Is volunteering at planned parenthood going to jeopardize my application?

[JulianaW]

I have just interviewed for a volunteer position at Planned Parenthood - either serving as a Rape Crisis Counselor or a patient volunteer (meaning I would help people who came in, take their info, talk with them if they are worried, etc).

I just realized that this might look bad on an application though... I don't know if adcoms would be biased against me because they do or do not support Planned Parenthood (and inherently the abortion topic is implied).

Should I decline the opportunity to volunteer here because of this?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[RunningDiva]

I have just interviewed for a volunteer position at Planned Parenthood - either serving as a Rape Crisis Counselor or a patient volunteer (meaning I would help people who came in, take their info, talk with them if they are worried, etc).

I just realized that this might look bad on an application though... I don't know if adcoms would be biased against me because they do or do not support Planned Parenthood (and inherently the abortion topic is implied).

Should I decline the opportunity to volunteer here because of this?

Short answer, no. Adcoms should not judge your experiences based on their own political/religious/whatever biases they may have. Are you passionate about volunteering for PP? Can you talk about why you wanted to volunteer there and how the experience influenced you (on paper and in an interview)? Follow what you want to do and don't be ashamed because you think someone won't agree with your positions.

 

[Asyouwereatrio]

I'll preface my post by stating that my political views are fairly liberal and I do support abortion...

Now, to answer your question with my opinion, your volunteer position does not necessarily reflect your views on abortion. It only shows that you care about the people that attend Planned Parenthood. You could easily be someone who is completely against abortion and you are volunteering there to education the patrons of the importance of being safe and not partaking in activities that could result in accidental, unwanted life.

In short, I think that volunteering here would show your care for others and not jeopoardise your application at all..unless people start reading into it incorrectly--just don't write anything that shows your opinion either way.

 

[RunningDiva]

I'll preface my post by stating that my political views are fairly liberal and I do support abortion...

Now, to answer your question with my opinion, your volunteer position does not necessarily reflect your views on abortion. It only shows that you care about the people that attend Planned Parenthood. You could easily be someone who is completely against abortion and you are volunteering there to education the patrons of the importance of being safe and not partaking in activities that could result in accidental, unwanted life.

In short, I think that volunteering here would show your care for others and not jeopoardise your application at all..unless people start reading into it incorrectly--just don't write anything that shows your opinion either way.

Just to piggy back on this idea, as a physician you will most likely have to treat patients who live a different lifestyle than you. You may not agree that they smoke, are a stripper, use drugs, etc. Its about the ability to be compassionate to every type of person.

 

[Dianyla]

I also volunteer for Planned Parenthood, accompanying patients through the entire abortion procedure from waiting room to recovery room. I am not censoring this in my description of it in AMCAS, and I acknowledge that it may end up being a polarizing issue. Then again, I'm not applying to any religious schools. My thinking is that any school that has this much of a problem with it is not an environment where I'm going to feel very comfortable for 4 years. Furthermore, since one of my potential fields of interest is women's health, I would be concerned that an anti-abortion school would possibly lack comprehensive coverage of women's health issues in their curriculum.

Your experience as you've described it sounds much more universally non-offensive. You could have been doing this at any women's clinic. I think only a very few very conservative schools (e.g. Loma Linda) would hold this against you just because the organization you were volunteering for happens to provide abortions. But the majority should look at the content of what you were doing and be fine with it.

 

[Zona Pellucida]

No way! Go for it.

If I were an adcom, I would look extremely favorable on this volunteer experience because, regardless of political/moral opinions, you are working with patients who are experiencing (arguably) some of the most difficult situations: rape, unwanted pregnancies, etc. You will most likely learn a lot from this and be able to talk about it in your future interviews.

 

[d1ony5u5]

Yeah, to provide further encouragement, let me offer an anecdote: When I was interviewing this past cycle, I got into a discussion with my interviewer about a very polemic issue (healthcare reform and immigration). We had completely different views on the subject, and I could have sworn the guy did not want me to get into his school afterward. However, I heard from the dean of the school on the day that he called to inform me I was accepted that the interviewer had actually advocated heavily to get me in!

Even though it is a politically charged issue, AdComs cannot discriminate in an unjustified manner. They are committees, and their decisions are based on consensus. When one person says they don't think you are good enough for their school, they usually have to provide reasons, and bigotry is not a valid one.

If you really like it, go volunteer with them, and defend with passion (and also with respect) your position. Most academically inclined people actually like well supported arguments that contradict their own.

 

[murfettie]

no. i worked a planned parenthood.
from the reception i've gotten
(although i'm applying this cycle, but I do know some admissions people since I'm a little older)

 

[runawayclock]

No way! Go for it.

If I were an adcom, I would look extremely favorable on this volunteer experience because, regardless of political/moral opinions, you are working with patients who are experiencing (arguably) some of the most difficult situations: rape, unwanted pregnancies, etc. You will most likely learn a lot from this and be able to talk about it in your future interviews.

+1. I would think that the adcoms would see the compassion and the empathy required for something like this, rather than think ZOMG THEY MUST BE TERRIBLE BABY EATING LIBERALS!!!

 

[morning]

If anyone does try to jump on you for it, just patiently explain that Planned Parenthood provides a full spectrum of reproductive health care to both women AND men. And some clinics don't even perform abortions.

 

[ErmaBoBurma]

If it is a cause you believe in don't hide it!!! I personally would never want to attend a school that would look down upon me for working for a cause that I believe in. So if they don't like it, their loss!!!

I volunteered for a similar type of place and talked about it a lot in my personal statement because it was really influential in my decision to go into medicine. Did it cost me interviews? I'll never know. But the places where I did interview were very interested in hearing more about my experience and supportive of my efforts.

 

[foofish]

Your experience as you've described it sounds much more universally non-offensive. You could have been doing this at any women's clinic. I think only a very few very conservative schools (e.g. Loma Linda) would hold this against you just because the organization you were volunteering for happens to provide abortions. But the majority should look at the content of what you were doing and be fine with it.

I agree, at most schools it would be a non-issue. For most schools this would be a positive factor, in that other than an EMT it's likely as close to a real clinical interaction as you're going to get as a premed. Frankly, if a school isn't interested in you based on a history of volunteering at Planned Parenthood, that med school probably would have been a bad fit to begin with, and they're doing you a favor.

 

[Bleg]

I have just interviewed for a volunteer position at Planned Parenthood - either serving as a Rape Crisis Counselor or a patient volunteer (meaning I would help people who came in, take their info, talk with them if they are worried, etc).

I just realized that this might look bad on an application though... I don't know if adcoms would be biased against me because they do or do not support Planned Parenthood (and inherently the abortion topic is implied).

Should I decline the opportunity to volunteer here because of this?

As a general rule: In the educational system, you are never penalized for adhering to a politically left ideal. Thus, for example, if you work as an abortion facilitator, or with undocumented migrant workers, or at a needle exchange program, these things will generally be viewed positively, and very rarely in a negative light.

However, if you adhere to a politically right ideal, you are more likely to encounter pushback or even outright discrimination. This is not legal, of course, and you will never be told that the reason for your denial is that you participated in thus-and-such activity, but such is the nature of reality.

I speak from intimate knowledge of publicly-financed education in general. I have no experience with medical school admissions, so I am assuming the same general rules apply. However, it is possible that medical school admissions have somehow avoided the prejudice endemic to the rest of academia. I doubt it, but I can't give you an insider's view.

 

[morning]

As a general rule: In the educational system, you are never penalized for adhering to a politically left ideal. Thus, for example, if you work as an abortion facilitator, or with undocumented migrant workers, or at a needle exchange program, these things will generally be viewed positively, and very rarely in a negative light.

However, if you adhere to a politically right ideal, you are more likely to encounter pushback or even outright discrimination. This is not legal, of course, and you will never be told that the reason for your denial is that you participated in thus-and-such activity, but such is the nature of reality.

I speak from intimate knowledge of publicly-financed education in general. I have no experience with medical school admissions, so I am assuming the same general rules apply. However, it is possible that medical school admissions have somehow avoided the prejudice endemic to the rest of academia. I doubt it, but I can't give you an insider's view.

What sort of activities do conservatives get up to that the evil lefties will disapprove of? Name one. Something that would show up on the medical school app.

Most people don't care what you believe. You're not the victim you think you are.

 

[ILikeDrugs]

I've seen an MDapp profile with planned parent hood work and acceptances. That doesn't mean that some adcoms won't be biased.

 

[Dianyla]

What sort of activities do conservatives get up to that the evil lefties will disapprove of? Name one. Something that would show up on the medical school app.

Speaking for myself, I'd look down on someone who volunteered at a crisis pregnancy center. Or coordinated an abstinence only sex miseducation program. Just sayin'.

 

[deconstruct]

As a general rule: In the educational system, you are never penalized for adhering to a politically left ideal. Thus, for example, if you work as an abortion facilitator, or with undocumented migrant workers, or at a needle exchange program, these things will generally be viewed positively, and very rarely in a negative light.

However, if you adhere to a politically right ideal, you are more likely to encounter pushback or even outright discrimination. This is not legal, of course, and you will never be told that the reason for your denial is that you participated in thus-and-such activity, but such is the nature of reality.

I speak from intimate knowledge of publicly-financed education in general. I have no experience with medical school admissions, so I am assuming the same general rules apply. However, it is possible that medical school admissions have somehow avoided the prejudice endemic to the rest of academia. I doubt it, but I can't give you an insider's view.

I worked in a restaurant where most of the kitchen staff were illegal immigrants. Do you think mentioning this in my application will increase my chances of getting accepted?

 

[Nevadanteater]

No. You'll be fine.

My application pack included some pretty out there stuff (transgender medicine, needle exchange/overdose education/narcan distribution, punk rock gig management and band roadie) and I am pretty happy with my results (though the acceptances I did get are from pretty liberal areas, so it might have skewed me in that direction).

 

[shiftingmirage]

I think the adcom would be well aware that Planned Parenthood does so much more than just abortions. And you said you may do rape crisis, how in the world could they hold that against you? If you are interested in ob/gyn, I would think Planned is a great place to get exposure to the field.

 

[plauto]

What sort of activities do conservatives get up to that the evil lefties will disapprove of? Name one. Something that would show up on the medical school app.

Most people don't care what you believe. You're not the victim you think you are.

most primary care docs at academic centers are extremely liberal and passionate about it. I'd caution anyone interviewing not to openly reveal their opinions about health care reform and such unless your ideas line up with mainstream liberal views. For these docs, if you don't agree with government expansion and mandatory "free" universal coverage, you are not serving your patients' best interest.

To the OP: no, it will not jeopardize you in any way. It will give you a great experience to talk about.

 

[mvenus929]

My thinking is that any school that has this much of a problem with it is not an environment where I'm going to feel very comfortable for 4 years.

This. You shouldn't be afraid to speak about your experiences, because they make up who you are. If a school rejects you because you work with rape victims, then they're probably not a school you want to attend anyway. I have a feeling you won't get much in the way of opposition to it, though.

 

[krs881]

I worked in a restaurant where most of the kitchen staff were illegal immigrants. Do you think mentioning this in my application will increase my chances of getting accepted?

+1 (about mentioning it and speaking about how it influenced you... can't say it would increase chances of getting in)

No. You'll be fine.

My application pack included some pretty out there stuff (transgender medicine, needle exchange/overdose education/narcan distribution, punk rock gig management and band roadie) and I am pretty happy with my results (though the acceptances I did get are from pretty liberal areas, so it might have skewed me in that direction).

+1

Working in a restaurant alongside immigrant coworkers, with injection drug users and needle ex/harm reduction programs/research, and working at a public clinic with immigrants all featured prominently in my PS and AMCAS. I was extremely pleased with the schools I got into, and don't think I would have been happy at any schools in which the AdCom would judge me for these activities, which are the very things that lead me to medicine.

 

[Cyradis]

Definitely include it. I'm looking at this from the other side: I was exec on a pro-life student/semi-activist club (don't worry, all non-violent =) demonstrations/information/counseling and the like). I think it showed that I really stuck to what I believe, and as someone else here before said, if a school would reject me because I'm pro-life and stand up for that, it isn't a school I want to attend.

With all that said comes a warning: my pro-life involvement was brought up in EVERY interview (well, 4/4). At one of these interviews - my interviewer was very clearly pro-choice and straight up told me that because I was a man, I don't have the right to have a say on abortion, because it is a woman's choice (this was at an Ivy League school too). I tried to respectfully disagree and say that I did feel I had a right to be against abortion and tried to divert the conversation to saying I would still respect a patient and if a patient needed an abortion I would counsel and then refer her to another physician who would do it (since I wouldn't).... but she just kept pushing her view. Needless to say, I'm pretty sure that had a huge role to play in me not getting in to that school.

I think you should include it, but just be ready to talk about it if/when it comes up during interviews and make it clear that you wouldn't denigrate someone for opposing abortion and that you respect/understand both sides of the issue etc.

 

[Sesom]

Planned Parenthood does not do abortions here in Utah, it is so lame. My girlfriend got pregnant and we had to pay a fortune to get her an abortion! But this is not Planned Parenthood's fault it is the stupid state.

 

[wingiv]

You should definitely put it down. I am sure that it provides a different view of medicine than most of us have been exposed to. Just be prepared though, that in one of my interviews, one of the interviewees told me that they got grilled by their interviewer for working at an abortion clinic. If the people at the school are like that, then so be it. You're probably better off somewhere else then.

 

[Chemdude]

You kill babies???!!!

 

[Chemdude]

Seriously though, I would bring it up, but I would make sure that I did not state my opinion in a way that could possibly offend any of the adcoms. I think the majority of doctors are anti-abortion;I remember seeing a survey somewhere showing that only 30% of doctors are pro-abortion. So if you don't state your opinion properly, you are very likely to offend an interviewer/someone reading your application.

 

[jrou111]

What sort of activities do conservatives get up to that the evil lefties will disapprove of? Name one. Something that would show up on the medical school app.

Most people don't care what you believe. You're not the victim you think you are.

The following associations I won't be putting on my app:

10th Amendment Center
Young Americans for Liberty
Concealed Campus (college students for concealed carry)
2nd Amendment Foundation
NRA life member
GOA member
MVPA (Military Vehicle Preservation Association)
Ludwig Von Mises Institute

I'm not worried about being a victim or not, it's just that the majority of the left and the right don't understand what being a libertarian is about. It's like a different language to them and I'd rather not have to explain ideas that are completely foreign to them.

 

[Bleg]

What sort of activities do conservatives get up to that the evil lefties will disapprove of? Name one. Something that would show up on the medical school app.

I thought I was clear that I speak from a larger academic perspective, and have no direct knowledge of med school admissions policies. I would be surprised if medical schools diverged from essentially all the rest of academia in being truly unbiased toward a rightward sociopolitical viewpoint, but I'm not saying it's impossible.

Try to get a grad school admission on the basis of your yearlong ministry service in Africa, consisting of digging wells, setting up secured wireless networks (good luck), providing power on a more-than-intermittent basis, teaching Sunday School, and coordinating proselytizing and other religious activity. I guarantee that if you don't leave out the last two items, you will get raised eyebrows, knowing glances between faculty members, eyerolls, and mumbled insults, and your odds of getting admitted to the program will fall to somewhere between slim and none.

Now, try telling them you coordinated a needle exchange and helped women secure "reproductive health care" in the form of abortions. You will be warmly complimented on your humanity and broadminded efforts, and your odds of admission will rise significantly.

Most people don't care what you believe. You're not the victim you think you are.

I don't believe I said anything about victimhood.

Are you saying that I haven't experienced these things?

 

[runawayclock]

Seriously though, I would bring it up, but I would make sure that I did not state my opinion in a way that could possibly offend any of the adcoms. I think the majority of doctors are anti-abortion;I remember seeing a survey somewhere showing that only 30% of doctors are pro-abortion. So if you don't state your opinion properly, you are very likely to offend an interviewer/someone reading your application.

"pro-abortion" - the forgotten side of the debate... abortion for every child! Mandatory!

Majority of the doctors are anti-abortion/pro-life/anti-choice? Wow. Kind of surprising, but maybe that's because i hail from the progressive land of British Columbia, province of Canuckistan.

 

[Bleg]

"pro-abortion" - the forgotten side of the debate... abortion for every child! Mandatory!

Majority of the doctors are anti-abortion/pro-life/anti-choice?

You object to the term "pro-abortion" yet use the openly dishonest term "anti-choice"? How's that?

 

[Cyradis]

Guys as much as I love abortion debates - I think the point of this topic was how adcoms would view working with a well-known pro-choice group. There are a lot of physicians who are pro-choice and a lot who are pro-life, even if there IS a split like 70/30 or something, if you apply to more than even a few schools you're going to get many people who disagree with you.

The key is the show respect for both sides of the debate and make it clear that you understand the ethical issues.

 

[basementcat]

How is the term "anti-choice" more dishonest than the term "pro-abortion"? People who are anti-abortion want to change the law so that women have to carry every pregnancy to term. People who are pro-choice want to uphold current law, which gives pregnant women the ability to choose whether or not to carry their pregnancies to term.

 

[Bleg]

How is the term "anti-choice" more dishonest than the term "pro-abortion"?

Consider attitudes toward slavery in the US 150 years ago. Not everyone who was pro-slavery actually owned slaves, or even wanted to. There were many in the South, and more than a few in the North, who personally objected to slave-owning but thought it should not be made illegal. Some thought that the African slaves were so obviously inferior -- according to their ideas, perhaps not even fully human -- that they could not function in "higher" society without being controlled. In the minds of such people, the choice was either to control the Africans through ownership (i.e. slavery) or ship them all "back to Africa," conveniently ignoring the fact that almost all slaves at the time had been born in America. Others thought owning a slave was morally abhorrent, but believed that each state needed to be able to make that call for itself rather than concentrating such sweeping power into a centralized federal government. They may have disapproved of slavery, but they saw the question as a matter (ironically enough) of freedom.

(Note the stunning parallels of both types of thinking with modern thinking about abortion, both those who call the baby a mere "mass of cells," undeserving of protection, and those who go with the "I-wouldn't-abort-but-I-can't-make-that-decision-for-others" line.)

In any case, I expect you would agree that calling all such people "pro-slavery" would not be a misrepresentation of their position. "Pro-slavery" didn't necessarily mean you wanted to own a slave, or that every single person of African descent should be a slave. It did not even mean you liked slavery per se. Rather, it meant that you believed that the institution of slavery should be allowed to exist.

Similarly, calling someone "pro-abortion" doesn't mean they want every pregnancy to be terminated in elective abortion; rather, it means the pro-abortionist supports the existence and availability of the institution of elective abortion.

On the other hand, "anti-choice" is a completely bogus term. Those who do not support elective abortion on demand believe that every woman (and man) should be allowed to choose whether or not to engage in sexual relations. In fact, the majority of the pro-life movement supports the option to abort in cases of forcible rape, as well as other conditions. Pro-life people are no more against "choice" than abolitionists were against "choice". The "anti-slavery-choice" "pro-abolitionists" simply argued that the "choice" to condemn a man to slavery for selfish (or no) reasons is no choice at all, but moral corruption -- just as the "pro-life" people argue that the "choice" to kill a human baby for convenience's sake is no choice at all, but butchery.

People who are anti-abortion want to change the law so that women have to carry every pregnancy to term.

This is simply false. Very few pro-life supporters believe this. The vast majority see reasonable cause for abortion, and seek only to eliminate elective abortion of convenience, the so-called "contraceptive abortion". Your statement is a blatant mischaracterization developed by the pro-abortion-rights crowd, which I can only hope you are unwittingly passing on because you haven't thought it through yet. In any case, it is untrue.

People who are pro-choice want to uphold current law, which gives pregnant women the ability to choose whether or not to carry their pregnancies to term.

When the "current law" is appallingly evil, as for example slavery in the 1850s, citing it as "upholding current law" isn't a convincing moral argument. Pro-lifers argue that the women had the choice at conception whether or not to engage in acts that could lead to pregnancy. Seeking to avoid responsibility for a choice you made is not sufficient justification for killing a baby.

If you believe in the "right" to kill a preborn baby at any time for any reason, you will have difficulty rationally arguing that the same standard should not apply to post-born babies. The difference is not of type, but purely of degree.

 

[bamtuba]

What sort of activities do conservatives get up to that the evil lefties will disapprove of? Name one. Something that would show up on the medical school app.

Most people don't care what you believe. You're not the victim you think you are.

Speaking for myself, I'd look down on someone who volunteered at a crisis pregnancy center. Or coordinated an abstinence only sex miseducation program. Just sayin'.

Not touching this thread with a 10 foot pole except to point out that Dianyla answered Morning's question (see above).

Though I wouldn't call anyone here an "evil lefty" there is obvious discrimination against people who have views on both sides of this issue.

While I don't believe abstinence education to be the most effective way of curbing unwanted pregnancies in the context of our society, abstinence is the only form of safe sex. May not be realistic to expect people to adhere to the policy, and there may even be a LOT of misinformation or "miseducation" going on, but "looking down on someone" because they don't want kids (yes, teens are still children in many ways) to have to go through with risky medical procedures because they couldn't keep it in their pants (not talking about forced situations and the like) is hardly an attitude conducive to solving the issue at hand.

 

[morning]

Not touching this thread with a 10 foot pole except to point out that Dianyla answered Morning's question (see above).

Though I wouldn't call anyone here an "evil lefty" there is obvious discrimination against people who have views on both sides of this issue.

While I don't believe abstinence education to be the most effective way of curbing unwanted pregnancies in the context of our society, abstinence is the only form of safe sex. May not be realistic to expect people to adhere to the policy, and there may even be a LOT of misinformation or "miseducation" going on, but "looking down on someone" because they don't want kids (yes, teens are still children in many ways) to have to go through with risky medical procedures because they couldn't keep it in their pants (not talking about forced situations and the like) is hardly an attitude conducive to solving the issue at hand.

Well, first off, as a doctor you'll be expected to take care of reproductive issues so I could see why being strictly abstinence-only would raise eyebrows to medical school adcoms. I can't see why anyone would care if you volunteer at a crisis pregnancy center. Although there was at least one scandal recently where a crisis pregnancy center was trying to force its clients to give their babies up for adoption rather than keep them, any reasonable person fully supports a woman being given all the help she needs to keep and raise her baby.

What Bleg said about missions to Africa would definitely concern me as an adcom because you will have many multicultural patients and it is NOT your business to proselytize to them.

The gist of what I'm saying is that I think that there's a difference between disapproval - or your activities being an incorrect fit for medical school - and blatant prejudice. I simply don't see how they are compatible with the work of a physician in a modern society. Bleg can complain about bias, but there's a VALID reason to be concerned about what he's saying.

I don't believe I said anything about victimhood.

Are you saying that I haven't experienced these things?

So YOU'RE not saying you're a victim, but I should believe you are anyway. But you're still not saying it. But I should believe it.

If you believe in the "right" to kill a preborn baby at any time for any reason, you will have difficulty rationally arguing that the same standard should not apply to post-born babies. The difference is not of type, but purely of degree.

There's no reason to get into an abortion debate here, but I will say that this reasoning is extremely suspect. In one situation you have a person who is protecting the autonomy of their body and in the other situation you have...a person (the baby) needing protection for the autonomy of THEIR body. If women laid eggs I don't think abortion would be an issue, would it? Instead what we have is a 9 month period of organ donation, and last time I checked, forced organ donation was illegal in this country even though the waiting list for kidney transplants in Michigan is 5 years long.

 

[bamtuba]

Well, first off, as a doctor you'll be expected to take care of reproductive issues so I could see why being strictly abstinence-only would raise eyebrows to medical school adcoms. I can't see why anyone would care if you volunteer at a crisis pregnancy center. Although there was at least one scandal recently where a crisis pregnancy center was trying to force its clients to give their babies up for adoption rather than keep them, any reasonable person fully supports a woman being given all the help she needs to keep and raise her baby.

And I'm not arguing any of what you said.

Just pointing out that when you posted "give one example," it was quickly followed up with someone posting an example of what I would consider a discriminatory view against people who disagree.

"Looking down on" anyone is rarely a good thing.

 

[Bleg]

Well, first off, as a doctor you'll be expected to take care of reproductive issues so I could see why being strictly abstinence-only would raise eyebrows to medical school adcoms.

A doctor are also supposed to protect life, including prenatal life. So do you equally see why helping out in an abortion center might raise eyebrows? Or is it only acting on politically rightward impulses that sets off the alarm bells?

I can't see why anyone would care if you volunteer at a crisis pregnancy center.

And thus you demonstrate the leftist bias I mentioned: You can see why adcoms might discriminate against someone acting on politically rightward ideals, but not on politically leftward ideals.

What Bleg said about missions to Africa would definitely concern me as an adcom because you will have many multicultural patients and it is NOT your business to proselytize to them.

Yet if someone serves a mission on his own time, on his own dollar, helping people as best he can, the mere fact that part of his efforts included proselytizing is enough to negate all his efforts in your mind. Again, you prove my point.

The gist of what I'm saying is that I think that there's a difference between disapproval - or your activities being an incorrect fit for medical school - and blatant prejudice.

Precisely. "Disapproval" means "I find your rightward ideals offensive and won't tolerate them in medical school." "Prejudice" means "I find your leftist ideals offensive and won't tolerate them in medical school."

I simply don't see how they are compatible with the work of a physician in a modern society.

Because physicians in modern society are not allowed to hold opinions that differ from yours?

Again, your self-confessed inability to see any other viewpoint demonstrates what I have written about the heavy bias in favor of leftist ideals.

Bleg can complain about bias, but there's a VALID reason to be concerned about what he's saying.

The fact that you find an idea disturbing doesn't mean the idea is disturbing, or (more importantly) that a doctor ought not hold that idea. Preventing someone from being a doctor because you disagree with his/her politics is a frightening prospect indeed. Can you see the destructiveness of this attitude? If not, imagine for a moment that the adcoms took your same attitude, but against leftist ideals instead of rightist.

So YOU'RE not saying you're a victim, but I should believe you are anyway. But you're still not saying it. But I should believe it.

Not sure what you're reading to come to this conclusion. I have seen what I have seen. My experiences are real, and they are mine. Do you expect me to deny them just because you don't like what they imply?

There's no reason to get into an abortion debate here, but I will say that this reasoning is extremely suspect.

"There's no need to debate. Just let me say what I believe, and that will settle the matter!"

 

[Cyradis]

Well, first off, as a doctor you'll be expected to take care of reproductive issues so I could see why being strictly abstinence-only would raise eyebrows to medical school adcoms. I can't see why anyone would care if you volunteer at a crisis pregnancy center. Although there was at least one scandal recently where a crisis pregnancy center was trying to force its clients to give their babies up for adoption rather than keep them, any reasonable person fully supports a woman being given all the help she needs to keep and raise her baby.

What Bleg said about missions to Africa would definitely concern me as an adcom because you will have many multicultural patients and it is NOT your business to proselytize to them.

The gist of what I'm saying is that I think that there's a difference between disapproval - or your activities being an incorrect fit for medical school - and blatant prejudice. I simply don't see how they are compatible with the work of a physician in a modern society. Bleg can complain about bias, but there's a VALID reason to be concerned about what he's saying.

So YOU'RE not saying you're a victim, but I should believe you are anyway. But you're still not saying it. But I should believe it.

There's no reason to get into an abortion debate here, but I will say that this reasoning is extremely suspect. In one situation you have a person who is protecting the autonomy of their body and in the other situation you have...a person (the baby) needing protection for the autonomy of THEIR body. If women laid eggs I don't think abortion would be an issue, would it? Instead what we have is a 9 month period of organ donation, and last time I checked, forced organ donation was illegal in this country even though the waiting list for kidney transplants in Michigan is 5 years long.

So morning, while I realize your comments weren't directed at me it sounds like you think someone who is pro-life might not be suited for medicine. If you were on an adcom and you saw that I was involved in a pro-life organization, would you count that against me?

 

[D3Nt1st]

Lulz, this is a great debate. Im not in med school (to much work not enough cha-ching, not to mention the instability that will be in the field over the next 10 years) but i have found any lefty leaning groups can only help you in academics. If you are nervous it will be held against you then you can always just leave it out of your app right? When i applied to dental school i left out that i was the chair of the college republicans, and that i am a member of a church. but i did include that i studied abroad in the socialist republic of England.

 

[D3Nt1st]

classic internet flame war...... love it

 

[runawayclock]

You object to the term "pro-abortion" yet use the openly dishonest term "anti-choice"? How's that?

It's called humor. I was using the term anti-choice BECAUSE the poster used the term pro-abortion.

Also, not going into anything but LOL: comparing a fetus to a SLAVE, "socialist republic of England."

I volunteered for 6 months at a Lutheran church. I have several courses in philosophy of religion/religion and science... I listed the first, and have all of the courses on my transcript. I doubt your religious affiliation will count against you. Not listing that you were the chair of some republican thing at college? That just seems paranoid.

 

[plauto]

Lulz, this is a great debate. Im not in med school (to much work not enough cha-ching, not to mention the instability that will be in the field over the next 10 years) but i have found any lefty leaning groups can only help you in academics. If you are nervous it will be held against you then you can always just leave it out of your app right? When i applied to dental school i left out that i was the chair of the college republicans, and that i am a member of a church. but i did include that i studied abroad in the socialist republic of England.

you guys are next. Who are you to deny me the smile I deserve?....

 

[D3Nt1st]

you guys are next. Who are you to deny me the smile I deserve?....

the scary thing is you are so right......... i need a drink

 

[Dianyla]

So morning, while I realize your comments weren't directed at me it sounds like you think someone who is pro-life might not be suited for medicine. If you were on an adcom and you saw that I was involved in a pro-life organization, would you count that against me?

As I stated upthread, I am biased against someone who is vehemently pro-life and abstinence-only. My issue is not that they believe abortion is wrong, or that they believe abstinence is the best/only form of contraception. That's an entirely valid belief, it's just not one that I partake in. My issue is that they believe their answer is the only possible right answer and that everyone else should conform or be punished.

If a pregnant patient walks into a pro-life pregnancy crisis center, she is only offered only one possible "right" answer to her dilemma. The only right answer is that she must carry the pregnancy to term.

If a pregnant patient then walks into a Planned Parenthood, she is offered multiple options. She could choose to terminate it, she could choose to carry to term. Plenty of women walk into PP and decide not to have an abortion performed. That's an entirely valid choice, and no woman is shunned for it or judged by the providers.

 

[Zona Pellucida]

Well this turned ugly. OP: Do it.

bye.

 

[JulianaW]

You're right Zona. I seem to have inadvertently started a forum death-match! Thanks for all the great advice everyone. I am going to go ahead and volunteer with PP.

 

[morning]

It probably wasn't a good idea to bump it, though

 

[NickNaylor]

I worked in a restaurant where most of the kitchen staff were illegal immigrants. Do you think mentioning this in my application will increase my chances of getting accepted?

I lol'd when I read this.