Bringing up overturning of Roe v. Wade in secondaries?

[JAK2-STAT3]

I am encountering secondaries with prompts like "how do you hope to impact medicine in the future," "what do you think you will like least about being a physician," etc. I am guessing that the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade will have major implications for us future physicians, and was wondering whether this topic is too controversial to bring up for these types of prompts assuming one does so in a thoughtful, non-inflammatory manner. I do not want to offend Adcoms but this topic is weighing on me as I consider my role as a (hopefully) future physician.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Goro]

If you want deal with Roe v Wade, and the aftermath of its repeal, become a politician.

Med school apps are not for essays on the state of medical care in the US, and certainly not for politics.

You CAN talk about your interest in women's health. Even better if you have walked the walk and engaged in such in your ECs.

 

[JAK2-STAT3]

If you want deal with Roe v Wade, and the aftermath of its repeal, become a politician.

Med school apps are not for essays on the state of medical care in the US, and certainly not for politics.

You CAN talk about your interest in women's health. Even better if you have walked the walk and engaged in such in your ECs.

Understood. Thank you for the reply!

 

[Goro]

Understood. Thank you for the reply!

Love the screen name!!

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

No.

Although most faculty and thus adcom members lean left, the ranking process works such that you should avoid alienating any members of the committee

 

[Goro]

No.

Although most faculty and thus adcom members lean left, the ranking process works such that you should avoid alienating any members of the committee

Even if we have a political lean, at my school we have rejected people who came off as too political too political; ie, too much like they would prefer being advocates.

I'm sure the wise @gyngyn has seen his fair share at his school!

 

[Med Ed]

I am encountering secondaries with prompts like "how do you hope to impact medicine in the future," "what do you think you will like least about being a physician," etc. I am guessing that the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade will have major implications for us future physicians, and was wondering whether this topic is too controversial to bring up for these types of prompts assuming one does so in a thoughtful, non-inflammatory manner. I do not want to offend Adcoms but this topic is weighing on me as I consider my role as a (hopefully) future physician.

You can code the language somewhat, and say that as a physician you would be an advocate for ensuring that patients have access to the healthcare they need. One cannot really formulate a reasonable argument against that position.

 

[GoSpursGo]

I agree with above. While I think there probably is a way to thread the needle and express how this decision is weighing on you, ultimately I don’t think it helps you because as others have said you could just as easily talk about womens’ health without jumping into the deep end on controversy

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I suggest developing a response aligned to what the professional societies and individual universities or schools have said publicly in the wake of the official ruling. Frame it as a women's health and access issue, with additional concerns on equity, not an issue on religious philosophy. Develop your own carefully phrased question (open ended)... I would prepare my admissions team, committee, and faculty to pay close attention to the dean or presidential/chancellor circle of executives with their statements.

(Yes, this is acknowledged in the Becoming a Student Doctor course that will roll out this week.)

 

[droliver]

You don't want to go near that issue on an essay.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

With these type of questions (or any question really), one has to do a cost benefit analysis. There have been a few questions on here lately where the benefit gained by writing something doesn’t not even come close to justifying the risk.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Adding to my earlier response: I would hold off on essays and reserve for interviewing. We are in the early parts of understanding the impact (though many of us already know based on where such laws were in effect). Also, you must pay attention to the schools where you are applying who have to navigate the politics while maintaining a strong equity position.

 

[JAK2-STAT3]

Love the screen name!!

Thanks, despite my screen name I try not to be overly inflammatory

 

[JAK2-STAT3]

I suggest developing a response aligned to what the professional societies and individual universities or schools have said publicly in the wake of the official ruling. Frame it as a women's health and access issue, with additional concerns on equity, not an issue on religious philosophy.

Thank you for this suggestion--it makes sense. However, I will just avoid the issue in the first place, especially since women's health is not a theme in my application. As an aside, it is frustrating that there is so much stigma and risk around discussing Dobbs, since regardless of one's religious or other views on abortion, there will be sweeping impacts to patient care that physicians will be grappling with for years. But alas, I will keep my head down and play the game...

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Thank you for this suggestion--it makes sense. However, I will just avoid the issue in the first place, especially since women's health is not a theme in my application. As an aside, it is frustrating that there is so much stigma and risk around discussing Dobbs, since regardless of one's religious or other views on abortion, there will be sweeping impacts to patient care that physicians will be grappling with for years. But alas, I will keep my head down and play the game...

It is very early to digest the implications, and it was an emotional minefield before the Dobbs decision. So many people cherish their religious identity that debates take on a very personal tone, and there have been many physicians/health providers who identify as "pro-life" for many years as well. By taking on a more pragmatic position similar to the professions at this point, you reduce the chance you'll get into trouble.

Of course, those physicians and health professionals who have been involved with running women's health clinics and providing abortions safely have persisted even under harassment and political intimidation for decades. I'm sure they know the impact they have made and what the implications are when they are portrayed as criminals for doing what they think is clinically justified for the patients they serve.