Questions for PDs from a GMO

[sonofva]

Any PDs out there who's willing to answer some questions?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TurtleDO2012]

Go ahead and ask specifc questions so maybe responses can be generated rather than waiting for someone to post "I am a PD"

 

[sonofva]

Go ahead and ask specifc questions so maybe responses can be generated rather than waiting for someone to post "I am a PD"

Touché. In planning for applying for future residency applications, how do non combat hardship tours look vs combat deployments. The issue is if I apply after a hardship tour I can reapply after one year, whereas getting on with a deploying unit would lock me in for two years time on station before reapplying. The rest of my package is solid (so I've been told), and I've maxed out research points. I'm trying to reapply quickly, but don't want to shoot myself in the foot if the only way to get accepted is after doing a real combat deployment.

 

[DrMetal]

Go ahead and ask specifc questions so maybe responses can be generated rather than waiting for someone to post "I am a PD"

To that end . . .It would be better if the OP just find out who the PDs are in the specialty/location that he/she desires, and contact said PDs directly, rather than asking for help on a public forum (I'm sure some PDs would be willing to post here . . . but if you're going to apply to their programs, it's time to get a little more personal).

 

[colbgw02]

Touché. In planning for applying for future residency applications, how do non combat hardship tours look vs combat deployments. The issue is if I apply after a hardship tour I can reapply after one year, whereas getting on with a deploying unit would lock me in for two years time on station before reapplying. The rest of my package is solid (so I've been told), and I've maxed out research points. I'm trying to reapply quickly, but don't want to shoot myself in the foot if the only way to get accepted is after doing a real combat deployment.

Not a PD, but...

We had a number of residents in my program who chose an unaccompanied hardship 1-year tour over the typical 2-year GMO tour. I think the benefit of the former is limited to exactly what you outlined - that it permits you to apply a year earlier. I don't think PDs care one iota because I think they're focused almost entirely on your academic record.

I suppose there is a theoretical advantage to the 1-year tours if you are (re)applying to a program in the same hospital as your internship, because your application would hit the PD's desk only a few months after you last laid eyes-on the PD. That's pure psychobabble though and would only be relevant if your application was on par with your competition.

I wasn't sure how the Army would treat these tours when it announced its 2-years-on-station policy a couple of years ago, but I guess this "loophole" still exists.

 

[chronick]

Touché. In planning for applying for future residency applications, how do non combat hardship tours look vs combat deployments. The issue is if I apply after a hardship tour I can reapply after one year, whereas getting on with a deploying unit would lock me in for two years time on station before reapplying. The rest of my package is solid (so I've been told), and I've maxed out research points. I'm trying to reapply quickly, but don't want to shoot myself in the foot if the only way to get accepted is after doing a real combat deployment.

The one year hardship tour is better because it allows you to apply after one year. The combat tour is probably viewed as more favorable overall, but the 2 years TOS rules will still apply to you. I'm telling you from first hand experience as someone who went the combat tour route.

 

[Gastrapathy]

All politics is local. There is a small chance that a 2 year tour would be viewed more favorably by a given PD but this is probably outweighed by the chance to apply twice.

 

[TurtleDO2012]

My Army opinion-
Consider all things being relatively equal- grades, scores, both not douchbags. The guy with the combat tour would be favored over the hardship tour. It's just the hierarchy of military experience.
That applicant maybe just manned an area on a random FOB and nothing really happened for 6-9 months compared to the guy who traveled for various missions, monthly field exercises at his base stuck in field for weeks, etc but never "combat deployed" probably loses to the combat deployment. Base off a fellow GMO of n-1 though so take with grain of salt.


If your scores and grades are better and you did the hardship tour then u probably have the edge over the guy with less scores and combat deployment. But again it could just be a split decision depending on the PD.

The gamble is this- you do the hardship and don't get picked up, what's next? Your next assignment unless another hardship would require the new 2 year TOS rule if Army. Again not sure if they will truly enforce the 2yr TOS for you specifically but it has been enforced since 2013 it appears based on my fellow friends.

Other item would be- do you foresee yourself doing the traditional combat deployment in your future specialty and want that experience? Do you want to have that possible Afghanistan/Iraq/whatever story vs being stationed in Egypt/Korea/Japan/Honduras where you could have fun traveling during a hardship? Not sure what Cuba would be like.

Overall just ask the specifc PD their opinion, then decide what you want out your foreseeable ADSO.

 

[chronick]

That applicant maybe just manned an area on a random FOB and nothing really happened for 6-9 months compared to the guy who traveled for various missions, monthly field exercises at his base stuck in field for weeks, etc but never "combat deployed" probably loses to the combat deployment. Base off a fellow GMO of n-1 though so take with grain of salt.

You think a 9 month combat tour is realistically equivalent to a GMO stationed CONUS who goes on frequent field exercises?

There's a reason that combat tours are viewed more favorably. Many PD's have experienced one or two. I was told explicitly by a PD that they are viewed more favorably.

 

[TurtleDO2012]

As of today and looking forward say for the next year the experience of a combat deployment includes Afghanistan and Iraq is quite different from just 2 years ago and further with Iraq. A combat deployment these days includes going to Kuwait for sake of the "points" or checking the box exercise. Is that fair, no but it is considered a deployment.

Do I consider time in Kuwait equal to Iraq or Afghanistan? Of course not, there are different levels of risk overall.

Do I consider anything done in OCONUS/CONUS to equal time spent deployed? Overall no.

Did the time people spend doing Ebola stuff in Liberia, being apart of a unit in Poland in response Ukraine problems, time spent in Haiti after earthquake count as combat deployements? No. They don't count for squat and that is the part I think is wrong. They aren't combat, yet as a provider you are still basically doing the same thing that would be expected of you if stationed on a FOB today and that is my point.

 

[DrMetal]

You think a 9 month combat tour is realistically equivalent to a GMO stationed CONUS who goes on frequent field exercises?

There's a reason that combat tours are viewed more favorably. Many PD's have experienced one or two. I was told explicitly by a PD that they are viewed more favorably.

The problem with this discussion is: how do you define "viewing favorably"? Do you mean that the applicant with a combat tour should get an extra point on their scoring sheet? Who's to say such a scoring sheet even exists and is used in the GME selection process [we've have this discussion on this forum several times]. If the PD is a war hero, I'm sure he/she may look favorably on those who deployed. But if the PD is someone who's never deployed him/herself, the PD might not give two shts. It's all very subjective. We're talking about shades of grey in a process (the GME selection) that we really don't understand (unless we've been PDs). In the Navy: i know several academically-strong interns that were selected for competitive residencies (rads/ortho/ophtho) over GMOs (some 2-tour GMOs, with 3 deployments). If there really was a point system, if the PDs really paid attention to it and viewed combat deployments favorably, said GMOs would have been clearly selected over these interns: they were not, go figure.

My advice would be: do the GMO tour that you want to do. Let the chips fall later wherever they may.

 

[chronick]

As of today and looking forward say for the next year the experience of a combat deployment includes Afghanistan and Iraq is quite different from just 2 years ago and further with Iraq. A combat deployment these days includes going to Kuwait for sake of the "points" or checking the box exercise. Is that fair, no but it is considered a deployment.

Do I consider time in Kuwait equal to Iraq or Afghanistan? Of course not.

Do I consider anything done in OCONUS/CONUS to equal time spent deployed?

Did the time people spent doing Ebola stuff in Liberia or the airborne unit activities

Kuwait is not considered a combat deployment. I'm not sure what you meant with the rest of that.

 

[chronick]

The problem with this discussion is: how do you define "viewing favorably"? Do you mean that the applicant with a combat tour should get an extra point on their scoring sheet? Who's to say such a scoring sheet even exists and is used in the GME selection process [we've have this discussion on this forum several times]. If the PD is a war hero, I'm sure he/she may look favorably on those who deployed. But if the PD is someone who's never deployed him/herself, the PD might not give two shts. It's all very subjective. We're talking about shades of grey in a process (the GME selection) that we really don't understand (unless we've been PDs). In the Navy: i know several academically-strong interns that were selected for competitive residencies (rads/ortho/ophtho) over GMOs (some 2-tour GMOs, with 3 deployments). If there really was a point system, if the PDs really paid attention to it and viewed combat deployments favorably, said GMOs would have been clearly selected over these interns: they were not, go figure.

My advice would be: do the GMO tour that you want to do. Let the chips fall later wherever they may.

You're addressing several issues here, and I'm just giving my personal experience. I asked my potential PD how I could improve my chances for selection as a GMO, and he said to deploy.

 

[DrMetal]

You're addressing several issues here, and I'm just giving my personal experience. I asked my potential PD how I could improve my chances for selection as a GMO, and he said to deploy.

Take caution with that advice. Said PD might be long gone when you get around to applying. And even if he is the same PD when you apply: we've seen many instances of PDs telling people to do things (deploy, do research, etc etc) then said applicant not getting selected. I've even seen situations where a PD has point blank said to an applicant, "I want you in my program, I'll get you in", and said applicant is not selected. From the looks of it, the PDs are not the final say, there's another process going on.

Deploy if you want to, it can be a very rewarding experience, I'm looking forward to it (am even extending to make the entire deployment). But I wouldn't hold any great expectations that doing so will make you a sure ringer for your residency of choice.

 

[Gastrapathy]

I'm very skeptical that a deployment means much when compared with a hardship tour. Easy thing for a PD to say to someone to get him out of the office. Besides, except for early on in Iraq, docs don't go into harms way hardly ever. The real variable for competitive programs is the competition and getting an extra bite at the apple is a good choice (as long as you'd stay in your hardship tour for a 2nd year if you were not picked).

 

[TurtleDO2012]

Strongly agree with gastrapathy. Do the hardship tour and if not picked up just do another hardship tour. Probably best way to hedge your application overall since you would get 2 looks over next 2 years. If your confident you'll be picked up then apply as soon as possible.

 

[chronick]

Take caution with that advice. Said PD might be long gone when you get around to applying. And even if he is the same PD when you apply: we've seen many instances of PDs telling people to do things (deploy, do research, etc etc) then said applicant not getting selected. I've even seen situations where a PD has point blank said to an applicant, "I want you in my program, I'll get you in", and said applicant is not selected. From the looks of it, the PDs are not the final say, there's another process going on.

Deploy if you want to, it can be a very rewarding experience, I'm looking forward to it (am even extending to make the entire deployment). But I wouldn't hold any great expectations that doing so will make you a sure ringer for your residency of choice.

Well yeah, I didn't ask him, hey sir how can you guarantee me a residency? The PD's are the ones doing the scoring, that's why they are the best people to ask for questions like this. All they can tell you is how to maximize your points, they can't tell you what your competition is going to be.

 

[chronick]

I'm very skeptical that a deployment means much when compared with a hardship tour. Easy thing for a PD to say to someone to get him out of the office. Besides, except for early on in Iraq, docs don't go into harms way hardly ever. The real variable for competitive programs is the competition and getting an extra bite at the apple is a good choice (as long as you'd stay in your hardship tour for a 2nd year if you were not picked).

Deployments and hardship tours are probably viewed similarly, and the one year tour would be ultimately be better because of the reasons you mentioned. I was only referencing CONUS utilization tour vs. deployment. BTW - docs were still being put in danger during my OEF tour last year, even saw one get a purple heart.