does being well-off help or hurt you?

[hopefulfuturedoctor1992]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have just been curious about this for a while now. My parents worked really hard from having two-three jobs throughout my childhood to making sure I would not struggle at all. They struggled so much coming from India with no money and all. I am very thankful and have learned a lot cause of it. They are very well off now (+500k) and have their own business and all. I have worked with in their business from the time I was a minor and am currently working with my parents to help them out. I joined their business this past summer have am an owner as well, self-employed.

I plan to take a year off to do a Postbacc if I get in but if not just increasing clinical experience (scribe, free clinic and may research) and work some more with my parents.

Does it hurt that I have so much business experience?

Any advice of how I can become a better applciant? Or should i just apply june 2015 if my MCAT is above a 30.

Shadowing: 30 hrs
Clinical hospital Volunteering: 600 hrs
leadership: board member on 3 different orgs for 2-3 years each
A career conference chair: in charge of making a conference

private undergrad in CA
CA resident
Asian Indian
age: 21
cGPA: 3.23
cGPA: 3.35
Graduating 2014
MCAT: haven't taken it

 

[jm192]

What's your question?

Does it hurt that your family is doing well? Obviously not.
Will AdCom's think you had it easiesr because your family does well financially? They likely won't have a clue how your family does financially. If they do know, I REALLY doubt they care.

Your business experience isn't a bad thing. You could have car experience, baking experience, Law experience, and it won't "hurt."
But your GPA is going to make it hard for Allopathic schools.

 

[Being]

IMO as a fellow premed:

Being well-off in and of itself shouldn't hurt you, but it will raise questions about whether you will be able to relate to patients in the real world. Based on what you've said here, you have lived a vastly different life than most of your patients will have lived. You always have had and always will have a job and money thanks to your parents, pretty much no matter what you do. This is not the case for the vast majority of people, who spend most of their waking hours trying to acquire money or worrying about not having enough of it. Not having to face this struggle means that your life and personality will inevitably be shaped differently, for better or for worse.

I think the best thing for you might be to work as an EMT or CNA (McDonalds might be perfect, but getting more clinical experience would probably be preferable). Spend some time on the bottom of the totem pole at an organization where you aren't personally connected to the CEO and see what most people have to deal with. Get puked on, wipe people's butts (literally), be disrespected by everyone, and take it all in stride with a smile. If you can hold a job like that, it will prove pretty convincingly that you don't have a superiority complex, you can relate to people and you don't have an issue with being the bottom man on the totem pole. This is important because that's what you will be for the next 7+ years as a medical student and then a resident. Understanding what life is like for your patients and coworkers will also make you a better physician in the long run.

Oh, and with that GPA you had better study like crazy and crush the MCAT.

 

[saveourpens]

I have just been curious about this for a while now. My parents worked really hard from having two-three jobs throughout my childhood to making sure I would not struggle at all. They struggled so much coming from India with no money and all. I am very thankful and have learned a lot cause of it. They are very well off now (+500k) and have their own business and all. I have worked with in their business from the time I was a minor and am currently working with my parents to help them out. I joined their business this past summer have am an owner as well, self-employed.

I plan to take a year off to do a Postbacc if I get in but if not just increasing clinical experience (scribe, free clinic and may research) and work some more with my parents.

Does it hurt that I have so much business experience?

Any advice of how I can become a better applciant? Or should i just apply june 2015 if my MCAT is above a 30.

Shadowing: 30 hrs
Clinical hospital Volunteering: 600 hrs
leadership: board member on 3 different orgs for 2-3 years each
A career conference chair: in charge of making a conference

private undergrad in CA
CA resident
Asian Indian
age: 21
cGPA: 3.23
cGPA: 3.35
Graduating 2014
MCAT: haven't taken it

No it doesn't hurt that you have business experience. What hurts so far is your GPA.

 

[Beargryllz]

“Money doesn’t just buy you a better life — better food, better cars, better p*ssy — it also makes you a better person. You can give generously to the church of your choice or the political party. You can save the f*cking spotted owl with money.”

It helps you. If you can't see why, look harder.

 

[LizzyM]

Your gpa will hurt you and your business experience will not make up for that. If your gpa sucks because you were busy helping your parents who are well off, you made a strategic error that it will be difficult to recover from. Not meaning to hurt -- just being frank.

 

[DermViser]

I have just been curious about this for a while now. My parents worked really hard from having two-three jobs throughout my childhood to making sure I would not struggle at all. They struggled so much coming from India with no money and all. I am very thankful and have learned a lot cause of it. They are very well off now (+500k) and have their own business and all. I have worked with in their business from the time I was a minor and am currently working with my parents to help them out. I joined their business this past summer have am an owner as well, self-employed.

I plan to take a year off to do a Postbacc if I get in but if not just increasing clinical experience (scribe, free clinic and may research) and work some more with my parents.

Does it hurt that I have so much business experience?

Any advice of how I can become a better applciant? Or should i just apply june 2015 if my MCAT is above a 30.

Shadowing: 30 hrs
Clinical hospital Volunteering: 600 hrs
leadership: board member on 3 different orgs for 2-3 years each
A career conference chair: in charge of making a conference

private undergrad in CA
CA resident
Asian Indian
age: 21
cGPA: 3.23
cGPA: 3.35
Graduating 2014
MCAT: haven't taken it

Your affluence and business experience won't hurt you. What will hurt you is your GPA with respect to MD schools.

 

[Euxox]

To answer the thread title, no, being wealthy does not hurt you in the application process. In fact it helps. A lot. I'm guessing both of your parents were college educated? If so, they were probably able to help you with your homework in high school, help guide you through the process of applying to college (what is a reach school? a safety?), help you pick courses in college (is diff eq. really necessary for bio?), and so on. That kind of information is invaluable, and for the many premeds who are the first in their families to attend medical school, it is also inaccessible.

And if your parents make 500k+ per year, you probably didn't miss high school for a week because your mom's car broke down and she couldn't afford to get it fixed and drive you, you probably didn't have to turn down a college acceptance because you couldn't afford the tuition, you probably didn't have to work a 20hr/week job while taking a full load of classes to pay your bills, and you probably didn't have to worry about how you would afford textbooks or exam prep books, and so on.

Now, once you get to the application process itself, people who self-identify has coming from low income or otherwise disadvantaged backgrounds are given a huge leg up. But the idea is that this is only meant to rectify the huge disadvantages they've faced for the many years up until that point. And to be frank, the med school admissions process doesn't do a very good job at leveling the playing field: The average family income of medical students is much higher than the national mean (something like 100k/yr vs 50k/yr).

tl;dr: Being wealthy gives you a huge number of advantages, but it is up to you to use those advantages, and through hard work, turn them into a competitive application with a high GPA, a high MCAT, and some impressive ECs.

Does it hurt that I have so much business experience?

No, in fact experience of pretty much any kind is an asset as long as you can explain how it will make you a better doctor. A good number of ex-MBAs get accepted to med school every year, and they all have a narrative that explains what initially drew them to business, why they eventually realized that it was medicine and not business that was there true calling, and how their business skills will help them as physicians.

Any advice of how I can become a better applciant? Or should i just apply june 2015 if my MCAT is above a 30.

I agree with others, your big issue is the GPA. Your ECs are fine, and assuming that you get a 30+ on the MCAT, that will be fine as well. But your low-ish GPA is not doing you any favors, especially since you are Asian Indian (overrepresented in medicine) and a California resident (very competitive state schools). You could apply this cycle if you like, but you are by no means guaranteed an acceptance. I would suggest enrolling in a post-bacc program to raise your GPA.

 

[WingedOx]

No amount of class-specific affirmative action will ever truly negate the intrinsic advantages of being well-off.

 

[hopefulfuturedoctor1992]

Thank you all for the great advice!

My parents finished high school only and I am the first gen. college graduate in my family.

I agree that I have not faced many struggles in life that do not give me the perspective as others have. I do not think I have superiority complex cause I have worked as a general employee for years before even becoming a manager or a self-employed owner. I was raised in a rural area for he majority of my life and really shaped my respect to help others. I know it would be something very different to work as a CNA or EMT but I think I would really enjoy this experience. I am just really focusing on increasing my GPA through a Postbacc if I get into once within the next month... I applied to UCSF, UCD and UCR. I hope to get in to at least one. I will probably do ER Scribe back home for two years then apply maybe do research as well cause I have none.

I am pretty shy when I interact with new people do you think it's because I lack experience? I have very back general knowledge of many different things minus science/medicine/technology/business

I have mainly worked during summer and yes I focused on educations mainly through my undergrad career with not having to get a job to support anyone. I have a couple C's in bio and one in Chem that really kills my gpa. I got A's in ochem, physics and biochem so I know I am able to handle hard science classes. I have done fairly well in my upper division neurosci classes - B's but got more A's the past two quarters showing high upward trend.

Not from many people but I have heard that having money just might help with getting that acceptance but I really do not believe this at all cause Money will not many anyone a better doctor.

I am planning to help my gpa as much as I can with a postbacc and if not then just going to take a chance with gaining an extra year of experience before I submit my application.

And if postbacc does not work I am going to apply to SMP next year cause I will have my MCAT done by then and hopefully be a better applicant. I will also most likely submit june 2015 as well to MD and possibly DO schools.

 

[Aerus]

Being well off will ALWAYS help you in the long run.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

 

[Jepstein30]

Well considering you can't change how well off you are unless you invent a time machine (and if you do, is medical school really for you?)..

who cares?

the answer to this question changes absolutely nothing... so why bother considering it?

 

[Euxox]

I am planning to help my gpa as much as I can with a postbacc and if not then just going to take a chance with gaining an extra year of experience before I submit my application.

And if postbacc does not work I am going to apply to SMP next year cause I will have my MCAT done by then and hopefully be a better applicant. I will also most likely submit june 2015 as well to MD and possibly DO schools.

Sounds like a good plan. Good luck!

As far as shyness, it's something that you will have to work on slowly. Put yourself in situations where you are forced out of your comfort zone. I used to be a cashier, and having been rather shy myself, I found it pretty hard to smile and make small talk with the customers. But that's part of the job description and I was forced to learn. Baby steps!

 

[Mt Kilimanjaro]

Medical schools are always looking to scoop up a few more wealthy Patels.

Seriously though, the tone deafness of this question is staggering. If you actually think that being in the top 1% of earners in the most powerful nation in the world could possibly hurt you in any way, especially with regards to professional school admissions, you need to turn on the news every once in a while or spend some more of your parents' money on a copy of Working by Studs Terkel.

 

[EMDO2018]

Medical schools are always looking to scoop up a few more wealthy Patels.

Seriously though, the tone deafness of this question is staggering. If you actually think that being in the top 1% of earners in the most powerful nation in the world could possibly hurt you in any way, especially with regards to professional school admissions, you need to turn on the news every once in a while or spend some more of your parents' money on a copy of Working by Studs Terkel.

Not sure I agree with this. Because his parents are well off, he probably wont get any financial aid besides loans. He may not even qualify for low interest loans. Honestly growing up poor sucks, but it has its advantages with med school admissions. I basically got a tuition waiver.

 

[chocolatethunder]

“Money doesn’t just buy you a better life — better food, better cars, better p*ssy — it also makes you a better person. You can give generously to the church of your choice or the political party. You can save the f*cking spotted owl with money.”

It helps you. If you can't see why, look harder.

Solid advice from Jordan Belfort!

 

[tuberomammillarynucleus]

Asians Indians were the second most matriculated students in 2009. I'm Asian Indian also.

Over-representation.

Source: MSAR 2011-2012 book.

 

[Fabio Lanzoni]

Asians Indians were the second most matriculated students in 2009. I'm Asian Indian also.

Over-representation.

Source: MSAR 2011-2012 book.

What does this have to do with anything? Also it's the second most matriculated group under the Asian category. He's asking about being wealthy

 

[Goro]

No

Does it hurt that I have so much business experience?

Raise the GPA and rock the MCAT...your numbers are fine for any DO program, but not competitive for MD schools, and especially not for the UC schools. if you're boning for an MD degree, a post-bac or SMP is in order. Heed the wise LizzyM's advice carefully.

Any advice of how I can become a better applicant? Or should i just apply june 2015 if my MCAT is above a 30.

 

[BestDoctorEver]

I basically got a tuition waiver.

Really! How? I worked throughout undergrad so I could pay my way thru school and I don't get anything but a blockbuster loan amount for med school...

 

[235009]

IMO as a fellow premed:

Being well-off in and of itself shouldn't hurt you, but it will raise questions about whether you will be able to relate to patients in the real world. Based on what you've said here, you have lived a vastly different life than most of your patients will have lived. You always have had and always will have a job and money thanks to your parents, pretty much no matter what you do. This is not the case for the vast majority of people, who spend most of their waking hours trying to acquire money or worrying about not having enough of it. Not having to face this struggle means that your life and personality will inevitably be shaped differently, for better or for worse.

I think the best thing for you might be to work as an EMT or CNA (McDonalds might be perfect, but getting more clinical experience would probably be preferable). Spend some time on the bottom of the totem pole at an organization where you aren't personally connected to the CEO and see what most people have to deal with. Get puked on, wipe people's butts (literally), be disrespected by everyone, and take it all in stride with a smile. If you can hold a job like that, it will prove pretty convincingly that you don't have a superiority complex, you can relate to people and you don't have an issue with being the bottom man on the totem pole. This is important because that's what you will be for the next 7+ years as a medical student and then a resident. Understanding what life is like for your patients and coworkers will also make you a better physician in the long run.

Oh, and with that GPA you had better study like crazy and crush the MCAT.

I strongly disagree with all of this. Just like you don't have to do heroin in the alley, have HIV, or live in your car to understand the struggles of patients who have to deal with that stuff likewise you don't need to go out of your way to demonstrate that you can empathize with people who are different than yourself and understand psychosocial dynamics that affect health outcomes. The only suggestion you made that I agree with is to get work experience outside your parents' business. Med school adcoms aren't looking for you to do mindless or "dirty" jobs just for the sake of it. Most med students come from upper class families but it's your life experience which will demonstrate whether you can relate to people who are different and work in a team (whether you're the leader or at the "bottom of the totem pole")

To answer the OP's question.... just look at your academic plan....postbacc, SMP ....the only reason you can do these things is because your parents are well off and will, I'm assuming, support you through all of this so there's no pressure to earn a living for yourself. Those are the kind of advantages that come with being wealthy.

 

[tantacles]

Really! How? I worked throughout undergrad so I could pay my way thru school and I don't get anything but a blockbuster loan amount for med school...

It depends on a number of factors, including your income level, your family's income level, the specific school you attend, and your competitiveness (read: MCAT, GPA, and everything else). To boil it down to a sole numbers issue is absolutely impossible. @LizzyM has stated this much more eloquently than I can, but there is a certain subset of people who, for financial reasons, literally can not afford to go to medical school. I don't mean that they don't have the money and have to take out lonas, but rather that if not given money, they literally will not be able to finance medical school. Those are the people that need-based aid serves best, and those are the people who end up getting the vast majority of the need-based aid.

 

[Fabio Lanzoni]

I don't mean that they don't have the money and have to take out lonas, but rather that if not given money, they literally will not be able to finance medical school.

I don't understand what the difference between these two sentences are. How can someone literally not be able to finance med school if they're given 100% loans to cover COA?

 

[tantacles]

I don't understand what the difference between these two sentences are. How can someone literally not be able to finance med school if they're given 100% loans to cover COA?

Because they literally will not be able to get loans. Notice that I said I was not referring to people who are able to get loans to cover their cost of attendance. If you don't have a good credit rating or parents who have a good enough credit rating to cosign, or if your parents are deceased, or any other number of situations where loan-based aid isn't an option, you're in a pickle, and you can only get out of it by having some money thrown at you. Those are the people schools try to target with their purely need-based funds.

My parents aren't wealthy, but if I didn't have a credit rating, they could, feasibly, cosign for me. Not everyone has that option.

Some people literally can not finance medical school.

 

[mrh125]

Just don't mark that your parents make 500k (put declined to state) and don't talk about their jobs being high-paying on your admissions if you don't want to play that game and have people assuming nonsensical stuff to your disadvantage. You shouldn't have to jump through additional hoops just because you won the good parent lottery, come on people that's nothing but over-assuming and thinly-veiled jealousy . I'm sure you have some difficult circumstance in your life that allows you to emphasize with others. Generalizations suck. Likewise prepare to be accused of having no social skills or even worse, autistic because you're shy, even though anyone with a brain should know it doesn't work that way. People like over-assuming. You have to learn how to naturally negate it or when you can't don't hit on topics that'll be hot buttons.

 

[Fabio Lanzoni]

Because they literally will not be able to get loans. Notice that I said I was not referring to people who are able to get loans to cover their cost of attendance. If you don't have a good credit rating or parents who have a good enough credit rating to cosign, or if your parents are deceased, or any other number of situations where loan-based aid isn't an option, you're in a pickle, and you can only get out of it by having some money thrown at you. Those are the people schools try to target with their purely need-based funds.

My parents aren't wealthy, but if I didn't have a credit rating, they could, feasibly, cosign for me. Not everyone has that option.

Some people literally can not finance medical school.

Ah okay I see what you mean now.

 

[ciestar]

Because they literally will not be able to get loans. Notice that I said I was not referring to people who are able to get loans to cover their cost of attendance. If you don't have a good credit rating or parents who have a good enough credit rating to cosign, or if your parents are deceased, or any other number of situations where loan-based aid isn't an option, you're in a pickle, and you can only get out of it by having some money thrown at you. Those are the people schools try to target with their purely need-based funds.

My parents aren't wealthy, but if I didn't have a credit rating, they could, feasibly, cosign for me. Not everyone has that option.

Some people literally can not finance medical school.

This literally describes me. I haven't even applied yet, but I ran into this harsh reality in undergrad. I was denied the parent plus loans, so I had no idea what to do. My financial aid officer managed to pull strings to get me Perkins loans to cover the rest. This is a situation I'm greatly hoping to avoid this time...

 

[hopefulfuturedoctor1992]

If I'm not obligated to state my family's income I will not.

I'm really certain I will take a postbac or smp route before I apply to medical school.

 

[mrh125]

If I'm not obligated to state my family's income I will not.

I'm really certain I will take a postbac or smp route before I apply to medical school.

If you murder the mcat you can get into some damn schools, though the whole ORM thing ****ing sucks. You have sympathy on that, being at a disadvantage because of your race is just garbage and is no different from standard racism if you ask me.

 

[Aerus]

If you murder the mcat you can get into some damn schools, though the whole ORM thing ******* sucks. You have sympathy on that, being at a disadvantage because of your race is just garbage and is no different from standard racism if you ask me.

Good thing nobody asked you.

 

[mrh125]

Good thing nobody asked you.

well that's too bad because you got the answer anyway. if you reincarnate as an ORM you'd think otherwise though.

 

[Aerus]

well that's too bad because you got the answer anyway. if you reincarnate as an ORM you'd think otherwise though.

I AM ORM (probably more ORM than you are) and I DO NOT think otherwise because I have enough common sense to understand how beneficial diversity of SES and race is to medical care

 

[mrh125]

I AM ORM (probably more ORM than you are) and I DO NOT think otherwise because I have enough common sense to understand how beneficial diversity of SES and race is to medical care

URM is great with regards to being only of the few subjective factors in the process, but it's downright nonsensical in some others. making diversity inherently race -related is also a silly pitfall. you can have 100 people with different ethnicities that aren't as diverse as 3 people of the same ethnicity in terms of their beliefs, core-values, and life experience. I fail to see any sense in that comment of yours. I just see a silly blanket statement. Being born as a certain ethnicity shouldn't put you at a disadvantage, life experiences may but that's diff. there's far more to diversity than putting people with different ethnicities in the same place and calling it a day.

 

[Aerus]

URM is great with regards to being only of the few subjective factors in the process, but it's downright nonsensical in some others. making diversity inherently race -related is also a silly pitfall. you can have 100 people with different ethnicities that aren't as diverse as 3 people of the same ethnicity in terms of their beliefs, core-values, and life experience.

You do not understand what diversity means or why it's so important.

I fail to see any sense in that comment of yours. I just see a silly blanket statement.

That's because you do not understand the issues at all.

Being born as a certain ethnicity shouldn't put you at a disadvantage, life experiences may but that's diff. there's far more to diversity than putting people with different ethnicities in the same place and calling it a day.

You are not entitled to becoming a doctor. Thus, you are not entitled to an advantage or disadvantage. Whatever you offer that will benefit medicine is considered, including race. I am done talking about this on this thread. If you wish to ask further questions or inform yourself, my PM is open. But I don't want this thread to be derailed anymore.

 

[mrh125]

You do not understand what diversity means or why it's so important.



That's because you do not understand the issues at all.



You are not entitled to becoming a doctor. Thus, you are not entitled to an advantage or disadvantage. Whatever you offer that will benefit medicine is considered, including race. I am done talking about this on this thread. If you wish to ask further questions or inform yourself, my PM is open. But I don't want this thread to be derailed anymore.

if you can't understand diversity means far more than race/ethnicity i have no further comments for you. Only being able to see it one way isn't diverse either. level ground for all is a must in the most comprehensive way possible (taking into account all reasonable experiences and context).

 

[Aerus]

if you can't understand diversity means far more than race/ethnicity i have no further comments for you. Only being able to see it one way isn't diverse either.

Assumptions are bad. Nowhere did I say that diversity only is limited to race/ethnicity. I merely said you do not understand the issue of diversity at all.

 

[mrh125]

Assumptions are bad. Nowhere did I say that diversity only is limited to race/ethnicity. I merely said you do not understand the issue of diversity at all.

you're focusing on race and URM. "
I am ORM (probably more ORM than you are) and I DO NOT think otherwise because I have enough common sense to understand how beneficial diversity of SES and race is to medical care
"

Bolded for you. once again I said "you can have 100 people with different ethnicities that aren't as diverse as 3 people of the same ethnicity in terms of their beliefs, core-values, and life experience." there is far more to diversity than race/ethnicity. focusing on that factor by itself is vapid. Now you've got me curious, explain if there's more to it. Multiple people with the same phenotype can have diverse experiences, different cultures, languages you name it even if they're all grouped together by ORM. If it is going be thought of as more than that why bother grouping people based off of race/ethnicity alone in the first place when there's way more to it than that? you can say socioeconomic background values, etc, but it still doesn't seem to include that when you bring in the terms ORM and URM which are based off of race. Everything should be based on merit and equality, experiences and hardships should be taken into account, but this system currently used is undeniably flawed. Do explain how there's more to it and that is actually taken into account in the same way with equal weight as race is. I'm the one listing different kinds of diversity beyond race, yet i don't understand. LOL what? What you're saying sounds more like divisivity.

 

[Aerus]

you're focusing on race and URM. "
I am ORM (probably more ORM than you are) and I DO NOT think otherwise because I have enough common sense to understand how beneficial diversity of SES and race is to medical care
"

Bolded for you. once again I said "you can have 100 people with different ethnicities that aren't as diverse as 3 people of the same ethnicity in terms of their beliefs, core-values, and life experience." there is far more to diversity than race/ethnicity. focusing on that factor by itself is vapid. Now you've got me curious, explain if there's more to it. Multiple people with the same phenotype can have diverse experiences, different cultures, languages you name it even if they're all grouped together by ORM. If it is going be thought of as more than that why bother grouping people based off of race/ethnicity alone in the first place when there's way more to it than that? you can say socioeconomic background values, etc, but it still doesn't seem to include that when you bring in the terms ORM and URM which are based off of race. Everything should be based on merit and equality, experiences and hardships should be taken into account, but this system currently used is undeniably flawed. Do explain how there's more to it and that is actually taken into account in the same way with equal weight as race is. I'm the one listing different kinds of diversity beyond race, yet i don't understand. LOL what? What you're saying sounds more like divisivity.

Sigh. I will PM you, since I really do not appreciate derailing this thread.

 

[type12]

I have been called out in an interview and after asking for feedback on not taking minimum-wage jobs (scribing, etc) and choosing to make six figures instead. I got the impression that they wanted someone who would let their family starve for medicine, instead of someone who knows how to manage life. To be fair, this may be because I'm a sibling and my parents don't work, so it looks like I have no dependents on my application.

 

[Fabio Lanzoni]

I AM ORM (probably more ORM than you are) and I DO NOT think otherwise because I have enough common sense to understand how beneficial diversity of SES and race is to medical care

(My comment here isn't about URM vs ORM. This is about your argument rationale.)

Just because you think it's beneficial, it doesn't make it correct, and much less "common sense." Please try to distinguish between the two. A big reasoning mistake made by extremists of any school of thought is that they genuinely believe their stance is objectively correct and others just have skewed perceptions of that reality. (examples: extreme atheists, extreme religious people - both of which are dinguses) You are free to think what you want, but you can't go around saying other opinions are not common sense.

 

[Aerus]

(My comment here isn't about URM vs ORM. This is about your argument rationale.)

Just because you think it's beneficial, it doesn't make it correct, and much less "common sense." Please try to distinguish between the two. A big reasoning mistake made by extremists of any school of thought is that they genuinely believe their stance is objectively correct and others just have skewed perceptions of that reality. (examples: extreme atheists, extreme religious people - both of which are dinguses) You are free to think what you want, but you can't go around saying other opinions are not common sense.

There are certain statements made that are not obvious nor common sense, such as "Apples taste good" or "Apples taste bad" or "Apples taste funny", but statements such as "Apples can be beneficial for your health", whether you like to eat them or not is common sense.

Whether you believe that the programs behind diversity are politically correct or not isn't the issue; there are tons of arguments to why people believe that taking into consideration of race and SES is bad. However, you cannot deny that they still benefit a class of future doctors as well as the future of healthcare and it IS common sense as to why.

 

[type12]

There are certain statements made that are not obvious nor common sense, such as "Apples taste good" or "Apples taste bad" or "Apples taste funny", but statements such as "Apples can be beneficial for your health", whether you like to eat them or not is common sense.

Whether you believe that the programs behind diversity are politically correct or not isn't the issue; there are tons of arguments to why people believe that taking into consideration of race and SES is bad. However, you cannot deny that they still benefit a class of future doctors as well as the future of healthcare and it IS common sense as to why.

I dunno, I am not versed in this situation, and I don't see it as common sense either. In fact, I see it as treating the symptoms rather than the problem. What are the benefits, and doesn't it just promote fracturing of care and standards in a more long-term scope?

 

[Aerus]

I dunno, I am not versed in this situation, and I don't see it as common sense either. In fact, I see it as treating the symptoms rather than the problem. What are the benefits, and doesn't it just promote fracturing of care and standards in a more long-term scope?

A diversity of backgrounds helps promote understanding and compassion. When you have a homogenous group of privileged people, then there is a large risk of alienation of certain communities. Healthcare providers historically used to be mostly White and upper-class and as a result, medical care was very discriminatory to these marginalized communities.

My main point is that being well off does not ever hurt you. The effects of wanting to diversify a class based on factors such as SES or race is for the benefit of healthcare and goes beyond selfish reasons such as "chances of being admitted to medical school".


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

 

[mrh125]

A diversity of backgrounds helps promote understanding and compassion. When you have a homogenous group of privileged people, then there is a large risk of alienation of certain communities. Healthcare providers historically used to be mostly White and upper-class and as a result, medical care was very discriminatory to these marginalized communities.

My main point is that being well off does not ever hurt you. The effects of wanting to diversify a class based on factors such as SES or race is for the benefit of healthcare and goes beyond selfish reasons such as "chances of being admitted to medical school".


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

Huge overgeneralization in bold. Why hold people in the present accountable for the past they had no part in regardless of how bad it may have been, this isn't the 18th century? Why make others atone for the past regardless of how long its been (I will not deny that what has been done to URMs is the past is terrible but that's besides the point)? Basing diversity based off of how heterogenous racially a group of people are is just silly and lacks depth. There are so many other factors that you cannot even begin to take into account just by going off race, what about gender, psychiatric health (an affluent person can be overcoming paranoid schizophrenia or another stigmatized mental disorder where affluence provides just as many drawbacks or be exposed to situations such as being bullied, facing abuse and discrimination for their background, which sounds awfully familiar right now), sexual orientation, personality, socio-economic people (what happens to the poor underrepresented white people who may have suffered in abject poverty for their lives? where's your recognition for that?) and cultural understanding? This take into account far more diversity than race and to say that a person automatically has it worse now because of their racial background is just a huge overgeneralization and does a great disservice to not only those who aren't represented with equal qualifications, but those who are from the supposedly discriminated racial background who have succeeded just like everyone else. You can lump together numerous heterogenous people with very little diversity in their fund of knowledge in a work place and have it do very little for the field or a few of the privileged white upper class you're talking about who have more cultural experience, diverse povs, and life experiences. If this system is to ever be balanced more factors should be taken into account than race because it really doesn't provide that much, however much supposed subjectivity it offers. If you ever want to transcend racism and issues the underrepresented face you should do a better job defining underrepresented because by just making it about race because there's far more to it. Rejecting someone just because they're from a privileged background and funneling all these unsubstantiated over-generalizations toward them. People are individuals, bottom line and cant be defined by race alone and yes, I did read your PM and the point still stands and your condescending attitude didn't help much either. Also, when are all the slews of equally qualified applicants who are potentially passed up for these sort of generalizations going to get their fair treatment? You simply don't get equal treatment if the system gives others a one-up. I admire true adversity especially if it's due to race or gender or anything else, but making it about race with huge generalizations does everyone involved a giant disservice. This cannot be a one-sided program.

 

[type12]

Huge overgeneralization in bold. Why hold people in the present accountable for the past they had no part in regardless of how bad it may have been, this isn't the 18th century? Why make others atone for the past regardless of how long its been (I will not deny that what has been done to URMs is the past is terrible but that's besides the point)? Basing diversity based off of how heterogenous racially a group of people are is just silly and lacks depth. There are so many other factors that you cannot even begin to take into account just by going off race, what about gender, psychiatric health (an affluent person can be overcoming paranoid schizophrenia or another stigmatized mental disorder where affluence provides just as many drawbacks or be exposed to situations such as being bullied, facing abuse and discrimination for their background, which sounds awfully familiar right now), sexual orientation, personality, socio-economic people (what happens to the poor underrepresented white people who may have suffered in abject poverty for their lives? where's your recognition for that?) and cultural understanding? This take into account far more diversity than race and to say that a person automatically has it worse now because of their racial background is just a huge overgeneralization and does a great disservice to not only those who aren't represented with equal qualifications, but those who are from the supposedly discriminated racial background who have succeeded just like everyone else. You can lump together numerous heterogenous people with very little diversity in their fund of knowledge in a work place and have it do very little for the field or a few of the privileged white upper class you're talking about who have more cultural experience, diverse povs, and life experiences. If this system is to ever be balanced more factors should be taken into account than race because it really doesn't provide that much, however much supposed subjectivity it offers. If you ever want to transcend racism and issues the underrepresented face you should do a better job defining underrepresented because by just making it about race because there's far more to it. Rejecting someone just because they're from a privileged background and funneling all these unsubstantiated over-generalizations toward them. People are individuals, bottom line and cant be defined by race alone and yes, I did read your PM and the point still stands and your condescending attitude didn't help much either. Also, when are all the slews of equally qualified applicants who are potentially passed up for these sort of generalizations going to get their fair treatment? You simply don't get equal treatment if the system gives others a one-up. I admire true adversity especially if it's due to race or gender or anything else, but making it about race with huge generalizations does everyone involved a giant disservice. This cannot be a one-sided program.

 

[Euxox]

There are so many other factors that you cannot even begin to take into account just by going off race, what about gender, psychiatric health (an affluent person can be overcoming paranoid schizophrenia or another stigmatized mental disorder where affluence provides just as many drawbacks or be exposed to situations such as being bullied, facing abuse and discrimination for their background, which sounds awfully familiar right now), sexual orientation, personality, socio-economic people (what happens to the poor underrepresented white people who may have suffered in abject poverty for their lives? where's your recognition for that?)

All of these things are already taken into consideration. That's what the diversity essays on secondaries are for.

 

[mrh125]

All of these things are already taken into consideration. That's what the diversity essays on secondaries are for.

Yes, some schools don't have diversity essays though and I wonder if they're given equal merit to race depending on the context. Also, things like mental disorders are extremely difficult and risky to put in applications which makes it even more important that those who do take the courage to are judged fairly. Instead of being given a knee-jerk negative reaction because mental disorders are still stigmatized against unfortunately making people with them unable to give a context of the issues they face or be evaluated with a better context if it did affect them so. Context is important and everyone should be measured fairly against each other without assumptions that have no context.

lol pretty much. Nothing like a nice tl;dr to exemplify my frustration.

 

[Aerus]

Huge overgeneralization in bold. Why hold people in the present accountable for the past they had no part in regardless of how bad it may have been, this isn't the 18th century? Why make others atone for the past regardless of how long its been (I will not deny that what has been done to URMs is the past is terrible but that's besides the point)? Basing diversity based off of how heterogenous racially a group of people are is just silly and lacks depth. There are so many other factors that you cannot even begin to take into account just by going off race, what about gender, psychiatric health (an affluent person can be overcoming paranoid schizophrenia or another stigmatized mental disorder where affluence provides just as many drawbacks or be exposed to situations such as being bullied, facing abuse and discrimination for their background, which sounds awfully familiar right now), sexual orientation, personality, socio-economic people (what happens to the poor underrepresented white people who may have suffered in abject poverty for their lives? where's your recognition for that?) and cultural understanding? This take into account far more diversity than race and to say that a person automatically has it worse now because of their racial background is just a huge overgeneralization and does a great disservice to not only those who aren't represented with equal qualifications, but those who are from the supposedly discriminated racial background who have succeeded just like everyone else. You can lump together numerous heterogenous people with very little diversity in their fund of knowledge in a work place and have it do very little for the field or a few of the privileged white upper class you're talking about who have more cultural experience, diverse povs, and life experiences. If this system is to ever be balanced more factors should be taken into account than race because it really doesn't provide that much, however much supposed subjectivity it offers. If you ever want to transcend racism and issues the underrepresented face you should do a better job defining underrepresented because by just making it about race because there's far more to it. Rejecting someone just because they're from a privileged background and funneling all these unsubstantiated over-generalizations toward them. People are individuals, bottom line and cant be defined by race alone and yes, I did read your PM and the point still stands and your condescending attitude didn't help much either. Also, when are all the slews of equally qualified applicants who are potentially passed up for these sort of generalizations going to get their fair treatment? You simply don't get equal treatment if the system gives others a one-up. I admire true adversity especially if it's due to race or gender or anything else, but making it about race with huge generalizations does everyone involved a giant disservice. This cannot be a one-sided program.

Your post shows how little you understand. First, race based admissions in medical schools (you are thinking about undergrad which is different) is NOT to equalize the playing field or unequalize the playing field. Diversity in a medical school class is separate from correcting years of institutional discrimination, which is the target of affirmative action in undergraduate institutions as well as the work place.

Second, the playing field is NOT equal. People who are from low SES backgrounds or minority races are NOT on an equal playing field as the majority. If you haven't taken a sociology course, then it would take far too long to explain it to you in a way that you would understand.

As I said, if you wish to discuss these issues, then I am more than happy to over PM, but stop making this topic about YOU. You are not entitled to a med school acceptance. Admissions do everything they can to improve healthcare and that includes diversity in providers. Your post is very selfish if all you care about is "being accepted". It's all about providing quality healthcare. The fact that you are ORM shows that you have not experienced the racial discrimination that minorities have had to go through and thus will naturally have trouble understanding why this is important.

 

[Aerus]

Huge overgeneralization in bold.

This is a typical response from someone who comes from a privileged background. Being well off, is by definition, a good thing. You cannot be hurt by this because you are "well off". If you are disadvantaged to the point that you cannot afford medical school, you are by definition, not well off.

 

[mrh125]

Your post shows how little you understand. First, race based admissions is NOT to equalize the playing field or unequalize the playing field. Diversity in a class is separate from correcting years of institutional discrimination.

Second, the playing field is NOT equal. People who are from low SES backgrounds or minority races are NOT on an equal playing field as the majority. If you haven't taken a sociology course, then it would take far too long to explain it to you in a way that you would understand.

As I said, if you wish to discuss these issues, then I am more than happy to over PM, but stop making this topic about YOU. You are not entitled to a med school acceptance. Admissions do everything they can to improve healthcare and that includes diversity in providers. Your post is very selfish if all you care about is "being accepted". It's all about providing quality healthcare. The fact that you are ORM shows that you have not experienced the racial discrimination that minorities have had to go through and thus will naturally have trouble understanding why this is important.

I'm not implying im entitled to anything. handwaving and saying I don't understand doesn't do anything to wipe away what I said. very selfish? what? Ive talked about giving everyone the benefit of the doubt and a proper context. if that's selfish do you consider MLK selfish? What about those who are affluent and from URM backgrounds? Also, are you going to answer the questions I asked at the end? When are all the slews of equally qualified applicants who are potentially passed up for these sort of generalizations going to get their fair treatment and will they eventually be considered underrepresented?

This is a typical response from someone who comes from a privileged background. Being well off, is by definition, a good thing. You cannot be hurt by this because you are "well off". If you are disadvantaged to the point that you cannot afford medical school, you are by definition, not well off.

What a ridiculous classist assumption. This isn't even about me, ignoring the fact that people can face adversity even if they're affluent is just reverse discrimination. Making it solely about race remains a good portion of the context of the issues people face.

Saying that you can assume so much because someone happens to be affluent is like saying you can assume that because people shy people they are automatically autistic. It's just wrong and shows no contextual knowledge.