Conservative Programs

[Waldeinsamkeit]

I will be applying in September and I was hoping for some insight. I would prefer a more conservative psychiatry program if such a thing exists. Would you let me know your experience? I know the University of Chicago is generally more conservative, but I also know that psychiatry as a whole is quite liberal. If you know of any such programs, please let me know. I would love any advice! Thank you.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[nitemagi]

You mean politically conservative?

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

You mean politically conservative?

Yes. I am not a republican, but I think I am more politically right of almost every psychiatrist I have met thus far. It can get exhausting.

 

[uname943]

Yes. I am not a republican, but I think I am more politically right of almost every psychiatrist I have met thus far. It can get exhausting.

Please remember to include this in your personal statement so that you can find the program that fits best with you.

Psychiatrists are members of their larger community. More conservative programs would be in rural or religious programs. Academic and city are more likely liberal.

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

Please remember to include this in your personal statement so that you can find the program that fits best with you.

Psychiatrists are members of their larger community. More conservative programs would be in rural or religious programs. Academic and city are more likely liberal.

Eh, I probably won't do that. I don't want to disqualify myself from a large number of programs. It is not a big deal, just personal preference. And I am less of a Arkansas conservative and more of a fiscal conservative. Thank you for the input though.

 

[Wilf]

If it makes you feel better, most psychiatrists are actually fiscally conservative but then simply and inexplicably say they are liberal.

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

If it makes you feel better, most psychiatrists are actually fiscally conservative but then simply and inexplicably say they are liberal.

Why would they do that? I don't bring it up bc I am a student and have 0 power. If you are an attending or prof-why would you lie?

 

[wolfvgang22]

Scott and White, Texas A&M. Once attended a grand rounds there once where the main topic was essentially about the problem of illegal immigration. Not for me, but maybe you would enjoy that.

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

Scott and White, Texas A&M. Once attended a grand rounds there once where the main topic was essentially about the problem of illegal immigration. Not for me, but maybe you would enjoy that.

No, I honestly do not want to build the wall
Seems like a waste of money

 

[splik]

If you are simply fiscally conservative then where the hell does it matter where you end up? It is only social conservatism that might get you into trouble (and it shouldn’t). People don’t feel as passionately about the economy as they do immigration, healthcare, reproductive rights, lgbtq rights, education etc. This forum skews heavily to the right incidentally so it’s not like there aren’t psychiatrists on the other end of the spectrum. Why don’t you just choose by location. But politically beliefs of whatever stripe should not factor in to choosing a residency program. There are/were prominent conservative voices such as the late Charles krauthammer and Sally Satel. I would suggest you focus on getting into the program that will best train you. If you aren’t a d*ick or a zealot people will respect you and your opinions even if they don’t share them.

 

[NickNaylor]

I don't really see why this should matter? Could be a potential learning opportunity to learn about your political foes, so to speak.

I would say that the nature of our work generally requires a more nuanced appreciation for human thoughts and behaviors and, thus, probably results in people that are more left-learning.

 

[birchswing]

Yes. I am not a republican, but I think I am more politically right of almost every psychiatrist I have met thus far. It can get exhausting.

I joked a while ago that if someone forced me to watch an hour of MSNBC, I might have to vote Republican this fall. The joke part is that I have always voted Democrat (although I don't identify as one). I am a progressive, but I generally can't stand the rhetoric, especially when they get lost pitting class against class and obsession with proper verbiage, fighting for table scraps and missing the forest for the trees.

There are progressives who are ruthlessly intellectually honest with themselves. Steven Pinker for example. He was attacked by people who don't realize they agree with him because of mindless, reptilian responses.

You might find you enjoy both conservatives and progressives who are less mindless and more open than the average bear.

Opinion | Social Media Is Making Us Dumber. Here’s Exhibit A.

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

I don't really see why this should matter? Could be a potential learning opportunity to learn about your political foes, so to speak.

I would say that the nature of our work generally requires a more nuanced appreciation for human thoughts and behaviors and, thus, probably results in people that are more left-learning.

I have been surrounded by political “foes” for 4 years. Not much to learn.

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

If you are simply fiscally conservative then where the hell does it matter where you end up? It is only social conservatism that might get you into trouble (and it shouldn’t). People don’t feel as passionately about the economy as they do immigration, healthcare, reproductive rights, lgbtq rights, education etc. This forum skews heavily to the right incidentally so it’s not like there aren’t psychiatrists on the other end of the spectrum. Why don’t you just choose by location. But politically beliefs of whatever stripe should not factor in to choosing a residency program. There are/were prominent conservative voices such as the late Charles krauthammer and Sally Satel. I would suggest you focus on getting into the program that will best train you. If you aren’t a d*ick or a zealot people will respect you and your opinions even if they don’t share them.

Sorry, this is patently false. Every issue is capable to be racially charged or have some sexually discriminatory bent unless you share every belief rank and file. If you don’t believe in taxes that means you’re pro gutting social programs, any relaxation of regulation is seen as signing up workers for slaughter. I know this sounds laughably absurd, but they are arguments that are made. I have a friend that is much more liberal than me and the only place he fell out of lock step was his views on the Israel-palestinian conflict, and it straight up cost him his friend group.
No, this is not a make or break issue. Yes, I am fine with people of other beliefs (I’m marrying a hippie). But you can’t pretend these rather tame opinions are not controversial at this point.
It’s not a big deal, I was just wondering bc it might be nice to find a program with that bent the same way it would be nice to find one with a crew team or a good sports team or something-holy ****.

 

[birchswing]

Sorry, this is patently false. Every issue is capable to be racially charged or have some sexually discriminatory bent unless you share every belief rank and file. If you don’t believe in taxes that means you’re pro gutting social programs, any relaxation of regulation is seen as signing up workers for slaughter. I know this sounds laughably absurd, but they are arguments that are made. I have a friend that is much more liberal than me and the only place he fell out of lock step was his views on the Israel-palestinian conflict, and it straight up cost him his friend group.
No, this is not a make or break issue. Yes, I am fine with people of other beliefs (I’m marrying a hippie). But you can’t pretend these rather tame opinions are not controversial at this point.
It’s not a big deal, I was just wondering bc it might be nice to find a program with that bent the same way it would be nice to find one with a crew team or a good sports team or something-holy ****.

I've been around colleges enough to believe you and empathize, even though my political persuasions run counter to yours.

I still think it's not about finding compatible opinions but finding non-reptilian minds and tolerating the reptilian ones. Or maybe that's what it should be. There are always people who have to work a little harder to make themselves understood in the way they have expressed themselves and who are put upon. I wouldn't disagree that in general in academics you're ideology is at a disadvantage. If it helps at all, I shake my head at the mindless tweets of liberal professors. I don't think conservatives or liberals who are in low level rhetoric are terribly interesting to begin with. That's the playground. So you're at a disadvantage in a sandbox. The whole two party system is a function of a non-proportionate, winner-take-all voting system. It's dysfunctional and pretty played out. There is a higher field of play that is available to engage on, philosophically at least, which is all that really matters anyway for the purpose of this discussion. It's not as if your ostracized friend was about to change the landscape of Israel/Palestine. Only his identity was at stake.

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

I find that people working in public health systems tend to be the most consistently blue leaning. It probably has something to do with committing to serve the underserved. The exception would probably be the VA system. In general, universities tend to be liberal bastions but there probably are exceptions particularly among private universities. I trained at a very conservative school, but it seemed like the medical school was liberal.
Yesterday someone misunderstood my point and called me a Trump supporter. Probably the meanest thing anyone has ever said about me. Then I figured that if I was a Trump supporter, being called one wouldn't be at all offensive.

 

[Wilf]

I would say that the nature of our work generally requires a more nuanced appreciation for human thoughts and behaviors and, thus, probably results in people that are more left-leaning.

I would say this is a complete non sequitur.


I rarely say this, but I appreciate Birch's point in his first posting. Steven Pinker has been one of my intellectual heroes for quite a few years and because of his intellectual integrity he often makes statements that sound conservative to people with only moderate thinking capability. Intellectual integrity is often missing on both sides of the political spectrum but it is sorely missing on the left. Much of the left has become indoctrinated into a religion that is as dangerous as they find Christians to be, and relies on myth over fact to at least the same degree, secular humanism. This is one of myriad reasons why I find it ironic and humorous and frustrating when the left acts as though they are "above" or more "sophisticated" than religionists.

 

[NickNaylor]

I would say this is a complete non sequitur.


I rarely say this, but I appreciate Birch's point in his first posting. Steven Pinker has been one of my intellectual heroes for quite a few years and because of his intellectual integrity he often makes statements that sound conservative to people with only moderate thinking capability. Intellectual integrity is often missing on both sides of the political spectrum but it is sorely missing on the left. Much of the left has become indoctrinated into a religion that is as dangerous as they find Christians to be, and relies on myth over fact to at least the same degree, secular humanism. This is one of myriad reasons why I find it ironic and humorous and frustrating when the left acts as though they are "above" or more "sophisticated" than religionists.

I don’t disagree with you at all. But for whatever reason, in the cultural zeitgeist the left is conceptualized as being “accepting” and “open” (even though this ironically is only applicable to those seemingly as “accepting” and “open”) while the right is caricatured as intolerant and traditional.

Ironically the left is just as dogmatic as they claim the right to be, as you said.

 

[Georgit]

I have a friend that is much more liberal than me and the only place he fell out of lock step was his views on the Israel-palestinian conflict, and it straight up cost him his friend group.
No, this is not a make or break issue. Yes, I am fine with people of other beliefs (I’m marrying a hippie). But you can’t pretend these rather tame opinions are not controversial at this point.

But you can pretend to ignore them.
Maybe I think this just because I'm too old ( 4 dozens) to lost time with this things.
Discussion about politics often border delusion ( no, you are not in charge with Israel-palestinian conflict) and dissociation ( just talking about, but dissociated by conduct).
Change friends, not the the type of opinion they hold

I don't think conservatives or liberals who are in low level rhetoric are terribly interesting to begin with.
It's not as if your ostracized friend was about to change the landscape of Israel/Palestine. Only his identity was at stake.

Yes, it is about to be or not to be in a tribe. And ( more when you are young) belonging to a group is a human need.

 

[Georgit]

I would say this is a complete non sequitur.

I say it is , or should be.
Like a christian should be pretty focused on suffering and pain, and a soldier should be not. Because the values of this groups tell this.
But then a decoupling between ideas and feelings kicks in. Pretty much a psychiatric issue.
You think it but you do not feel it. Pretty common, it is about how Homo sapiens brain works. Neo-cortex and mammalin brain notworking togheter.
That is why intellectual honesty is not so common, it needs a good deal of insight

 

[romanticscience]

Hopkins, maybe? Dr. McHugh is an influential figure there. He has been explicit in some politically conservative ideas as they relate to psychiatry (e.g., LGBT).

I've heard the program is conservative in general. Attendings must round on the wards, even if they do primarily research. They have to wear white coats in the hospital. They require ICU and 1-full year of medicine as PGY-I. They allow for no or very little elective time. They adhere to a non-DSM conceptual model based on the Perspectives of Psychiatry (1983).

Please excuse me if these aspects of the program have changed.

 

[st2205]

If you are simply fiscally conservative then where the hell does it matter where you end up? It is only social conservatism that might get you into trouble (and it shouldn’t).

Without opining on the OP, I think there’s a greater Intersection of fiscal and social issues that perhaps in the minds of other people, would leave them being viewed as a pariah if they held a stance on an issue (that was social in nature) but was ultimately fiscal.

i.e. there may be some social cause that calls for public funding (or some kind of large-scale government oversight or intervention). A fiscally conservative, yet socially liberal, individual may oppose such funding/intervention on fiscal grounds, and may be castigated by their liberal social peers for being “anti- [insert social issue].”

 

[michaelrack]

During your interviews, tell them that you want to "Make Psychiatry Great Again".... their reaction should give you an indication of how conservative the program is.

 

[WingedOx]

I know the University of Chicago is generally more conservative,

I mean, the major Chicago programs all have unique cultures to them among their residents, but none of it really has anything to do with politics.

But really, I can't think of any particular programs that mirror the politics of their respective undergraduate institution, though I've never set foot in Loma Linda.

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

I find that people working in public health systems tend to be the most consistently blue leaning. It probably has something to do with committing to serve the underserved. The exception would probably be the VA system. In general, universities tend to be liberal bastions but there probably are exceptions particularly among private universities. I trained at a very conservative school, but it seemed like the medical school was liberal.
Yesterday someone misunderstood my point and called me a Trump supporter. Probably the meanest thing anyone has ever said about me. Then I figured that if I was a Trump supporter, being called one wouldn't be at all offensive.

Yeah, but I’m assuming it was intended to be an insult. I think it is so dumb that it is popular to rip on Trump supporters. I think Trump is... not the best to put it lightly, but I stop short of insulting his entire base.

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

Without opining on the OP, I think there’s a greater Intersection of fiscal and social issues that perhaps in the minds of other people, would leave them being viewed as a pariah if they held a stance on an issue (that was social in nature) but was ultimately fiscal.

i.e. there may be some social cause that calls for public funding (or some kind of large-scale government oversight or intervention). A fiscally conservative, yet socially liberal, individual may oppose such funding/intervention on fiscal grounds, and may be castigated by their liberal social peers for being “anti- [insert social issue].”

Lol you should read my response

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

During your interviews, tell them that you want to "Make Psychiatry Great Again".... their reaction should give you an indication of how conservative the program is.

I could just wear a MAGA hat with my suit, and a giant Q Anon symbol on the back

 

[DisorderedDoc417]

I say interview broadly and apply/rank where you feel comforable. I wouldn’t necessarily bring it up as it will suggest you possibly don’t play well with people you don’t agree with while simultaneously incinuating that you don’t agree with the majority of people in psychiatry. I think you would be surprised what people think as you befriend and make colleagues. Most doctors, especially psychiatrists I like to think, are fairly thoughtful and open minded when it comes to views that differ. Such that discussions that are genuine and fun can take place.

 

[WingedOx]

I could just wear a MAGA hat with my suit, and a giant Q Anon symbol on the back

C'mon bro. I f-cking swear if you spill the beans on the role of psychiatry in the conspiracy...

 

[whopper]

Folks it's time I fessed up.

I'm Q.

I'm the guy behind all of the conspiracy theories. I need your help. PM and I'll give you a Paypal address to send some money. Q needs funding. Give it to me.

Being serious, your political beliefs shouldn't be an issue so long as it's not something affecting your job in a detrimental way. If you're conservative and you're following the ethics and rules of the profession it shouldn't matter what your beliefs are.

If on the other hand, because of your political beliefs, you feel you can violate HIPAA or some other law or rule (I've actually seen this not with psychiatrists but with a few graduate students) that's a problem.

(In the cases I mentioned above I saw a few therapy students who were former police officers violate HIPAA and informed authorities of activities of their patients despite that those patients weren't doing anything dangerous).

Most psychiatrists I know are socially liberal (or libertarian) but otherwise highly varied. Also most are into personal responsibility and while many are into social assistance they usually are into social assistance with limits. E.g. If the patient is on disability they still should work as much as they can work. Virtually all forensic psychiatrists I know do not tolerate malingering (unless they're the paid-to-lie types).

 

[WingedOx]

Most psychiatrists I know are socially liberal (or libertarian) but otherwise highly varied. Also most are into personal responsibility and while many are into social assistance they usually are into social assistance with limits. E.g. If the patient is on disability they still should work as much as they can work. Virtually all forensic psychiatrists I know do not tolerate malingering (unless they're the paid-to-lie types).

I was actually coming into this thread to type something very very similar to this.

There's of course a wide range, but if you were to pick out the median political profile of the people working around me it would look a lot like that. Even for those who aren't working in government or public settings, if you've trained anywhere with populations of a reasonable amount of acuity, you see first hand how much our mental health infrastructure needs public $$ to function, so hard core economic libertarians tend to be few and far between and social spending is generally favored. Though somewhat paradoxically, you see a more right-looking focus on individual responsibility from even rather left-leaning psychiatrists. Even if you're the type that emphasizes the role of socioeconomic factors on mental illness, the understanding of consequences of individual choices is usually highly emphasized in treatment.

/now of course everyone can chime in to explain why they're an exception to this.

 

[Wilf]

Even for those who aren't working in government or public settings, if you've trained anywhere with populations of a reasonable amount of acuity, you see first hand how much our mental health infrastructure needs public $$ to function, so hard core economic libertarians tend to be few and far between and social spending is generally favored.

I agree that some public funding is necessary for mental health care and I think many conservatives would agree. In general though, public funding should be kept as low as it reasonably can. I think what also separates conservatives from liberals is that we feel everyone should contribute to society, not just people who have gone into "successful" careers (often times through hard work and innate abilities.) I pay upwards of $70K in taxes to the federal government each year while so many people pay nothing or very little and I can't say that does not bother me, especially with the ridiculous student debt and interest I have. Not only that, but I am providing a needed service to a vulnerable population.

 

[WingedOx]

I agree that some public funding is necessary for mental health care and I think many conservatives would agree. In general though, public funding should be kept as low as it reasonably can. I think what also separates conservatives from liberals is that we feel everyone should contribute to society, not just people who have gone into "successful" careers (often times through hard work and innate abilities.) I pay upwards of $70K in taxes to the federal government each year while so many people pay nothing or very little and I can't say that does not bother me, especially with the ridiculous student debt and interest I have. Not only that, but I am providing a needed service to a vulnerable population.

I mean, even in my very blue city/state, virtually all of our MH infrastructure is paid for via regressive sales and a flat income tax, so not much to argue against there...

 

[birchswing]

I agree that some public funding is necessary for mental health care and I think many conservatives would agree. In general though, public funding should be kept as low as it reasonably can. I think what also separates conservatives from liberals is that we feel everyone should contribute to society, not just people who have gone into "successful" careers (often times through hard work and innate abilities.) I pay upwards of $70K in taxes to the federal government each year while so many people pay nothing or very little and I can't say that does not bother me, especially with the ridiculous student debt and interest I have. Not only that, but I am providing a needed service to a vulnerable population.

It's interesting how your perception that not everyone pays into the system affects you. Olof Palme realized a similar phenomenon but came at it from a different angle. He realized people would only accept a welfare state if everyone received from it. In your case for example, your grievance of student debt wouldn't have ever existed to begin with. He would have argued that society should spend whatever necessary cost so that everyone can contribute to society. I wish I had the quote, but he said something once like how it was worth it for the government to spend X amount of dollars for a disabled person to be put in a position where they could have a job making Y amount of dollars. He was fascinating. FDR also realized that social security would only be accepted if everyone paid in and everyone received (with the exception of things like SSI, a measure of last resort). Conservatives have tried to change it to a means-tested program, which would probably hasten its demise.

 

[shahseh22]

I would venture to say that you would have the best luck looking for a program in the South. Though, as a whole, Psychiatrists are generally more liberal than other specialties.

 

[SeniorWrangler]

I mean, the major Chicago programs all have unique cultures to them among their residents, but none of it really has anything to do with politics.

But really, I can't think of any particular programs that mirror the politics of their respective undergraduate institution, though I've never set foot in Loma Linda.

I'm not sure how conservative Loma Linda is, but you could go chill out in the Nixon Presidential Library after work and get your conservative on.

 

[WingedOx]

I'm not sure how conservative Loma Linda is, but you could go chill out in the Nixon Presidential Library after work and get your conservative on.

 

[Candidate2017]

I will be applying in September and I was hoping for some insight. I would prefer a more conservative psychiatry program if such a thing exists. Would you let me know your experience? I know the University of Chicago is generally more conservative, but I also know that psychiatry as a whole is quite liberal. If you know of any such programs, please let me know. I would love any advice! Thank you.

Try my Conservative and Republican Screening questionnaire: Ask the PD what 4x4 they'd recommend for reliably getting in to your residency rotations. If they wax poetic about their Subaru or crossover SUV or say public transportation is reliable, then you have your answer.

 

[Candidate2017]

Also, I hypothesize programs that more male, whiter and community-based are more likely to be conservative than programs that are more female, less white and academic. Conservativeness also differs between residents vs faculty. There are a lot more conservative residents than you'd assume, while faculty generally are 90+% liberal.

 

[NontradCA]

Sorry, this is patently false. Every issue is capable to be racially charged or have some sexually discriminatory bent unless you share every belief rank and file. If you don’t believe in taxes that means you’re pro gutting social programs, any relaxation of regulation is seen as signing up workers for slaughter. I know this sounds laughably absurd, but they are arguments that are made. I have a friend that is much more liberal than me and the only place he fell out of lock step was his views on the Israel-palestinian conflict, and it straight up cost him his friend group.
No, this is not a make or break issue. Yes, I am fine with people of other beliefs (I’m marrying a hippie). But you can’t pretend these rather tame opinions are not controversial at this point.
It’s not a big deal, I was just wondering bc it might be nice to find a program with that bent the same way it would be nice to find one with a crew team or a good sports team or something-holy ****.

No ones going to give a **** what your political views are.

 

[ziggyhope]

Hopkins, maybe? Dr. McHugh is an influential figure there. He has been explicit in some politically conservative ideas as they relate to psychiatry (e.g., LGBT).

I've heard the program is conservative in general. Attendings must round on the wards, even if they do primarily research. They have to wear white coats in the hospital. They require ICU and 1-full year of medicine as PGY-I. They allow for no or very little elective time. They adhere to a non-DSM conceptual model based on the Perspectives of Psychiatry (1983).

Please excuse me if these aspects of the program have changed.

Ehh, Dr. McHugh is 85 and doesn't have much involvement in the day to day work. I don't know everyone's political opinions explicitly, but if someone is coming to Hopkins for political conservatism they are going to have a bad time. Faculty are younger and younger, and honestly, it is very hard to be a psychiatrist and see the suffering of our patients and be "extremely" conservative.

Regarding your other comments on how we operate, you are correct. We have very intense medicine training, and wear white coats. I am certainly happy to discuss the reasons for that, it is not just about being "conservative". We are now starting a track system where each year will have elective time, so that is changing as well. Regarding the DSM, correct we use the Perspectives, but point me to a good psychiatrist who doesn't have a problem with the DSM. Our main concern is to not become checklist psychiatrists. Happy to discuss more in PMs.

 

[Wilf]

honestly, it is very hard to be a psychiatrist and see the suffering of our patients and be "extremely" conservative.

Regarding your other comments on how we operate, you are correct. We have very intense medicine training, and wear white coats. I am certainly happy to discuss the reasons for that, it is not just about being "conservative".

I’m having trouble not seeing your first comment as a non sequitur.

In regard to the second part I think that’s great that Hopkins forces their psych residents to do more medicine. It would be nice if that happened at more psych residencies. (As long as the extra training leads to more knowledge and isn’t just to provide cheap service.) It is a bit conservative that they want competency. The white coat part I’m not sure about unless it is some sort of old school conservatism. I’d be interested to hear their rationale for it.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I’m having trouble not seeing your first comment as a non sequitur.

In regard to the second part I think that’s great that Hopkins forces their psych residents to do more medicine. It would be nice if that happened at more psych residencies. (As long as the extra training leads to more knowledge and isn’t just to provide cheap service.) It is a bit conservative that they want competency. The white coat part I’m not sure about unless it is some sort of old school conservatism. I’d be interested to hear their rationale for it.

The answer for why psychiatry isn't conservative probably has less to do with on the job learning itself and more with who has traditionally ended up in the field. Psychiatry probably has the least amount of religious individuals of any field.

And this mind you this is a well described statistical fact.

 

[SeniorWrangler]

It's probably wise for everyone, attendings and trainees alike, to avoid talking politics at work. It's a polarized world and people can take offense at the oddest things. My two cents is that overt, expressed religiosity would be a bigger issue than just conservatism.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

It's probably wise for everyone, attendings and trainees alike, to avoid talking politics at work. It's a polarized world and people can take offense at the oddest things. My two cents is that overt, expressed religiosity would be a bigger issue than just conservatism.

The residents I work with this month tend to be pretty fun to talk politics with. I think conservative view points also offer plenty of perspective too. But like religion for sure is a no go zone.

 

[WingedOx]

The residents I work with this month tend to be pretty fun to talk politics with. I think conservative view points also offer plenty of perspective too. But like religion for sure is a no go zone.

I went a solid 3 years of working with one of my co-residents before I found out she was a creationist.

 

[WisNeuro]

I went a solid 3 years of working with one of my co-residents before I found out she was a creationist.

I had a similar issue. Worked with someone for a while and didn't know they were a Mormon until I made a magic underwear joke.

 

[Liquid8]

The answer for why psychiatry isn't conservative probably has less to do with on the job learning itself and more with who has traditionally ended up in the field. Psychiatry probably has the least amount of religious individuals of any field.

And this mind you this is a well described statistical fact.

Indeed, and conversely we are the most likely medical speciality to enquire about our patient's religion and belief.

I did work with one very religious psychiatrist who had pictures of Jesus and Crucifixes in his office and was rumoured to give his junior doctors a small book that he'd give to people during his missionary. One of the nurses told me that when the service first started there used to be a group of senior medical officers and psychologists who would run prayer sessions during the week. What concerned me more was the micromanager rumours, but it was simply a case of being more watchful over juniors until he could trust them. I did end up getting the book, but in a clinical sense I learnt a lot of good psychiatry and never had any concerns.

 

[whopper]

Adding to the confusion, just what is conservative?

Back in the 90s Conservatives defined themselves using the Goldwater-standard that was highly libertarian. Neo-conservativism which took over in the first decade of the 2000s goes against that (government intervention in other countries that didn't ask for the help). Today's conservatism doesn't look anything like Goldwater conservatism. Even Barry Goldwater critically remarked later on in his life that he was a liberal compared to what he saw with the conservatives embracing religion.

Also many (self-proclaimed) conservatives I see today bemoan socialism, but in the same breath claim are completely for the government propping up coal companies despite that they cannot compete with other forms of energy without government-assistance (natural gas is cheaper, and mind you I didn't say government assistance is right or wrong with the coal companies), aren't against the tariffs (that's government interference), aren't against certain government hand-outs, aren't against a politician selectively saying they'll tax the heck out of company that doesn't support their agenda. On the face when you look at the entire picture they're really not against socialism, are really for nationalism, but say their main thing is they're against socialism despite telling me of the 10+ government interventions they support. I'm not saying nationalism is wrong, but if that's your thing just say it is and stop saying your main thing is less government when it's really not.

(Now the above-not all conservatives believe this, but the momentum seems to be in that area right now. All movements redefine themselves over time, and those on the Left do similar things as well).

Just like I see many "constitutionalists" who haven't read the Constitution outside of knowing the first 2 Amendments and being oblivious of all others or the various Supreme Court cases that gave specific interpretations of the first 2 Amendments.

So if one is "conservative" just what do you mean by that? Cause heck I think George Will is a conservative, but he's not in with the mainstream conservative movement. Barry Goldwater wanted no religion in government and he's the considered the father of conservatism. William F. Buckley disagreed with many GOP leaders who at times held the reigns of what was the conservative movement.

 

[Wilf]

Whopper you are correct that there are various groups that fall under the umbrella of conservative. The intellectuals of the party tend to be the pro free market (anti socialism) group and tends to be made up of professionals (doctors, attorneys, business people, etc.) You correctly pointed out that most tend to be for a mixed economy. They are not generally for laissez faire capitalism in other words. Conservative (or evangelical) Christians are another important group of conservatives. I know most liberals already know this, but their condescension toward this group does them little good. The hypocrisy of speaking the way the left does about Christians while simultaneously holding views completely opposite when it comes to Muslims is not lost on as many people as they may believe. Uneducated lower SES (“redneck”) people are probably the other largest group in the conservative camp. Their reasons for not liking people like Hillary, Barack, or Kerry are fairly obvious.

You pointed out that you’ve met some conservatives who you felt were hypocritical. That is very common on both sides of the political aisle. The very people in this thread feature some of the political hypocrisy I find most irritating personally. Few would argue that the two words heard most from the left in the past few years are “income inequality.” I do not think a group of people who demand a quarter of a million dollar or more per year salary can claim to be liberal when the average American salary is 1/5 that and one of the most pressing concerns is income inequality, according to the left. It’s also annoyingly popular to be at the top of the top 1% and then pretend that one is just “another typical person” as made very clear by the likes of the Clintons, Obamas, Stephen Colbert, LeBron James, Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerberg, etc etc.