni or other corporation, but if you want to equate the head of communications, alumni support, and philanthropic activities with the head of "Fundraising" (your caps bro), then that's your obsession. And btw the position's responsibilities are linked to from your own reference:

http://www.mq.edu.au/pubstatic/abou...t_professor_david_wilkinson/responsibilities/

...not that there's any meaningful connection between fundraising, corporate communications, philanthropy, alumni support, & marketing, and your obsession with the nepotism scandal in the first place. Or is it simply that you're bitter Wilkinson has been promoted in the uni world? That he got a Fulbright scholarship in the aftermath of the scandal? That he hasn't been -- as you seem to wish he's been -- "disgraced"?

 

[qldking]

Oh right a Fulbright scholarship isn't political or anything.

let me ask you-what is your stance on the current tsunami of medical students and the RMO crisis? How do you think it all came to be?

 

[pitman]

qldking, if I thought you had an ounce of actual curiosity rather than an agenda arising from a massive chip on your shoulder, I might take your question at face value.

You can, of course, look through over a thousand posts of mine and answer that yourself, as I am on the record with everything tsunami (having watched it evolve from the beginning, being a part of it, and representing students and docs on it).

Of course if you then misrepresent me here as you have most of what you write about, I will rub your face in it, relentlessly. Go for it.

 

[qldking]

I'm legitimately curious as to your stance.

My 'chip' is founded on reality and the reality of many others who have finished medical school and were not content with the process.

 

[Medstart108]

So where are you now? Did you not get an internship after your graduated? Or did you get sent out into the middle of the outback and you're bitter about it? Did you not get a residency in the specialty you wanted? It's one thing to be dissatisfied with a service or product, but in your case it is pretty obvious that this is a very personal grudge.

He's probably just bitter that he didn't get the internship he wanted or didn't get one at all. Honestly, with every new rant and rage post, he looks more and more like a psych patient than a doctor.

Someone who is this bitter at such an insignificant issue has serious issues and shouldn't be a physician anyways.

 

[pitman]

What I find particularly odd is that in Queensland, where qldking claims to have been a student, there has yet to be a year when there weren't enough spots for its graduates. Domestic or international. In fact, for last year and this year, when the Commonwealth created ~100 spots (each year) across Australia just for internationals who didn't get a job through their own state ballot, many went unfilled -- including in several Queensland hospitals. I have yet to find anyone who was rejected by them, though I suppose anything's possible.