Someone with a DUI can still be an excellent doctor

[childish93]

Just sayin'.

Doctor 1: Someone with excellent credentials (Let's say 95th percentile test scores and grades in undergrad through residency) and bedside manner who happened to get a DUI in college.

Doctor 2: Someone with inferior credentials (barely scraped his or her way into a US residency) and mediocre bedside manner but doesn't have a criminal record.

I would choose Doctor 1 over Doctor 2 for myself or a family member in a heartbeat. Maybe they just had a few beers and ended up blowing a point .09 at a roadside check. Doesn't make them a bad person or a less capable clinician. I'd rather be in the car with someone attentively driving with a .09 than trying to text and drive anyway...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

Just pay for a cab you bum.

 

[KnuxNole]

It's ok OP, you can still achieve your dream to be a physician despite your DUI

 

[childish93]

Nope, no DUI's here. Thanks for the assumption though!

 

[Temerit]

Doctor 2 isn't going to get picked over Doctor 1. Doctor 3 with credentials similar to Doctor 1, but no DUI offense, will get picked.

 

[deanthedream17]

In other news the sky is blue

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

Just sayin'.

Doctor 1: Someone with excellent credentials (Let's say 95th percentile test scores and grades in undergrad through residency) and bedside manner who happened to get a DUI in college.

Doctor 2: Someone with inferior credentials (barely scraped his or her way into a US residency) and mediocre bedside manner but doesn't have a criminal record.

I would choose Doctor 1 over Doctor 2 for myself or a family member in a heartbeat. Maybe they just had a few beers and ended up blowing a point .09 at a roadside check. Doesn't make them a bad person or a less capable clinician. I'd rather be in the car with someone attentively driving with a .09 than trying to text and drive anyway...

Is there a question here? Or just pontificating?

 

[deleted480308]

Maybe they just had a few beers and ended up blowing a point .09 at a roadside check. Doesn't make them a bad person.

yes it does

 

[Aerus]

Just sayin'.

Doctor 1: Someone with excellent credentials (Let's say 95th percentile test scores and grades in undergrad through residency) and bedside manner who happened to get a DUI in college.

Doctor 2: Someone with inferior credentials (barely scraped his or her way into a US residency) and mediocre bedside manner but doesn't have a criminal record.

I would choose Doctor 1 over Doctor 2 for myself or a family member in a heartbeat. Maybe they just had a few beers and ended up blowing a point .09 at a roadside check. Doesn't make them a bad person or a less capable clinician. I'd rather be in the car with someone attentively driving with a .09 than trying to text and drive anyway...

While a DUI isn't something that will, by itself, bar someone from becoming a doctor, it still shows incredibly poor judgement and blatant disregard for other people. I've had personal friends killed by people driving while intoxicated.

But other than that, there's really no purpose for this thread, is there?

 

[darkjedi]

Sure, but why choose the candidate with black marks on their record when there are hundreds of other qualified applicants still being turned away.

I wouldn't trust a physician that would make the incredibly dumb mistake of drinking and driving. It could be just the city culture that I grew up in, but where I'm from, it's practically unthinkable to even contemplate doing such a thing.

 

[gettheleadout]

I'd rather be in the car with someone attentively driving with a .09 than trying to text and drive anyway...

Try again.

 

[jm192]

Just sayin'.

Doctor 1: Someone with excellent credentials (Let's say 95th percentile test scores and grades in undergrad through residency) and bedside manner who happened to get a DUI in college.

Doctor 2: Someone with inferior credentials (barely scraped his or her way into a US residency) and mediocre bedside manner but doesn't have a criminal record.

I would choose Doctor 1 over Doctor 2 for myself or a family member in a heartbeat. Maybe they just had a few beers and ended up blowing a point .09 at a roadside check. Doesn't make them a bad person or a less capable clinician. I'd rather be in the car with someone attentively driving with a .09 than trying to text and drive anyway...

LOL

Yes. I would probably pick the better doctor that got a DUI in college.

But I'm assuming we're talking about the real world where everything isn't quite so dichotomous. You're virtually never going to choose between the best doctor and the worst doctor.

Of course you can be an excellent physician if you got a DUI. You can get a DUI and become excellent at most anything. It may make it more difficult as you've now red flagged your AMCAS and/or ERAS.

Some people are going to post that it shows poor decision making. And it absolutely does. But 1 poor decision doesn't mean you're going to make nothing but bad decisions. People grow from mistakes all the time.

Now, multiple DUI's...

 

[Teleologist]

You can rationalize this all you want, but if an adcom knows someone who got killed or injured due to a DUI, there's little chance of Doc 1 even getting into med school. I know people who've died from DUIs. Now imagine someone three times my age. Often times emotions trump logic.

Actually, logic would dictate that Doc 1 doesn't need to be in med school. It's not like he's irreplaceable.

 

[shiftingmirage]

But 1 poor decision doesn't mean you're going to make nothing but bad decisions. People grow from mistakes all the time.

Now, multiple DUI's...

I don't have any stats, but I would venture most people that have a DUI have driven drunk before and were not caught. Think about the number of speeding tickets you have vs how often you speed. You don't get caught every time.

 

[jm192]

I don't have any stats, but I would venture most people that have a DUI have driven drunk before and were not caught. Think about the number of speeding tickets you have vs how often you speed. You don't get caught every time.

While I agree with the premise, I believe in innocent until proven guilty. And I don't think we can just start treating everyone as if their 1 mistake=the same mistake multiple times without proof.

Moreso, I think a TON of people buzz drive and don't get caught.

So in a sense the distinction is REALLY did you get caught. So getting caught vs not getting caught ISN'T what determines whether or not you're a good physician

 

[NickNaylor]

While I agree with the premise, I believe in innocent until proven guilty. And I don't think we can just start treating everyone as if their 1 mistake=the same mistake multiple times without proof.

Moreso, I think a TON of people buzz drive and don't get caught.

So in a sense the distinction is REALLY did you get caught. So getting caught vs not getting caught ISN'T what determines whether or not you're a good physician

Those damn constitution guys and their constitutioning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[deleted480308]

Driving drunk makes you a bad person. Getting caught driving drunk just means that all the adcoms get to find out you're a bad person.

Bad people can change their lives and be good people, but the person who drives drunk is bad.

 

[V5RED]

Driving drunk makes you a bad person. Getting caught driving drunk just means that all the adcoms get to find out you're a bad person.

Bad people can change their lives and be good people, but the person who drives drunk is bad.

True, but lots of things make you a bad person.

Texting while driving, taking a phone call while driving, speeding in a work zone or residential area, deliberately hurting someone's feelings, lying to gain an unfair advantage in anything, cheating on a partner, taking credit for someone else's work, keeping extra change a cashier mistakenly gave you, not helping someone when asked if it would be almost no burden to you and a massive boost for that person, not thanking someone for helping you, etc.

 

[Mad Jack]

You could make the same argument about any number of criminal offenses. "Oh sure, Dr. Diddler has a bit of a problem with child pornography, but he's a fine neurosurgeon with excellent bedside manner and a damn near 0% complication rate. And how can we judge Dr. John, just because his mug shot has landed in the papers multiple times for soliciting prostitutes, shouldn't be judged solely based on his night romps but rather on his 99th percentile Step score and excellent oncology skills. And poor Dr. Crystal, who credits much of her excellent performance and research to the added energy provided by her methamphetamine habit."

Sure, all of these people may be fine hypothetical physicians, but they are criminals with behavior that is unacceptable both in a professional environment and society at large. Perhaps I could give a one time pass to some doctors for some offenses- a DUI or minor possession charge from years ago I might let slide (but certainly not Dr. Diddler- lock him up and throw away the keys). But a current DUI, drug charge, or basically anything else? Yeah, I don't care how good you are, you've shown the capacity to be both irresponsible and to engage in criminal behavior.

 

[CherryRedDracul]

True, but lots of things make you a bad person.

Texting while driving, taking a phone call while driving, speeding in a work zone or residential area, deliberately hurting someone's feelings, lying to gain an unfair advantage in anything, cheating on a partner, taking credit for someone else's work, keeping extra change a cashier mistakenly gave you, not helping someone when asked if it would be almost no burden to you and a massive boost for that person, not thanking someone for helping you, etc.

You're not a bad person until you are caught. That's the difference.

 

[zzxxzz]

True, but lots of things make you a bad person.

Texting while driving, taking a phone call while driving, speeding in a work zone or residential area, deliberately hurting someone's feelings, lying to gain an unfair advantage in anything, cheating on a partner, taking credit for someone else's work, keeping extra change a cashier mistakenly gave you, not helping someone when asked if it would be almost no burden to you and a massive boost for that person, not thanking someone for helping you, etc.

Yea, I think drunk driving is a little worse than hurting someone's feelings...

 

[Annabell Lee]

I think the issue with drunk driving in relationship to a med school app is that it shows a level of arrogance as well as disregard for the safety and well being of others. There's also the fact that many people will assume you're an alcoholic, and as someone else has already pointed out, there is a possibility that someone in the adcom or even in the screening process has lost someone to a drunk driver.

Weather this prevents someone from getting into med school will depend on their individual circumstances.
There's a huge difference between someone who got one DUI ten years ago and someone who has had multiple DUIs in the past year. Also, maybe it wont bar you from consideration on its own, but how you approach the subject might. A defensive "but I could still be an awesome doctor!" makes it seem like you are unable to learn from your mistakes, while admitting that it was wrong and showing remorse for potentially endangering the public could be seen as a sign of maturity.

Also, for the record, you really shouldn't be driving if you've had any alcohol recently. Most people suck at telling how drunk they are.

 

[Teleologist]

It's ok OP, you can still achieve your dream to be a physician despite your DUI

Exactly. Sucks for the OP he/she was caught drunk driving. Sorry, life's tough, you don't get an exception, no matter how special you think you are. To quote Amadeus, "mediocrity is everywhere."

 

[virtualmaster999]

Why would you trust a physician with your life in your hands if they can't even take care of theirs? Not to mention the lives they could be ruining when under the influence

 

[childish93]

Well, this has been immensely entertaining to see how y'all have reacted. As I said before, no DUI's on my record and I don't drink much in the first place, but I'm still taking Doctor 1. I hope many of you lose your judgmental attitudes before dealing with intoxicated patients in med school, if you make it there.

Doctor 2 isn't going to get picked over Doctor 1. Doctor 3 with the same credentials as Doctor 1, but no DUI, will get picked.

Fair point, but Doctor 2 is out there and practicing because the demand for physicians is so high.

yes it does

Yikes. Godspeed with that poorly articulated, disparaging attitude. I hope for your future patients sake that AdComs pick up on it.

While I agree with the premise, I believe in innocent until proven guilty. And I don't think we can just start treating everyone as if their 1 mistake=the same mistake multiple times without proof.

Moreso, I think a TON of people buzz drive and don't get caught.

So in a sense the distinction is REALLY did you get caught. So getting caught vs not getting caught ISN'T what determines whether or not you're a good physician

Yes indeed.

You could make the same argument about any number of criminal offenses. "Oh sure, Dr. Diddler has a bit of a problem with cold pornography...

Why have cold pornography when you can have hot pornography?

Exactly. Sucks for the OP he/she was caught drunk driving. Sorry, life's tough, you don't get an exception, no matter how special you think you are. To quote Amadeus, "mediocrity is everywhere."

Woof. Read up on the thread, big guy/gal.

 

[V5RED]

Yea, I think drunk driving is a little worse than hurting someone's feelings...

I was being a bit facetious. I don't agree that an instance of drunk driving means someone is a "bad person", it just means that person is not just not a perfectly good person. I used common action examples to point out that many common actions could put someone in the arbitrary "bad person" category especially if that person is basically selfish and doesn't really do much good. I have no idea how many bad things someone needs to do to outweigh whatever good they do and thus be a "bad person."

To your point, I am not sure that hurting someone's feelings is less bad than drunk driving though. Both can lead to deaths, but when you deliberately hurt someone's feelings, your goal is to cause pain. That is not the case with drunk driving. I am sure Megan Meier's parents think that deliberately hurting someone's feelings is pretty evil.

 

[Mad Jack]

Well, this has been immensely entertaining to see how y'all have reacted. As I said before, no DUI's on my record and I don't drink much in the first place, but I'm still taking Doctor 1. I hope many of you lose your judgmental attitudes before dealing with intoxicated patients in med school, if you make it there.




Fair point, but Doctor 2 is out there and practicing because the demand for physicians is so high.



Yikes. Godspeed with that poorly articulated, disparaging attitude. I hope for your future patients sake that AdComs pick up on it.



Yes indeed.



Why have cold pornography when you can have hot pornography?



Woof. Read up on the thread, big guy/gal.

Damn autocorrect, sucking the meaning out of my writing. Fix'd.

 

[Annabell Lee]

I hope many of you lose your judgmental attitudes before dealing with intoxicated patients in med school, if you make it there.

I wish more health care workers were nonjudgmental towards their patients. That being said, we were discussing a physician in a professional, not as a patient.

 

[Mad Jack]

I was being a bit facetious. I don't agree that an instance of drunk driving means someone is a "bad person", it just means that person is not just not a perfectly good person. I used common action examples to point out that many common actions could put someone in the arbitrary "bad person" category especially if that person is basically selfish and doesn't really do much good. I have no idea how many bad things someone needs to do to outweigh whatever good they do and thus be a "bad person."

To your point, I am not sure that hurting someone's feelings is less bad than drunk driving though. Both can lead to deaths, but when you deliberately hurt someone's feelings, your goal is to cause pain. That is not the case with drunk driving. I am sure Megan Meier's parents think that deliberately hurting someone's feelings is pretty evil.

You're neglecting that a DUI is both disregarding the value of the life of others but also a criminal offense. A physician that is willing to both commit a crime and willfully endanger others is likely to act in the same manner when their ass is on the line legally in their medical practice.

 

[V5RED]

You're neglecting that a DUI is both disregarding the value of the life of others but also a criminal offense. A physician that is willing to both commit a crime and willfully endanger others is likely to act in the same manner when their ass is on the line legally in their medical practice.

I don't care about the criminal offense portion from an ethical perspective. I also do not agree that the actions of a person while sober(ie at work) are going to be the same as his actions while drunk. If you are suggesting that the person will be drunk while working, you are implying that all people who commit DUI are hardcore alcoholics who wake up to a glass of scotch.

Putting yourself in a position where you are likely to drive drunk is stupid and shows you to have poor judgement. I never said it wasn't, but your post seems to be attacking the strawman that would be me claiming that drunk drivers did nothing wrong. My point was to reject the claim that having committed a single DUI makes you a "bad person", not to say that every drunk driver is a good person or regularly makes good decisions.

 

[darkjedi]

I wish more health care workers were nonjudgmental towards their patients. That being said, we were discussing a physician in a professional, not as a patient.

I will judge the crap out of people that selfishly and irresponsibly put other peoples lives at risk. Being intoxicated is one thing, but being intoxicated and getting in the drivers seat is another thing altogether.

 

[shiftingmirage]

One of the difficulties with hiring individuals with a record, be it DUI, petty theft, possession, is that they are more of a liability than a non-offender. The employer is on notice and needs to provide *extra* supervision.

When that doc gets sued for malpractice, even though he/she did absolutely nothing wrong, were they drunk? They have a DUI, so they are an alcoholic and exhibit poor judgement. Perhaps they were drunk while caring for this patient, and of course the doc probably didn't get a BAC at the time because he was completely sober so none of his colleagues had any concerns, and malpractice wasn't alleged at the time in question so now this doc has no proof that he was not drunk. Why is this hospital letting drunk physicians treat patients? It need to learn a lesson and pay $$$ to teach it said lesson.

I obviously made this up, but I think it likely has happened somewhere in the US.

While it may not sound like it from my posts, I do believe in second chances. I also believe that people convicted of a DUI have probably driven drunk before and that people with a record of any kind are an increased liability to an employer.

 

[Mad Jack]

I don't care about the criminal offense portion from an ethical perspective. I also do not agree that the actions of a person while sober(ie at work) are going to be the same as his actions while drunk. If you are suggesting that the person will be drunk while working, you are implying that all people who commit DUI are hardcore alcoholics who wake up to a glass of scotch.

Putting yourself in a position where you are likely to drive drunk is stupid and shows you to have poor judgement. I never said it wasn't, but your post seems to be attacking the strawman that would be me claiming that drunk drivers did nothing wrong. My point was to reject the claim that having committed a single DUI makes you a "bad person", not to say that every drunk driver is a good person or regularly makes good decisions.

My point was not that they would come to work drunk, but that they show poor judgement that could extend into other situations. If you're the sort of person that isn't even responsible enough to call a cab or make sure you have a designated driver despite knowing that if you are caught, the consequences will be severe, you're probably the same kind of person that will let their judgement lapse in other areas of your life as well.

 

[Law2Doc]

This is a competitive process. The majority of applicants will have good stats and come across as personable in the interview setting. Most have good LORs and compelling essays. Given that baseline, then yes the one guy with a DUI probably won't be at the top of the list. No it doesn't make him a "bad person" but it does indicate he makes really bad decisions. And 90% of what a doctor does is decision making. And although far from foolproof, it sometimes can telegraph a propensity for abusing substances (a person with an alcohol related charge against him is simply statistically more likely to be a person who abuses alcohol in the future than his squeaky clean counterparts). At any rate in a highly competitive process you really can't afford too many black marks, and thi is one. I'm not saying it means the school will take someone with a 2.7/27 over him, but I'm saying that when you have a sizeable pool of applicants all with better than 3.5/32, a DUI can certainly make someone fall off the list.

 

[drcrispmd]

Someone with a DUI on their record will have to explain this when they go to apply for license after residency and may have a difficult time getting a license in some states. This may be a reason for not getting accepted to medical school or having a harder time getting a residency.

 

[deleted480308]

Yikes. Godspeed with that poorly articulated, disparaging attitude. I hope for your future patients sake that AdComs pick up on it.

The act of DUI is worthy of being disparaged. As a responsible adult, a DUI driver would still get whatever medical treatment was appropriate, just like their potential/actual victims would...but they are getting judged. I could absolutely treat Chris Brown competently and properly because I am a professional, that doesn't stop me from knowing he's a dirtbag domestic abuser. When I agree to perform a service in exchange for compensation, my opinion of the person is irrelevant to completing the task well. My completion of the task is a matter of my integrity and not dependent on the patient.

I'm already accepted but your concerns for my patients are duly noted.

 

[correctlywrong]

An important point: The guy with the DUI didn't "just happen" to get it. They aren't awarded by random lottery. The guy with the DUI decided to take a risk that could have endangered other people because he had so much confidence in his ability to function despite intoxication that he believed he would get away with it... He was in college, which means that he was old enough to be aware of the law and the risks involved, which he chose to disregard.

That is precisely the kind of error in judgment that I don't want my physician to make.

The way that you attempt to discount his responsibility in the situation is concerning to me. What other dangerous behaviors will you be willing to excuse?

I'm not saying that I would keep someone out of med school over a youthful error in judgment... unless they tried to distance themselves from the responsibility for it by pretending that it was something that "just happened to them." That approach suggests that it wasn't a one time mistake, but part of an ongoing pattern of antisocial behavior. Someone who thinks that justice just happens to them is someone who is only sorry when they get caught.

 

[correctlywrong]

Also, false dichotomy. Those two aren't in the running against one another. There are thousands of doctors whose stats and social skills are just as good as the drunk driver, without the DUI. Why compare to an extreme example?

Also the person who barely scraped by did scrape by. They met the standards that were set for them at every stage. Those hoops are there for a reason, and if someone got through them, they are a doctor now.

 

[Tommyguns89]

I dont like most driving related laws(including DUIs) in general because they pretend everyone is the same. The thing that seems to concern most people here about DUIs is the "bad decision". But what if that person was barely over the limit, and still able to drive well, and knew that he was able to drive well? Then the only error in judgement was refusing to abide by a law that can be quite arbitrary in the first place. And I am not sure I am willing to keep someone out of med school for that. Obviously part of being an adult and professional is existing in a system full of stupid arbitrary rules, but I still think it is far from a fatal flaw in that case.

Disclaimer: I do not have a DUI and I dont even really drink. I have had friends/relatives killed in DUI related accidents. I have also had relatives killed because somebody took their eyes off the road for a second to change the radio station. I dont think everyone who changes the radio station while driving should be kept out of med school.

 

[el_duderino]

I don't know if this point has been made, but thousands of people who would make great doctors get rejected from medical school. Every single year.

 

[el_duderino]

Driving drunk makes you a bad person.

Yes. This is true. I've long thought that drunk driving should be treated as some equivalent as depraved indifference or attempted manslaughter.

 

[Annabell Lee]

I will judge the crap out of people that selfishly and irresponsibly put other peoples lives at risk. Being intoxicated is one thing, but being intoxicated and getting in the drivers seat is another thing altogether.

OP was the one equating judging this doctor to being a judgmental health care provider. I was just trying to say that while I am very nonjudgmental of my actual patients, other people, especially other health care workers, don't always get that benefit. We should all hold each other to higher standards.

 

[el_duderino]

There's no way to avoid judging people. Some people are just bad people and no amount of telling yourself that you don't judge will make you not think they're a bad person. You just have to get over it and treat them well anyway.

 

[Teleologist]

Funny how all the young people here are trying to rationalize how DUI can't be bad.

If there were a board for Bernie Madoffs and ilk they'd all be rationalizing how making money off the backs of others through lying would be acceptable.

Let's face it guys, the ones defending DUI here are precisely the ones who are most likely to be caught DUI.

 

[NontradCA]

I will judge the crap out of people that selfishly and irresponsibly put other peoples lives at risk. Being intoxicated is one thing, but being intoxicated and getting in the drivers seat is another thing altogether.

Do you text and drive? It's the same logic. Demonizing people who get duis is incredibly naive. About half the med students and physicians I know drink and drive. They just don't get caught.

Not defending drinking and driving....it's dangerous. But to say that someone wouldn't make a good physician or pull that bad decision card out is ridiculous. Some physicians out there make bad decisions (mismanagement) and then ACTUALLY kill people.

 

[childish93]

Let's face it guys, the ones defending DUI here are precisely the ones who are most likely to be caught DUI.

 

[correctlywrong]

I dont like most driving related laws(including DUIs) in general because they pretend everyone is the same. The thing that seems to concern most people here about DUIs is the "bad decision". But what if that person was barely over the limit, and still able to drive well, and knew that he was able to drive well? Then the only error in judgement was refusing to abide by a law that can be quite arbitrary in the first place. And I am not sure I am willing to keep someone out of med school for that. Obviously part of being an adult and professional is existing in a system full of stupid arbitrary rules, but I still think it is far from a fatal flaw in that case.

The idea that rules are stupid and arbitrary is problematic. So is your idea that someone can know themselves and know that they are above following the rules. But every single one of those stupid arbitrary rules was made in response to a problem, and often that problem IS the person who thinks that rules should not apply to them.

There are people I work with who believe that they are special, important, above the rules that are put in place to keep patients and staff safe. Many of those people are surgeons, and their attitudes are dangerous.

They are the doctors who don't want to stop closing the wounds to find a missing sponge because they know that they are good at what they do and wouldn't have left a sponge in the patient. Except that it happens. When we insist, and refuse to hand them any more surgical implements until they check the incision, they often find what would have become a retained object. Our insistence on following policy regarding surgical counts prevents complications, deaths, and lawsuits. And yet, surgeons whine and complain that OR nurses and techs are oppressing them by insisting on doing the safe thing, the same way, every single time.

I used to think like you. Lots of gifted children were mistreated by being taught that they were above the rules, that rules are stupid and meant for stupid people, not savants like us. That thought is toxic, and it will undermine you in the long run.

 

[Teleologist]

Do you text and drive? It's the same logic. Demonizing people who get duis is incredibly naive. About half the med students and physicians I know drink and drive. They just don't get caught.

Not defending drinking and driving....it's dangerous. But to say that someone wouldn't make a good physician or pull that bad decision card out is ridiculous. Some physicians out there make bad decisions (mismanagement) and then ACTUALLY kill people.

What counts is both one's intentions and the results. That's how law works, in case you didn't know. Even if you didn't mean to hit that jaywalker who thought it would be a bright idea to run across a highway, you can still be charged with vehicular manslaughter.

 

[Aerus]

Well, this has been immensely entertaining to see how y'all have reacted. As I said before, no DUI's on my record and I don't drink much in the first place, but I'm still taking Doctor 1. I hope many of you lose your judgmental attitudes before dealing with intoxicated patients in med school, if you make it there.

No one is saying that being intoxicated is bad. We're saying that making the decision to drive intoxicated, knowing that you are endangering other people, and driving BAD ENOUGH to be caught is bad.

Clearly you're privileged enough to not know anyone who was killed by a person DUI. Let's hope that never happens.

 

[Teleologist]

And I am not sure I am willing to keep someone out of med school for that.

Everyone thinks they're a special cookie but the fact is they aren't. It's not like great doctors are getting slaughtered each day and it's not like people with potential to be great doctors aren't being born anymore.

There are no second acts in American life. If you screw up, thanks for trying. You might think you're special, but so did every other human who walked this Earth before you for the last two millennia.