Can I express interest in working with underserved in my PS?

[bunnyg]

---

Members don't see this ad.

.

 

[Affiche]

If it contributes to your answer to "why medicine?", then I don't see how it would be a problem.

 

[bunnyg]

It does, I am just wondering if I would come off as insincere or just trying to impress the adcoms because of my background

 

[Syns]

two cents:
If your formative years were spent in a wealthy community, the statistics suggest you are unlikely to work in undeserved areas during the duration of your career. I suspect adcoms are painfully aware that students often attempt to leverage a fictional desire to engage with this community to try and gain an admissions advantage. I believe that you need to prove you have the experience base to make an informed decision. Does your 100 hours provide you enough experience to *reasonably* claim to have a desire to serve the disenfranchised? If so, then go for it but I would be hypercritical of using it in your PS because its inclusion could work in opposition to your admittance if taken the wrong way.

 

[bunnyg]

two cents:
If your formative years were spent in a wealthy community, the statistics suggest you are unlikely to work in undeserved areas during the duration of your career. I suspect adcoms are painfully aware that students often attempt to leverage a fictional desire to engage with this community to try and gain an admissions advantage. I believe that you need to prove you have the experience base to make an informed decision. Does your 100 hours provide you enough experience to *reasonably* claim to have a desire to serve the disenfranchised? If so, then go for it but I would be hypercritical of using it in your PS because its inclusion could work in opposition to your admittance if taken the wrong way.

Good point. I guess I won't explicitly mention it

 

[vellez]

I think if you were honestly interested, you woudn't have have an "hours total" at the ready.

 

[Affiche]

I think if you were honestly interested, you woudn't have have an "hours total" at the ready.

I agree. I think that the quality of these experiences cannot be quantified by number of hours, which is what having hours at the ready tends to do. I also think that 100 hours in a year of work isn't very much at all (that's less than 2 hours/week), and if this was a meaningful experience for you then you would have found more time to dedicate to it.

That said, if there was one experience in particular that was meaningful and profoundly influenced your desire to pursue a career in medicine, then there won't be any harm in including that experience and how it shaped you.

 

[Goro]

Yes, and admirable too.

I have been volunteering in a free clinic with the uninsured/underserved in the imperial valley for about a year (around 100 hours)
I have had some great experiences and have lots of things to talk about in my PS, and through this experience I have developed an interest in working with this population in the future.

Is 100 hours enough to express this interest? I would be mentioning it rather briefly in my PS
I am white, come from a upper-middle class family, so I am not sure if adcoms will roll their eyes if I put this in.

 

[Syns]

I respectfully disagree rachiie01. If this experience stands alone, then I agree but there are many circumstances that would merit its inclusion. For instance: this experience (100 hours) may have planted a seed of interest that the candidate expanded on. If they had 2-3 activities that all supported their desire to enter the workforce as a physician focused on the underserved than it might be a more compelling argument. My remarks were based on the assumption that the OP didn't have these experiences and I should have been more even-handed in my original post.

My apologies OP.

 

[bunnyg]

I think if you were honestly interested, you woudn't have have an "hours total" at the ready.

I am continuing with my volunteering. I mentioned my hours as a hesitation for putting it in my PS...

 

[Affiche]

Our perspectives are shaped by a culmination of experiences.

I see no harm in briefly mentioning one experience if it contributed to the OP's overall outlook on the role of a physician. If the entire personal statement was about this experience and these 100 hours, then yes, I agree that's a stretch. However, speaking briefly about one experience that offered the OP a new perspective has the potential to demonstrate a well-balanced applicant.

 

[Affiche]

I respectfully disagree rachiie01. If this experience stands alone, then I agree but there are many circumstances that would merit its inclusion. For instance: this experience (100 hours) may have planted a seed of interest that the candidate expanded on. If they had 2-3 activities that all supported their desire to enter the workforce as a physician focused on the underserved than it might be a more compelling argument. My remarks were based on the assumption that the OP didn't have these experiences and I should have been more even-handed in my original post.

My apologies OP.

You're also disagreeing with Goro, who is an adcom. In another thread, you've disagreed with mimelim, who I also believe is an adcom (or is at least a practicing physician).
Respectfully, it may behoove you to be a bit more receptive to the advice others offer when they're further along in their careers (I am not including myself in this), rather than immediately disagreeing without much ground for support.

I am not an adcom and I can only offer what I personally would do, so I advise the OP to take Goro's advice on this.

 

[beeboops]

I think if you could meaningfully explain what you've learned about working with others that are different from you (in terms of socioeconomic standing, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, the whole shebang), then this experience would be a wonderful thing to include in your PS. However, since your hours are light as of right now, have maybe 2-3 other experiences that can answer the questions of "why medicine?" and "why me?"

 

[Syns]

I respectfully disagree rachiie01. If this experience stands alone, then I agree but there are many circumstances that would merit its inclusion. For instance: this experience (100 hours) may have planted a seed of interest that the candidate expanded on. If they had 2-3 activities that all supported their desire to enter the workforce as a physician focused on the underserved than it might be a more compelling argument. My remarks were based on the assumption that the OP didn't have these experiences and I should have been more even-handed in my original post.

My apologies OP.

Our perspectives are shaped by a culmination of experiences.

I see no harm in briefly mentioning one experience if it contributed to the OP's overall outlook on the role of a physician. If the entire personal statement was about this experience and these 100 hours, then yes, I agree that's a stretch. However, speaking briefly about one experience that offered the OP a new perspective has the potential to demonstrate a well-balanced applicant.

Then we are in agreement.

You're also disagreeing with Goro, who is an adcom. In another thread, you've disagreed with mimelim, who I also believe is an adcom (or is at least a practicing physician).
Respectfully, it may behoove you to be a bit more receptive to the advice others offer when they're further along in their careers (I am not including myself in this), rather than immediately disagreeing without much ground for support.

I am not an adcom and I can only offer what I personally would do, so I advise the OP to take Goro's advice on this.

By this logic no one should offer their opinion other than adcoms. We are both guilty of breaching that restriction. My opinions have sometimes been consistent with adcom remarks and others not. Adcoms on the site also give different shades of advice because their institutions handle situations differently. Discourse is an important tool in developing ideas and shaping understanding. I am grateful to have the opportunity to make foolish remarks and learn from them. In fact, the post that I disagreed with you about was consistent with my original post and I saw my error in logic. Our secondary remarks are much more even-handed and do justice for the argument that a peaceful exchange in opinion is useful.

 

[ChrisMack390]

Goro already said this was a good idea, why is anyone still talking?

 

[Affiche]

Disagreeing is fine.
Disagreeing without much ground for support while advising someone else is not fine.

My point is that including an experience to talk about how it shapes you as a whole may very well be valuable to a PS. When an adcom states that he finds it valuable, even admirable, it doesn't make much sense to continue to advise the OP to exclude this piece of information. That's all I'm saying.