2020-2021 Kaiser (Tyson)

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Ok let's go ahead and unpack why this comment reeks of privilege and entitlement. First, let me make something very clear: Kaiser should never have asked Dr. Khoury to share her experiences. They put the burden of anti-racism work on a single black faculty member when there are groups like Advancing Health Equity that host workshops and do speaking engagements for exactly these types of situations. Instead, KPSOM had a black female doctor share her experiences with racial trauma in a space where she clearly was not welcome. That's on them.

Now, you mention that Dr. Khoury "complains" that white BSNs hesitate to follow her orders because she's black. If you'd taken the time to examine this statement from an inquisitive viewpoint rather than an accusatory one, you would've seen that black doctors being doubted by their white counterparts is not at all new and is fairly widespread. It's another facet of medical racism and I would hope that Dr. Khoury brought it up in her talk because its important to acknowledge the many ways in which racism works. Dr. Michele Harper wrote about her experience of being doubted by a white second-year resident when she (Dr. Harper) refused to examine a man against his will. Additionally, Dr. Tamika Cross tried to help a passenger who was having a health emergency during a Delta flight. The flight attendant didn't believe her and began questioning her credentials. However, when a white male doctor showed up, he was allowed to help without having to provide any "proof." The doubt that Dr. Khoury was talking about stemmed from white BSNs doubting her knowledge because she doesn't "look" the part. It's racism, plain and simple, and it should be addressed.

Your next point talks about the anxiety and fear Dr. Khoury has when interacting with white healthcare professionals. Rather than rehashing past unethical treatment from white physicians such as the case of Henrietta Lacks, the Tuskegee experiments, etc. I'll share with you the story of Dr. Susan Moore, who died of COVID after her white care team failed to address her concerns. She made it clear before she died that she wouldn't have been treated that way if she were white, and she was right. I firmly believe that had Dr. Moore been white, she'd be alive today. But let's get some hard data rather than anecdotal evidence. A 2016 study found that half of white medical students and residents believed myths that black people have thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings than their white counterparts. The AAMC has opened a discussion on disparities like this as well. Knowing all of that information, what black person wouldn't have some level of anxiety/fear when faced with a white provider?

Dr. Khoury's view most definitely do not "fall outside of the mainstream" nor are they too far left. They are based in fact as well as her personal experiences. Kaiser didn't want an open discussion of medical racism and bias. They wanted a discussion that wouldn't sacrifice the comfort of white students and faculty. Discussions about racism and bias are going to be uncomfortable, but your way of thinking asks black people to place the comfort of their white counterparts above their own. Let me repeat that: you want a black female doctor to place the comfort of her white peers above her own when relaying the details of her racial trauma.

Rather than trying to center yourself in discussions like this, question yourself and identify your own biases. It's much easier to demonize Dr. Khoury than acknowledge your faults. When people like you lick their wounds and stroke their egos rather than acknowledging how they subconsciously or consciously contribute to racism in medicine, black and brown patients suffer.
not you having bible verses in your signature and then promoting microaggressions

Let me just start by saying that you both (and everyone else here) are COMPLETELY entitled to your thoughts and opinions. It was not my intention to promote a microaggression because I didn't see it as a microagression. I saw an opinion that I agreed with and I promoted it. Because my opinion is different from yours doesn't make me an evil or bad person, it's just a part of what make me different. But it's our freedom to express our beliefs that makes living in a free country like America such a privilege. I'm not saying every belief (or even mine) is 100% justified, but just because someone may have a different opinion than yours doesn't mean these people are automatically incorrect or should be cancelled. And although we may have differing opinions, I would hope that we can promote an environment of respect and empathy regardless of the views we want to express. *Also for the record I am very proud to call myself a follower of Christ and I love that you noticed the verses in my signature.

Moving on, I really enjoyed reading your post idkdoctormaybe because you bring up both valid and factual points to your argument. Attitudes aren't changed by righteous crusades or emotional outbursts, but by supporting a stance with logic and sound judgment. I learned a lot by reading your post and I thank you for that. I will do my part moving forward to be more open-minded and willing to listen to all sides of an issue regardless if the views of others align with my own. If we could all do this I think it will not only contribute to a safer space for free thought, but it will help us to be more tolerant and respectful of those who are different from ourselves.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: 10 users
Rather than trying to center yourself in discussions like this, question yourself and identify your own biases. It's much easier to demonize Dr. Khoury than acknowledge your faults. When people like you lick their wounds and stroke their egos rather than acknowledging how they subconsciously or consciously contribute to racism in medicine, black and brown patients suffer.
@Osminog's post was so steeped in racism it hurt to read. Yes. Racism. Calling it for what it is. This is not "canceling" someone. It's identifying a behavior and describing it. Not saying that person is inherently evil or bad.

Calling someone's actions toxic and "unbecoming of a physician" because of the pain they experience in their profession is exactly what perpetuates the problem.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
  • Care
Reactions: 25 users
Let me just start by saying that you both (and everyone else here) are COMPLETELY entitled to your thoughts and opinions. It was not my intention to promote a microaggression because I didn't see it as a microagression. I saw an opinion that I agreed with and I promoted it. Because my opinion is different from yours doesn't make me an evil or bad person, it's just a part of what make me different. But it's our freedom to express our beliefs that makes living in a free country like America such a privilege. I'm not saying every belief (or even mine) is 100% justified, but just because someone may have a different opinion than yours doesn't mean these people are automatically incorrect or should be cancelled. And although we may have differing opinions, I would hope that we can promote an environment of respect and empathy regardless of the views we want to express. *Also for the record I am very proud to call myself a follower of Christ and I love that you noticed the verses in my signature.

Moving on, I really enjoyed reading your post idkdoctormaybe because you bring up both valid and factual points to your argument. Attitudes aren't changed by righteous crusades or emotional outbursts, but by supporting a stance with logic and sound judgment. I learned a lot by reading your post and I thank you for that. I will do my part moving forward to be more open-minded and willing to listen to all sides of an issue regardless if the views of others align with my own. If we could all do this I think it will not only contribute to a safer space for free thought, but it will help us to be more tolerant and respectful of those who are different from ourselves.
Here's the definition of microaggression:
A microaggression is a subtle, often unintentional, form of prejudice. Rather than an overt declaration of racism or sexism, a microaggression often takes the shape of an offhanded comment, an inadvertently painful joke, or a pointed insult.
The fact that you don't see it is exactly why it's microaggression. Being ignorant doesn't automatically make one not racist. Glad you learned and hope you continue learning.
 
  • Like
  • Care
Reactions: 23 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Yikes, I can’t help but think it’s a little overzealous to be declaring those commenters as being racists.
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: 14 users
Yikes, I can’t help but think it’s a little overzealous to be declaring those commenters as being racists.
Why? Because looking at someone's actions and defining them as a racist behavior makes you uncomfortable? I just made an amendment to my post to acknowledge something someone else said in the thread.

A racist action should be called what it is. Racism. That doesn't mean the person is a bad or evil person, but rather that they said/did something that was hurtful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 24 users
Yikes, I can’t help but think it’s a little overzealous to be declaring those commenters as being racists.
I understand why you're concerned about labeling people as racist. But, I think there's a misunderstanding here. A person can have harmful ideas that stem from racism without being a virulent, overt racist who absolutely thinks that certain races are better than others. That's why there's a discussion about being anti-racist and actively working to identify, challenge, and alter racist beliefs/behaviors. An overall good person can have racist beliefs/behaviors that they may not even understand are racist. However, when BIPOC/POC point out the racist beliefs/behaviors, it's a good idea to listen to what they're saying and reflect on oneself since BIPOC/POC are most likely going to have more experience with racism and know what to look for.

And in this case, the issue is that a Black female professor/physician was suspended from her job within a day of a class discussion after sharing her experiences with racism in medicine. I truly believe that if it was a White male making political statements during a class, he wouldn't experience the same treatment. In fact, I can 100% confirm that there's a White male professor at my undergrad institution who sometimes goes on pro-Trump tangents in class and has for years but has not faced any career consequences. (Now, maybe that's a tenure issue, but I digress.)

Nevertheless, since Kaiser Med's whole schtick is DEI, there should be room made for discussions on DEI issues in medicine from a patient as well as a provider perspective.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 15 users
Yikes, I can’t help but think it’s a little overzealous to be declaring those commenters as being racists.
You don’t have to be actively championing slavery in order to be a racist. It can be subtle, and it’s not the end of the world even if you (often unknowingly!) exhibit racism. The important thing is to recognize it in us through education and make sure we correct it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 15 users
Hello, I apologize for interrupting the discussion above, but I was curious as to whether anyone had information on Kaiser accepting update letters? Also, are they still sending out IIs?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Hello, I apologize for interrupting the discussion above, but I was curious as to whether anyone had information on Kaiser accepting update letters? Also, are they still sending out IIs?
Their portal states that they only accept post-interview update letters
 
@Osminog's post was so steeped in racism it hurt to read. Yes. Racism. Calling it for what it is. This is not "canceling" someone. It's identifying a behavior and describing it. Not saying that person is inherently evil or bad.

Calling someone's actions toxic and "unbecoming of a physician" because of the pain they experience in their profession is exactly what perpetuates the problem.

I apologize, but How can you label someone's post as steeped in racism without knowing their background though? why did you assume the race of the individual that commented? What if they are actually POC ? Im honestly just trying to learn here. I truly do not see where the post made was racist? If anything it was insulting, but far from racist? Please educate me if I am misinformed.
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: 4 users
I apologize, but How can you label someone's post as steeped in racism without knowing their background though? why did you assume the race of the individual that commented? What if they are actually POC ? Im honestly just trying to learn here. I truly do not see where the post made was racist? If anything it was insulting, but far from racist? Please educate me if I am misinformed.
You're absolutely right, I don't know the poster's race and that doesn't matter. Racism isn't isolated to white people only. They could very well be another black female medical professional and not even realize that what they're saying is racist. Key take away: most folks do and say racist stuff ALL THE TIME and do not realize that what they're doing or saying is racist. Solution? Listen, apologize, and grow. No one is calling them Hitler. They're saying that they did/said something harmful. I don't understand this logic of getting defensive over being called out on doing something racist. Which is worst? Being called racist or being on the receiving end of racism?

Why do I say that post is steeped in racism? @idkdoctormaybe already provided a thoughtful and articulate response to this but what stood out to me was this:

A black female doctor posts on their social media about white staff that are not responsive to her directions or the fear she feels in white spaces. Her posts represent the feelings of many black and indigenous physicians. When you learn about "racism in medicine", actions like this are precisely what is being referenced. The post of interest says that her saying these things is toxic and unbecoming of a physician and goes on to call her behavior a "far-left version of Alex Jones".

When a person from a marginalized group shares their experience, an antiracist approach is to listen and seek to understand their perspective. A racist approach is labeling their experience as toxic. That is the behavior that contributes to the cycle of racism that we're all (regardless of the color of your skin) trapped in. It minimizes her experience to a political motive or a call for attention without ever acknowledging what that must feel like. To finish medical school, residency, and fellowship, only to go to work and feel as if you're not being taken seriously by your colleagues.

That post reinforces the "shut up and get in line" mentality that continues to oppress people of color any work force.

Again, please read @idkdoctormaybe's post as they framed this much better than I did.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 24 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I apologize, but How can you label someone's post as steeped in racism without knowing their background though? why did you assume the race of the individual that commented? What if they are actually POC ? Im honestly just trying to learn here. I truly do not see where the post made was racist? If anything it was insulting, but far from racist? Please educate me if I am misinformed.
No need to apologize and I appreciate your curiosity here. Background while important doesn’t preclude one from being racist. You can be black and racist, brown and racist, white and racist etc. Afro-Latinx discrimination is an excellent example of this. In latinx communities black latinx people are discriminated in numerous ways by other latinx people. BIPOC people can be racist too. Regardless of the commenters race, gender, ethnicity, etc. we have to judge what has been said. In that way the post is racist.

Why? There is no middle ground you are either racist or anti-racist. Being “not racist” is racist because our culture and the systems in place are steeped in inequity. They perpetuate long standing economic inequity, they are the reason BIPOC people are suffering more from COVID, and they are the reason that despite BIPOC people committing an identical crime they are sentenced to more jail time and harsher punishments as compared to their white counterparts. If you are not against the inequity present in our society you are allowing it to exist and harm others. Thus you are racist.

In this case a woman BIPOC doctor shared her personal beliefs, experiences, and views of racism in medicine. What’s the end result? She is getting fired. Were a white doctor to do the same I suspect the result would be very different. In fact I have seen outrageous and harmful views espoused by healthcare workers while shadowing and while working as an EMT with nothing but a slap on the wrist as a result. They were white. The commenter blames the individuals actions and dismissed the role skin color played. In dismissing the role that color plays they perpetuate a system of inequity that has continually punished groups people of being for being “too dark”. This is racist.

Furthermore, who creates the measuring stick for appropriateness, for polity, for proper conduct? In this country and culture white people. The norms will favor white people at the expense of BIPOC people as they have and continue to. This doesn’t mean all white norms are bad and need to be tossed out but why do we have a stereotype for the “angry” black woman. Is being outspoken and honest a bad thing? Sometimes but when what is being said makes a group of people uncomfortable but doesn’t actually harm them why is our response to punish the speaker.

In this way the post is centered in white norms and defines appropriateness in a white way. In this light being outspoken or speaking in a different way is not polite, proper, or appropriate. Thus we assign the adjectives angry, aggressive, crazy to a person speaking about the pain they face on a day to day basis. Then when we get tired of the discomfort we make them go away in this case by firing them and go back to being “not racist”. In this way the commenter wields a white-centered perspective to justify why this doctor should just accept her fate and go away. Further feeding into the systems of inequity that pushes BIPOC into the margins of society in an attempt to keep them quiet.

We are telling people to suffer silence while supporting people who already benefit the most from our current systems for the sake of comfort. That is insulting and racist.

Ultimately perpetuation of racial inequity in our society by action or inaction is racist is doesn’t matter the color of your skin, who you happen to love, or what holidays you celebrate. In that way I have accept that I have been racist and probably still am despite my best efforts be anti-racist.

If you are interested in learning more I would highly recommend reading How To Be Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 21 users
Thank you both for your thoughtful and polite responses. These posts are very valuable in aiding people's comprehension about the topic, and yes I am interested in learning more about it, I will certainly check out that book this weekend!
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 6 users
II. Complete late July. Does anyone know if they only give you one interview date on the portal? I have a conflict that date but don't see any other available.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 5 users
II. Complete late July. Does anyone know if they only give you one interview date on the portal? I have a conflict that date but don't see any other available.
I remember reading that they offer only one, but you can email if you need to change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ahh.. Still a little unclear on how Dr. Khoury was treated, but I am sure I can find it via google. Curious as to how many people holding offers of admission will end up declining.
Typically, those who declined their Acceptance last year were one of three types of candidates.
1. Those receiving lots of Need based financial aid from a high to mid tier school with no residency competitiveness risks.
2. Those receiving Merit based financial aid from a high to mid tier school with no residency competitiveness risks, that felt the remaining cost offset the risk reduction from the unknown of KP.
3. Those not needing any aid from a high to mid tier school with no residency competitiveness risks, that felt the cost offset the risk reduction from the unknown of KP.
 
Does anyone know how far out they plan on interviewing / how full the class already is?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Does anyone know how far out they plan on interviewing / how full the class already is?
Pretty sure they interview into early/mid March. I don't think they have released info on how full the class is!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
it seems that kaiser has slowed things down, no acceptances given out for a while, and interviews seem to be conducted biweekly.
 
Was anyone else a little off-put by the Dean's interpretation of the situation during their interview day? Don’t want to go into details because of the NDA, so I’ll try to speak in general terms. I would understand the nuances of this situation if his claim that there is more to the situation is true, however, his tone came across as rather accusatory and defensive, like he wanted to get over this issue and did not want to listen to student's real concerns. Regardless of the "real" reasons for Dr. K’s removal, I did not get a sense of community from his answer. After speaking with the students I received a more justice-oriented tone on productive discussions and transparency as best they could. Not sure if this is making sense or if my interpretation of the remarks was off, but I was a little taken aback by the difference in the students' response vs. the Dean’s tone and language.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Was anyone else a little off-put by the Dean's interpretation of the situation during their interview day? Don’t want to go into details because of the NDA, so I’ll try to speak in general terms. I would understand the nuances of this situation if his claim that there is more to the situation is true, however, his tone came across as rather accusatory and defensive, like he wanted to get over this issue and did not want to listen to student's real concerns. Regardless of the "real" reasons for Dr. K’s removal, I did not get a sense of community from his answer. After speaking with the students I received a more justice-oriented tone on productive discussions and transparency as best they could. Not sure if this is making sense or if my interpretation of the remarks was off, but I was a little taken aback by the difference in the students' response vs. the Dean’s tone and language.
I think it’s hard to really interpret. Since he is legally unable to speak on the situation in full depth the only thing he really CAN say is that there’s more to the story than her side. I think he could’ve done a better job acknowledging that whether or not it was his intent, she feels her removal was a result of racism. He did, however, say that he understood why faculty/students were upset.

I just wish he had elaborated and said something along the lines of “I can’t speak legally on the other side, but I’m proud of students/faculty speaking up on what they believe is racism.” And just further gone into the fact that the organization of students/faculty is the whole point of the culture that Kaiser created and that once the whole story comes out he hopes it would clear up the whole picture.

Regardless, I think speaking with the students was a great opportunity because it showed me that they did recruit students and faculty who were dedicated to standing up against systemic oppression and who would speak out against racism/sexism/etc. That to me says that no matter what, there’s going to be backlash if the school doesn’t uphold their values because it’s something the students/faculty care so much about. The student I was with also made a good point that this type of this happens everywhere, but at Kaiser they’re not going to let it happen without making noise. Overall, I am glad they didn’t just try to brush over it or avoid the topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Was anyone else a little off-put by the Dean's interpretation of the situation during their interview day? Don’t want to go into details because of the NDA, so I’ll try to speak in general terms. I would understand the nuances of this situation if his claim that there is more to the situation is true, however, his tone came across as rather accusatory and defensive, like he wanted to get over this issue and did not want to listen to student's real concerns. Regardless of the "real" reasons for Dr. K’s removal, I did not get a sense of community from his answer. After speaking with the students I received a more justice-oriented tone on productive discussions and transparency as best they could. Not sure if this is making sense or if my interpretation of the remarks was off, but I was a little taken aback by the difference in the students' response vs. the Dean’s tone and language.

I completely agree with you. It was very cringe worthy and hand wavy at best. I was definitely put off by this interaction.
The student I spoke to said they would not have attended if they knew this before. They felt they were sold on a lie and now had no other choice but to stick it through.
 
  • Wow
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 2 users
This is a school-specific thread. It is understandable that emotions run high in unsettling circumstances, but I am going to ask that all sides step down in the debate over the Dean and other faculty. This is not the forum for that discussion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: 30 users
This is a school-specific thread. It is understandable that emotions run high in unsettling circumstances, but I am going to ask that all sides step down in the debate over the Dean and other faculty. This is not the forum for that discussion.
Are school-specific threads not the place for applicants to debate the merits of a specific school? Seems to me that many applicants and interviewees to this institution are discussing whether or not the institution upholds its own standards and mission— a factor that I, as an applicant, will certainly use to assess whether or not to attend any institution to which I am accepted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 17 users
Are school-specific threads not the place for applicants to debate the merits of a specific school? Seems to me that many applicants and interviewees to this institution are discussing whether or not the institution upholds its own standards and mission— a factor that I, as an applicant, will certainly use to assess whether or not to attend any institution to which I am accepted.
Charges of racism and responses to them belong in the Socio-Political Forum. Because we cannot close a school-specific thread we recommend this and because such discussion can easily slip into that territory, we request that members take such matters to SPF.
 
Last edited:
  • Dislike
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Charges of racism and responses to them belong in the Socio-Political Forum. Because we cannot close a school-specific thread we recommend and because such discussion can easily slip into that territory, we request that members take such matters to SPF.
these matters are important to discuss, why do you feel they need to be censored? your response does not sit well with me
 
  • Like
Reactions: 14 users
Charges of racism and responses to them belong in the Socio-Political Forum. Because we cannot close a school-specific thread we recommend and because such discussion can easily slip into that territory, we request that members take such matters to SPF.
You recommend that such discussions be moved to a thread that you have the ability to close, because you have the ability to close it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 13 users
You recommend that such discussions be moved to a thread that you have the ability to close, because you have the ability to close it?
It seems like a cop-out IMO. Especially considering that this discussion is specific to Kaiser and has already/will probably continue to affect applicant's views of the school and their decision to keep/withdraw their application. It's an important discussion that needs to be had and it really rubs me the wrong way that SDN wants to censor it. Definitely not a good look.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users
It seems like a cop-out IMO. Especially considering that this discussion is specific to Kaiser and has already/will probably continue to affect applicant's views of the school and their decision to keep/withdraw their application. It's an important discussion that needs to be had and it really rubs me the wrong way that SDN wants to censor it. Definitely not a good look.
💯. Sad to say I’m not surprised that a medical school admin would want to censor this conversation.
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: 8 users
You recommend that such discussions be moved to a thread that you have the ability to close, because you have the ability to close it?
It seems like a cop-out IMO. Especially considering that this discussion is specific to Kaiser and has already/will probably continue to affect applicant's views of the school and their decision to keep/withdraw their application. It's an important discussion that needs to be had and it really rubs me the wrong way that SDN wants to censor it. Definitely not a good look.
💯. Sad to say I’m not surprised that a medical school admin would want to censor this conversation.
Name-calling and accusations are not permitted under the ToS.
This is why threads are closed.
 
  • Dislike
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Are school-specific threads not the place for applicants to debate the merits of a specific school? Seems to me that many applicants and interviewees to this institution are discussing whether or not the institution upholds its own standards and mission— a factor that I, as an applicant, will certainly use to assess whether or not to attend any institution to which I am accepted.

to be fair i think there’s a difference between identifying whether a school is upholding their mission and accusing them of being racist which has occurred on this thread. When you bring a charged stance like that to an admission information thread it makes it hard to ask other admissions questions like “what’s the interview like?” Or “when can I expect an admission Decision” because they don’t want to be seen as taking this situation lightly, which has also been evidenced in this thread by users in the last few days. So I think moving the more important charged conversations to a more appropriate thread would be beneficial so that the original purpose of the thread can be upheld.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Name-calling and accusations are not permitted under the ToS.
This is why threads are closed.
I saw exactly zero name-calling/insults, just users sharing feedback on a mod's decision. Either way, here's a link to the thread I started in the sociopolitical forum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12 users
honestly you would think schools and admins would be more understanding to work against discrimination ESPECIALLY in this time with everything going on in the country but considering the tone of some on this thread as well as the statements put out by administration, it feels as though they could care less. theres a difference between trying to politically correct and actually caring about diversity and inclusion
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
to be fair i think there’s a difference between identifying whether a school is upholding their mission and accusing them of being racist which has occurred on this thread. When you bring a charged stance like that to an admission information thread it makes it hard to ask other admissions questions like “what’s the interview like?” Or “when can I expect an admission Decision” because they don’t want to be seen as taking this situation lightly, which has also been evidenced in this thread by users in the last few days. So I think moving the more important charged conversations to a more appropriate thread would be beneficial so that the original purpose of the thread can be upheld.
Racism surely goes against Kaiser’s publicly stated mission. You seem to be suggesting that potential racism on the part of the institution should be ignored as it pertains to the institution’s commitment to its values. That we should only discuss other potential violations of its mission, outside of accusations of racism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Racism surely goes against Kaiser’s publicly stated mission. You seem to be suggesting that potential racism on the part of the institution should be ignored as it pertains to the institution’s commitment to its values. That we should only discuss other potential violations of its mission, outside of accusations of racism.
THIS! the reason we still see so much blatant racism in society is because people refuse to acknowledge it for what it is, plain and simple. the first step to healing or whatever you wanna call it is actually identifying the issue first
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 5 users
Racism surely goes against Kaiser’s publicly stated mission. You seem to be suggesting that potential racism on the part of the institution should be ignored as it pertains to the institution’s commitment to its values. That we should only discuss other potential violations of its mission, outside of accusations of racism.
No? Never suggested that. Again my comment states that racism is a serious charge, much greater than determine whether a school is upholding its value and should justly be talked about in a forum dedicated to serious issues not a forum for petty issues like admissions decisions
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The purpose of the School Specific forums is to discuss general questions about the admissions cycle for a particular school.

We request that this detailed discussion on systemic racism in healthcare be moved over to our Topics in Healthcare forum:

This will allow the students who wish to discuss secondaries, admissions decisions, etc. for this school to do so in this thread, as well as open the discussion on systemic racism to members who aren’t currently following it because they are not applying to this school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12 users
Have any acceptances been given out recently? Interviewed in early November and have yet to hear anything!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Do we need to file FAFSA for Kaiser? i couldn't find their name or code in the school list
 
Do we need to file FAFSA for Kaiser? i couldn't find their name or code in the school list
Don't think so given it's free. They may have an internal app for cost of living expenses...
 
Do we need to file FAFSA for Kaiser? i couldn't find their name or code in the school list
You can't. Kaiser is not accredited yet for Title IV, which means that it doesn't have a FAFSA school code, and you can't get federal student aid if you go to Kaiser. It'll be accredited in 2023. This is one reason why Kaiser is free for its first few years and provides generous need-based aid on top of that for cost of living. If you get accepted you give them your tax forms
 
Why do you need aid when they pay for it 100%?
 
Top