Please read again where you got that I am " judging someone's qualifications/abilities/whatever by the color of his skin".
It seems that you are saying here by not being born and raised in America, one is more likely to be a racist ??
well...
This! I was wondering the same thing.
You are assuming a lot of things here....
Meritocracy is not a myth.
Let me give an example: Asian.
We all know that most of Asian students do belong to minority groups or come from very disadvantaged backgrounds in America. They sure are not playing on the same playing field as the majority of Americans.
Are many if not most of them experiencing racism and oppression too right now right here in America ?? A big YES.
But do you see most of them whine and claim the race card ?? No. They work hard and earn their places fair and square. No URM status and favor for them. No problem. They are trying harder to overcome those hardships/disadvantages by becoming the better /best workers or the better/best students.
Now you can ask why Asians are not underrepresented in medicine. In fact, they are disproportionally represented in medicine. Why ?? We all know that is because how highly they value education and the medical profession. Their own cultures and families encourage and support them to pursue medicine. But they earn their marks based on their own hard work and merits.
Would I refuse the care of an Asian doctor based on their skin color ?? Heck no. I know for sure most of them earn their marks on their own merits.
You want equal playing field ?? That can be done without the current URM policy.
I am not insulting anyone here. I am speaking facts. Is that true that URMs policy is to give preferential treatments and favors in admission and training to URMs, most with lesser stats than the rest of the student/applicant pool ??
To me lesser stats = highly chance that the students/doctors are not as qualified or competent as others.
If lesser stats in MCAT, GPA, or USMLE are unreliable and inherently biased, let's abolish the use of them. Let's base med school admission/medical residency-training on interviews and LORs or whatever but not grades and standardized test scores. Oh wait, most of Caribbean med schools have already done that lol
MCAT scores do correlate to passing and/or high scores on UMSL Step 1. Unless you are saying USMLE is not to measure the competency of the doctor-in-training.
Again, please do tell me what you think should be used to judge/measure/determine the competency and qualification of a doctor.
Also I have never said that MCAT and undergrad GPA should be an be all and end all. Whatever admission standards there are, they should be the same for ALL. The current URM policy is a double standard if you will, which is unfairly taking the spots of many other more qualified students/applicants to favor URMs.
racism is racism. What is racism ?? I think you already have an idea, i.e. "based on races". Is the current URM admission based on races ?? lol
I do not refuse care from doctors based on their races. I refused care from doctors who are the productions of the URM system which favors students w lesser stats than others, which very likely to produce incompetent doctors. I would not trust my health/life in the hands of incompetent doctors, regardless of races or backgrounds.
I am saying most URMs consistently admitted to med school w lesser stats, thus highly likely become incompetent doctors. Studies do show MCAT scores positively correlate with performance on USMLE (esp Step 1). USMLE is measuring the competency of the doctor-in-training, is it not ??
I based my decisions on merits while people like you repeatedly are trying put words in my mouth and calling me a "racist".
read this for your own info,
https://www.google.com/search?q=quota wrong supreme court&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Funny in your own words you are saying above that there is racism in affirmative action and URMs and it is not relevant. Whatever LOL
You do realize that grades and MCAT scores aren't what makes a competent physician, right? Most of the older attendings out there today got into medical school with what was the equivalent of a 25 and GPAs that would be considered abysmal today. Hell, until recently there were rapidly trained physicians in practice that completed accelerated curriculums during the WWII and post WWII era, and they did fine as well, despite having what amounted to a slightly more in-depth PA curriculum. It doesn't make them any less competent than their younger peers. Being able to excel on tests and in undergrad have no bearing on whether your surgeon will have the dexterity to master his craft or whether your PCP has the patience and listening skills to sort through your complaints to find what is at the root of your problem.
How does their lower GPA and MCAT in any way affect the quality of care that they provide?
More people get in based on connections, athletic performance, etc than there are URMs in a given school. You're more likely to come across a legacy admit than a black physician by a wide margin.
imho, if URMs are given special treatments in admission and / or training because their populations are under-represented in medicine, their licenses to practice medicine should be restricted to only practicing medicine within their own populations / communities.
Personally, I will try my best not to be treated by a URM doctor, because I think most of them are underqualified and lesser students compared to the general pool. I want the best doctors I can get to treat me !! I am sure God does not give me a URM status on my life and spare me when the time comes
But enjoy medical school !!
. I'm not here to brag, but I am very competitive. Yes, I had to retake my MCAT, and I know that is something that I had to struggle with, but it is okay. I've done above and beyond what an average pre-medical student has done. I am also a scholar for a very prestigious fellowship, which people wish they were . Once again, we don't need your negative comments, and thinking just because you can't pass a test you are incompetent. URMs aren't the only ones who struggle with standardized tests, everyone does. I am happy there is a system in place. I bet if they had certain privileges for other ORMs, for example, people families who were victims for a certain event, people will definitely jump on the bandwagon.. If you can't handle the heat, get the hell out the kitchen. Better yet, if you can't play the cards you are dealt with, you're useless and pretty much a pathetic soul. Fold your hands, put on some depends, and let someone tuck you in. Life is not fair, and not always in your favor.. I hope there aren't any URMs who would want to be mentor by someone like you. I will feel very sorry for them, but more importantly, I pity you, and really feel sorry for you, like I truly do. I guess this is how majority of SDNers feel., and they need help as well!
.
lol
There's no quotas involved, so it's not directly illegal per any court decision that currently stands. Given that it's a subjective process, there's not really a way to ensure "fairness," as administrators will always have their discretion in choosing who they believe will be right for the job.
The whole package includes who a physician will ultimately care for. That's the point. Their merit is that they are infinitely more likely to serve in underserved areas than ORMs. That meets a need for American society and the school's mission. Believe it or not, med schools take ORMs from severely disadvantaged backgrounds as well, if they show promise to work in underserved areas. There's several types of "disadvantaged" you can claim on the AMCAS and in secondaries.when you aim to have URMs in your student body and try to achieve that goals by using a double standard to give out seats without the students' merits, this is quota even in the case you admit only 1 URM. You are just playing or skirting with the laws by not stating the number you are aiming for.
admission process does not have to be entirely subjective. I've already given you examples. There is nothing but your wish to make it entirely subjective or objective or anything in between.
your saying of "there's not really a way to ensure 'fairness' " is false. There are. If we are taking out "discretion" and using transparent and objective metrics, there will be clear cut in college admission without any confusion.
Mind you, if "discretion" consistently amounts to violating the laws, this is just discrimination in education/employment and I am sure someone will take legal action on it. Plenty of cases out there. Google for your info if you will.
Life is not fair, I know. But you know what ?? America is built and fought on the principle of equal opportunity, liberty, and justice to ALL. We have all learned that.
As a whole, we are trying to build, maintain, and protect our country and society based on that principle. Libery, Equality, Justice for ALL.
I have already addressed this point of yours above in my previous posts. Legacy, athletes, connection, etc are wrong. More likely than URM or not, to be admitted to med schools, those things are neither regular/frequent occurrences nor systematic.
Buying seats via monetary donations or connections is not OK. That is one of the reasons I think the system is broken and needed to be fixed.
But you have to realize again that the fact that those things are happening does make the URM any less wrong or not wrong.
It might not matter when you do not intentionally do it and things just happen by accident.
When you are trying to achieve this goal by putting a system in place, this does matter. Especially when it is unfair by discrimination based on races and not on merits.
By merits, I do take into accounts grades + standardized test scores and other accomplishments that the person EARNS.
You are resorting to the "whole package/whole person" argument again ?? Check the typical URM "whole package" again, you will see if your "whole package" defense are still valid for them. Plenty of examples from their own very words right here in this same very thread and on SDN. You answered to some of them.
So their "whole packages" are superior than others' "whole packages" ???? But you know
Whatever you do again, whole person or highest number, EVERYONE must be treated the same. It is only right and fair to ALL. NO discrimination, esp based on races. NO double standard and/or without merits.
Seriously, if you'd met some of the people I interviewed alongside or was in group interviews with, you'd understand why numbers aren't everything. There was this one kid that was brilliant but completely unable to talk to people. Another that was clearly a jerk that shouldn't ever be working with vulnerable people. These are character traits- you don't teach someone to not be so shy that they can barely talk, nor do you teach someone to not be an ass, or how to interact with people. That isn't the job of medical school. It is to find people who have the personalities and qualifications to be successful physicians. There are plenty of people that get rejected every year with high stats, such as one girl recently that had over ten interviews and nearly perfect stats and ECs- she didn't get admitted for a reason, and likely one that had to do with a personality that had no place in medicine. That's why we need interviews. That's why we need subjectivity. Because medicine is about a whole lot more than just brains.
Until we get a Supreme Court ruling banning the designation of URM status on med school applications entirely, nah.
People have been trying to do something for 25 years. I'm all for the status quo myself, as there are often socioeconomic inequalities that result in students being given a substantial educational advantage when compared to their peers. By switching to a largely numbers-based approach, you would be favoring those who could afford private school for their children, expensive prep courses, etc, which is a far less fair system overall than the one that currently exists, as factors beyond a student's control largely determine whether they have the resources available to be successful.
Treating everyone equal in a world in which equality does not currently exist will simply exacerbate inequality. Not all home environments, educational systems, parents, and socioeconomic backgrounds are equal. It's been shown time and time again that Asian students largely succeed due to sociocultural factors that are completely lacking in other communities. Youth do not get to choose the culture in which they are raised, nor who their parents are, nor their economic status growing up. Any move to a purely objective system would simply further entrench the privileged class that currently holds the vast majority of medical school seats.
Med school adcoms can't right every wrong in the world leading up to the application process, so they work with what they've got to balance things as best as they're able. When society finally reaches the point that URM status isn't needed, it will be removed from consideration.You are only right about admitting that this current race-based URM is not treating everyone fairly and equally.
if we want fairness to ALL, we start now in everything we are doing. Unfair is unfair and it will be forever unfair and will not to make anything fair.
I agree with you that Asian students such as because of other sociocultural factors. They are the minority in the whole America. So why others are not emulating them and building similar socialcultural factors/structures in their communities that are lacking those ??
We cannot change the cultures or individual homes, but we can create a supporting and encouraging structure at large as a whole society to encourage ALL people to advance their life. Again, our school system, welfare system, tax system, etc.
We have to also encourage people to take responsibility and charge for their own lives and not depend on entitlements or favors regardless of races. We can teach this principle in kindergarten, grade and high schools. We can promote this in media to bring awareness. As a whole country, America takes responsibility and charge for its own destiny and do not depend or wait on favors, help, or handout from any other nation. We need to remind everyone and every home in America this principle.
We need to do right thing NOW. Want Fairness and Justice ?? Treat others with fairness and justice NOW.
Want nobody judge you on the color of your skin but on your individual hard work and achievements ?? Compete with others not on the basic of your skin color but on your own merits. EARN your marks.
This is the spirit that country is founded on !!
In my example above, if Bill Clinton had blamed on no URM status/favors, no rich parents, no special treatments or upbringing, no expensive prep courses or private schools, I am 100% sure that he would not have not excelled in everything he tries and become the 42nd President of United State of America
You can always find a new way to basically ensure that URMs are recruited, be it based on income, the zip code they come from, etc. Making it no longer race-based won't change a thing, except in name.
As long as you don't base it on race, it may be discrimination, but it's legal discrimination, which I'm fine with, as income and zip code aren't federally protected. You don't have a legal right to be a physician any more than you have one to be an underwear model or a Hooters waitress. You're idealistic, but ideals are often not reflective of the real world, which is ugly, unfair, and requires some balancing to compensate for. In a perfect world, your way would be the way to do things, but the world is far from perfect.
"In Bakke, the Court held that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but that educational institutions could legally use race as one of many factors to consider in their admissions process. In Grutter and Gratz, the Court upheld both Bakke as a precedent and the admissions policy of the University of Michigan Law School. In dicta, however, Justice O'Connor, writing for the Court, said she expected that in 25 years, racial preferences would no longer be necessary. In Gratz, the Court invalidated Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, on the grounds that unlike the law school's policy, which treated race as one of many factors in an admissions process that looked to the individual applicant, the undergraduate policy used a point system that was excessively mechanistic."
Try applying to Hooters or an underwear model as a fat guy. You don't have what they're looking for, they aren't hiring you. Call it sex discrimination or fat discrimination or whatever the hell you want, but the simple fact is, you're not the one they want.I am glad that you admit that my way is the way to do thing (in the perfect world or whatever) lol
all kidding asides, you are right that not all discrimination is illegal. However, discrimination in education and employment by not letting ALL people to compete fairly and equally under the same rule and treatment) are ILLEGAL discrimination, esp when you are using double standard to favor some particular groups of your choosing to not let everyone to compete fairly and equally.
This applies to med school admission and Hooter's employment policy. I do not know about other Hooters but I am sure Hooters of America is an equal opportunity employer. Or at least they are claiming for
I hate to write long so I suggest you google for your info. Plenty of cases and info you can read about this issue.
"The Court's majority ruling, authored by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, held that the United States Constitution "does not prohibit the law school's narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body." The Court held that the law school's interest in obtaining a "critical mass" of minority students was indeed a "tailored use"."where does it say Medical and Law schools are actually held to different standards ??
if you read it closely, it says that the point system which was used in UM's undegrad policy was excessively mechanistic. If their law school's policy had used the same point system instead of just racial preferences, it would also have been struck down.
yes, but no obvious quota or numbers.
Racial preferences would be ok according to the recent Supreme Court's judgment if med school picked a URM candidate over another student whose stats and credentials are the same.
The current race-base URM consistently and categorically favors URMs based on races and applying lower admission standards for URM.
IMHO, when you consistently and categorically do this, this will create enough patterns and numbers to base a discrimination case on
The Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter as to the application of laws. They can deem laws unconstitutional, even if passed by Congress, and can throw them out entirely. They can determine that a law, as written, is being interpreted improperly. They hold ultimate sway over what is and is not within the bounds of the Constitution and what is and is just. Given that you're not a Supreme Court Justice, I'd say that their opinion counts a hell of a lot more than yours in regard to what is and is not legal.
