Indeed, this is exactly a point I would make, but to counter your stance. Everyone has their faults, problems, issues that they deal with (or are unable to deal with). And yet, we all take the MCAT under normal timing conditions. Why the special privileges?
The real problem is that things like ADD and OCD are not really defined by clear diagnoses. Sure, there are tests and methods of "diagnosing" them, but their cutoff is completely arbitrary. In reality, there is quite a spectrum of how well each individual is able to focus on a task at hand. I might (along with many others) have a minor case of ADD--I know that I fidget alot, am easily distracted by sounds, and regularly catch myself looking around rooms when I should be performing a specific task. So maybe I deserve 1.1 times normal time on the MCAT. I am quite sure that given extra time, I could get a higher score. In fact, I think we all can. But we don't get more time, only people who are "diagnosed" with this disorder reap the benefits of more time. Someone will retort, "But they're NOT reaping benefits! They are being given their due--what takes you(being me) 1 hour might take them 1.5, and without extra time, they can't show off their potential!" Indeed. And given extra time, I'll show you my true potential too.
Some of you say you know physicians who are OCD or ADD--I do too. They all share something in common--they took the MCAT, and apparently did well enough (despite their "disorder") to get into medical school. Perhaps they did the unthinkable--studied harder, practiced often and overcame their individual flaws, without depending on extra time crutches. The very concept of extra time didn't even exist in their day; it's a construct of our "PC" society, where everyone deserves equal rights *for certain things* You don't see basketball players who are short get extra points for scoring, because they would have gotten those baskets if they were taller. You don't see people taking eye tests get the board moved closer to them to make up for their poor eyesight, so they can become pilots. Someone will respond, "But these are all physical issues; if you aren't tall enough to compete in basketball, you choose a different path." Intellectual talent, and the ability to think quickly is as much a physical part of us as the length of our legs, and quality of our eyesight.
This is harsh, I know. I'm really not an ass, but from a philosophical (and logical) standpoint, this is what it comes down to (in my opinion). You're the medical school admission director, and you have one spot left in your class. Who is more qualified to be a physician, given all else things being equal: student A who worked their ass off and nailed a 34 on the MCATs under normal time constraints, or student B who achieved the same score but required time and a half? It's a no brainer for me. In fact, I think I would choose someone who achieved a 32, 31, or perhaps even a 30 on the MCAT, over student B. Ask the question again, not from the standpoint of an admissions officer, but from the perspective of a patient. Sure, I wouldn't be truly worried about the OCD dermatologist, or ENT (who doesnt perform procedures on me). But let me tell you, show me a person who has a severe case of OCD such that they cannot focus on the matter at hand, and I will show you a person who I avoid as a cardiologist, gastroenterologist, anesthesiologist--and about 95% of the other specialties. Someone will say, "you probably have had an OCD physician, and didn't know it." Maybe. And if so, I bet their OCD isn't bad enough to severely restrict their success on the MCAT.
