Do I qualify for URM Status?

[No2Pencil]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I am Ecuadorian-American (born in USA). Do I qualify for URM status?

 

[redlight]

the only way to confirm urm status is by submitting a blood sample to a professional genetics lab and testing positive

 

[redlight]

the only way to confirm urm status is by submitting a blood sample to a professional genetics lab and testing positive

actually, now that i think about it, there is another way.. but it requires using the sdn search function.

 

[No2Pencil]

I already used the SDN search feature in attempt to answer my question, however, I found conflicting answers. That is why I made a new topic.

What I found from my forum searches:
-Some people say that all Latinos are considered URM. This would mean that Ecuadorian-Americans, such as myself, would be considered URM.
-Some people say that only Mexicans/Puerto Ricans/Cubans (the three major Hispanic communities in the US) are considered URM. This would mean that Ecuadorian-Americans, such as myself, would not be considered URM.

Could someone please clarify this issue for me? Thanks.

 

[amakhosidlo]

I already used the SDN search feature in attempt to answer my question, however, I found conflicting answers. That is why I made a new topic.

What I found from my forum searches:
-Some people say that all Latinos are considered URM. This would mean that Ecuadorian-Americans, such as myself, would be considered URM.
-Some people say that only Mexicans/Puerto Ricans/Cubans (the three major Hispanic communities in the US) are considered URM. This would mean that Ecuadorian-Americans, such as myself, would not be considered URM.

Could someone please clarify this issue for me? Thanks.

Si. Check that box.

 

[Brent8927]

I already used the SDN search feature in attempt to answer my question, however, I found conflicting answers. That is why I made a new topic.

What I found from my forum searches:
-Some people say that all Latinos are considered URM. This would mean that Ecuadorian-Americans, such as myself, would be considered URM.
-Some people say that only Mexicans/Puerto Ricans/Cubans (the three major Hispanic communities in the US) are considered URM. This would mean that Ecuadorian-Americans, such as myself, would not be considered URM.

Could someone please clarify this issue for me? Thanks.

I think you kind of answer your own question here. Personally, I would definitely argue that an Ecuadorian-American is considered an URM. But, if you want the definitive answer, then give AMCAS a call.

Best of luck! 🙂

 

[WannaBePreMed]

I am Ecuadorian-American (born in USA). Do I qualify for URM status?

Yes, you are a URM. No one will call you out on it unless you look white.

 

[Richzz89]

Sorry to kind of take over this thread but I'm wondering if I would be considered a URM. I'm Chinese-Peruvian, even though I'm only a quarter Peruvian I definitely associate myself more with my Hispanic heritage. Both of my parents were born and raised in Peru, I learned Spanish basically since birth since both of parents spoke it to me as a child, the irony is even though I'm more Chinese I can't speak a bit of it or understand it. Most of my relatives still reside in Peru and I have constantly visited Peru while growing up.

 

[BlueElmo]

Sorry to kind of take over this thread but I'm wondering if I would be considered a URM. I'm Chinese-Peruvian, even though I'm only a quarter Peruvian I definitely associate myself more with my Hispanic heritage. Both of my parents were born and raised in Peru, I learned Spanish basically since birth since both of parents spoke it to me as a child, the irony is even though I'm more Chinese I can't speak a bit of it or understand it. Most of my relatives still reside in Peru and I have constantly visited Peru while growing up.

I don't think so.

 

[oshkosh1]

I don't mean to troll, but it kinda disgusts me when people are given a selective advantage based on something as trivial as race which is clearly beyond anyone's control. Instead of worrying about this, you guys should focus on working hard and expanding on concrete merits - cause at the end of the day, being URM won't make you a better doctor, hard work will.

 

[Richzz89]

I don't mean to troll, but it kinda disgusts me when people are given a selective advantage based on something as trivial as race which is clearly beyond anyone's control. Instead of worrying about this, you guys should focus on working hard and expanding on concrete merits - cause at the end of the day, being URM won't make you a better doctor, hard work will.

Not to start an argument or anything, but whose to say URM's do not work hard? Although as you stated that it "disgusts" you when people are given an advantage based on something as race, URM's could just as easily say that it disgusts them that the majority, in this case, Whites are often given preference in many aspects of the real world such as jobs especially when they come from a very influential family such as those who are well connected or are involved in politics.

Just wanted to express that this "disgust" that you speak off can work for both sides. Obviously there is no one side that 100% of people will agree on, there is no right or wrong its kind of like a grey area.

 

[oshkosh1]

Not trying to sound super defensive....but I never implied that URMs dont work hard...I meant to say they should focus on deriving success solely from merit as opposed to unfair advantages. And yes, I get what you're saying about connected people through politics ect, but not everyone has those connections. A majority of people (including myself) are not URM, are not connected via politics/associations ect., and thus only have old fashion hard work. Also, just because connected white people get this advantage doesn't mean that URMs have some right to take unfair advantage as well. Imo, two wrongs do not make a right.

 

[redlight]

we cant give you a definitive answer. it appears schools individually decide whether or not you are urm.. but by aamc definition you are not urm because it only considers mexicans and main land puerto ricans. sounds very arbitrary... but i dont know how they how they come up with this.

 

[scattun]

we cant give you a definitive answer. it appears schools individually decide whether or not you are urm.. but by aamc definition you are not urm because it only considers mexicans and main land puerto ricans. sounds very arbitrary... but i dont know how they how they come up with this.

They come up with because of a Supreme Court ruling concerning Affirmative Action in college admissions. I don't remember the exact case name, but I think it had to do with the University of Michigan. Anyway, they courts somehow decided that African Americans, Native Americans (or American Indians, whichever you prefer), mainland puerto ricans, and mexicans were the only groups which were underrepresented in college graduates or something. From here I think it was generalized. Anyway, it's actually a moot point now, because the AAMC, no longer makes URM guidelines, they leave them up to the individual schools to decide. Therefore, you maybe considered URM at some schools, and not at others. Interestingly though, all the admissions statistics posted by AMCAS or AAMC always lump all Hispanics together in the reporting, so if you ask me, my money would be on all hispanics being treated the same.

 

[amakhosidlo]

They come up with because of a Supreme Court ruling concerning Affirmative Action in college admissions. I don't remember the exact case name, but I think it had to do with the University of Michigan. Anyway, they courts somehow decided that African Americans, Native Americans (or American Indians, whichever you prefer), mainland puerto ricans, and mexicans were the only groups which were underrepresented in college graduates or something. From here I think it was generalized. Anyway, it's actually a moot point now, because the AAMC, no longer makes URM guidelines, they leave them up to the individual schools to decide. Therefore, you maybe considered URM at some schools, and not at others. Interestingly though, all the admissions statistics posted by AMCAS or AAMC always lump all Hispanics together in the reporting, so if you ask me, my money would be on all hispanics being treated the same.

You're thinking of Gratz v. Bollinger. Its basic holding was that race cannot play an explicit role in admissions decisions. It was generally a pretty toothless oppinion and U Mich still takes race into consideration, albeit in the form of a more subtle "points-based" system. There are other cases specific to med schools ( UCLA, I think) , though I don't think they ever made it past the Circuit level.

Wrt to checking URM, unless you come from a legitimately disadvantaged background, I would be hesitant to take advantage of the special consideration URM gets you. It's really a means a leveling the playing field for applicants from different socioeconomic backgrounds (I'm white, but I could claim URM if my family was dirt, dirt poor). Claiming URM when you're a middle-class white or Asian kid whose only blood URM relative is your great aunt's cousin twice removed is pretty risky, and honestly, really cheap.

 

[gree]

Sorry to kind of take over this thread but I'm wondering if I would be considered a URM. I'm Chinese-Peruvian, even though I'm only a quarter Peruvian I definitely associate myself more with my Hispanic heritage. Both of my parents were born and raised in Peru, I learned Spanish basically since birth since both of parents spoke it to me as a child, the irony is even though I'm more Chinese I can't speak a bit of it or understand it. Most of my relatives still reside in Peru and I have constantly visited Peru while growing up.

The answer to your question is in the mirror.

 

[scattun]

You're thinking of Gratz v. Bollinger. Its basic holding was that race cannot play an explicit role in admissions decisions. It was generally a pretty toothless oppinion and U Mich still takes race into consideration, albeit in the form of a more subtle "points-based" system. There are other cases specific to med schools ( UCLA, I think) , though I don't think they ever made it past the Circuit level.

Wrt to checking URM, unless you come from a legitimately disadvantaged background, I would be hesitant to take advantage of the special consideration URM gets you. It's really a means a leveling the playing field for applicants from different socioeconomic backgrounds (I'm white, but I could claim URM if my family was dirt, dirt poor). Claiming URM when you're a middle-class white or Asian kid whose only blood URM relative is your great aunt's cousin twice removed is pretty risky, and honestly, really cheap.

No, actually I am thinking of Grutter v. Bollinger. This case was heard in conjuction to the one you mentioned above. You are correct, in the sense that I botched the details. Gratz was indeed about undergraduate admissions at UMich and you are right, the court ruled it unconstitutional. But it was the specific point system, which you incorrectly referenced which was ruled unconstitutional. It was deemed to be too rigid. Grutter on the other hand dealt with less rigid Umich law school admissions and their practice was upheld in the courts decision. In the majority opinion, I beleive the identified the groups that I talked about earlier, were mentioned and subsequently generalized from law to med school admissions.

Now, as to the debate about ethics, don't shoot me I'm only the messenger. Also, though I'm not entirely sure, I think that disadvantaged economic status is not considered a URM. Yes, it is taken into consideration in admissions (personally, I think it should carry more weight than race or ethnicity), but I beleive these are two separate categories. Also, you can't claim to be a URM, there isn't a box, you only put what you ethincity/race you identify with.

 

[BennieBlanco]

I don't mean to troll, but it kinda disgusts me when people are given a selective advantage based on something as trivial as race which is clearly beyond anyone's control. Instead of worrying about this, you guys should focus on working hard and expanding on concrete merits - cause at the end of the day, being URM won't make you a better doctor, hard work will.

lol.

I don't mean to troll either, but it kind of disgusts me when people were given a select disadvantage because of their race. It must have been tough for Jackie Robinson being the first black baseball player. Death threats, people discriminating and beating him up, and having to be better than the average guy just to get a shot. Man, that doesn't seem fair.

Oh wait, not to troll but 200 years ago when people were automatically slaves because of the color of their skin, that sucks. Doesn't really seem fair for them since it was out of their control.

Oh wait. The current selective advantages are minor in comparison to the old disadvantages.

I guess nothing in life is fair, neither situation is right. But when does complaining help anyone.

It is what it is.

America is a funny country. We steal the Indians land so we give the a whole bunch of land to make up for it. We discriminate races in disgusting ways for hundreds of years then we give them a little advantage (0.5 on a GPA or 7 points on an MCAT) and people call UNFAIR.

I wonder if the slaves wanted to call UNFAIR.

 

[Narmerguy]

Can we not make this another URM vs the world thread?

 

[BennieBlanco]

Can we not make this another URM vs the world thread?

agreed. I just laugh when people take the "woe is me, the world is unfair" approach. People have been raped, forced to do hard labor for 50 years and beaten/hung/lynched yet Americans think they have it tough if they may have to chose a different vocation or work a bit harder to do a career.😱😱 We have tough tough lives, us Americans. How do we do it?

And this isn't URM vs anyone. It's called have some resilience and take what life has to give. It is what it is. URM are lucky to get in with lower scores but were unlucky before. It is what it is. Story finished. Live life, don't complain.

 

[usermike8500]

Sorry to kind of take over this thread but I'm wondering if I would be considered a URM. I'm Chinese-Peruvian, even though I'm only a quarter Peruvian I definitely associate myself more with my Hispanic heritage. Both of my parents were born and raised in Peru, I learned Spanish basically since birth since both of parents spoke it to me as a child, the irony is even though I'm more Chinese I can't speak a bit of it or understand it. Most of my relatives still reside in Peru and I have constantly visited Peru while growing up.

I would think so. What has more substance, your looks or your cultural background? Your parents are from Peru, you speak Spanish not Chinese. If you are denied URM status, then the idea of URM advantage is backward and superficial.

 

[usermike8500]

lol.
We discriminate races in disgusting ways for hundreds of years then we give them a little advantage (0.5 on a GPA or 7 points on an MCAT) and people call UNFAIR.

This reasoning isn't really valid because the same is true for Asian Americans. Japanese Americans were forced into concentration camps. Chinese Americans endured horrid conditions while building the railroads. "No Japs Allowed" was once a common slogan on signs at businesses. Even today, why can't there be an Asian American movie star who isn't subject to stereotypical karate guy or scientist roles?

In spite of all this, are Asian Americans given any preference for medical school admissions? Of course not.

URM advantage isn't based on trying to right historical wrongs, it is simply an attempt to increase diversity in school. Whether that diversity is cultural or merely diversity of skin tone, I'm not sure.

 

[Zoom-Zoom]

Only claim URM status if you plan to give back to your claimed-race/culture's community. That's the whole point. End of discussion.

 

[19nbj58]

It took 10 posts, so right around the average.

 

[Zoom-Zoom]

URM advantage isn't based on trying to right historical wrongs, it is simply an attempt to increase diversity in school. Whether that diversity is cultural or merely diversity of skin tone, I'm not sure.

There's more to it than that. It's about diversifying the doctor population, not that of the schools. There have been numerous studies showing the importance of race in healthcare, the fact that several races are significantly under-represented when it comes to doctors, and basically, that many of our communities would be better served if they had doctors who have like skin tone and, to some extent, the same cultural background. The data is really interesting and will blow your liberal pants off.

It has nothing to do with fairness, righting wrongs, the effect that minority doctors will have on minority "psyche," or any of that... it's all peer-reviewed and highly justified. Still, objectively, it is unfair.

 

[BennieBlanco]

There's more to it than that. It's about diversifying the doctor population, not that of the schools. There have been numerous studies showing the importance of race in healthcare, the fact that several races are significantly under-represented when it comes to doctors, and basically, that many of our communities would be better served if they had doctors who have like skin tone and, to some extent, the same cultural background. The data is really interesting and will blow your liberal pants off.

It has nothing to do with fairness, righting wrongs, the effect that minority doctors will have on minority "psyche," or any of that... it's all peer-reviewed and highly justified. Still, objectively, it is unfair.

It is what it is. We can all find unfair things. Objectively it is unfair that a kid in Africa is born to parents dying of AIDS and has no food and water while kids in America obtaining diseases from overeating (adult onset diabetes in a 10 year old).

Not very fair. Oh well, all we can do is live our lives to the best of our abilities. We don't need to go through and find all the fair/unfair things in the world. It is sillyness.

 

[Rendar5]

No, actually I am thinking of Grutter v. Bollinger. This case was heard in conjuction to the one you mentioned above. You are correct, in the sense that I botched the details. Gratz was indeed about undergraduate admissions at UMich and you are right, the court ruled it unconstitutional. But it was the specific point system, which you incorrectly referenced which was ruled unconstitutional. It was deemed to be too rigid. Grutter on the other hand dealt with less rigid Umich law school admissions and their practice was upheld in the courts decision. In the majority opinion, I beleive the identified the groups that I talked about earlier, were mentioned and subsequently generalized from law to med school admissions.

URM is a bit different from affirmative action listed here. The current set of URM groups were around before I was applying, when that legal decision had been reached. Personally I think URM is important for med school admissions unlike affirmative action (which is more appropriately replaced by disadvantaged status), but that globally restricting it to those 4 groups is a bit silly. It should be done more on a state-by-state basis so that locally underrepresented groups will have more physicians they can identify with. What's URM in one state wouldn't be in another state.

 

[amakhosidlo]

No, actually I am thinking of Grutter v. Bollinger. This case was heard in conjuction to the one you mentioned above. You are correct, in the sense that I botched the details. Gratz was indeed about undergraduate admissions at UMich and you are right, the court ruled it unconstitutional. But it was the specific point system, which you incorrectly referenced which was ruled unconstitutional. It was deemed to be too rigid. Grutter on the other hand dealt with less rigid Umich law school admissions and their practice was upheld in the courts decision. In the majority opinion, I beleive the identified the groups that I talked about earlier, were mentioned and subsequently generalized from law to med school admissions.

Now, as to the debate about ethics, don't shoot me I'm only the messenger. Also, though I'm not entirely sure, I think that disadvantaged economic status is not considered a URM. Yes, it is taken into consideration in admissions (personally, I think it should carry more weight than race or ethnicity), but I beleive these are two separate categories. Also, you can't claim to be a URM, there isn't a box, you only put what you ethincity/race you identify with.

Touché

http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/admissions/legal/grutter/gru-op.html

Then I wonder what stops people from dropping lawsuit after lawsuit on schools with disparate admissions statistics across racial groups...

Anyway, looking at amcas I guess you're right about the 'URM' and disadvantaged boxes being two discrete entities. I'm curious to know if they carry equal weight in terms of admissions considerations. After all, the poor are pretty severely underrepresented in medicine...