Fake ID Taken

[Mad Jack]

with several thousand applicants for a few hundreds spots, yes.

Hivemind.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[wasteofspace323]

When you've got literally thousands of perfect candidates, why take the one that's got a misdemeanor? That's really what it comes down to.

Diversity?

 

[Affiche]

Well, they're also selecting for the people that didn't do stupid things to begin with.

It's only stupid if you get caught

 

[Mad Jack]

Diversity?

lol, we should start spreading that rumor around- get a misdemeanor, it'll make your app stand out!

 

[Goro]

Where is Teela Brown when you need her?

For the rest of you who are disagreeing with the very wise gonnif, pay attention to the article Mad Jack posted. The tl, dr is that dishonest doctors start out as dishonest students. While you can deride the slippery slope argument all you want, here it does have a basis in fact to justify our caution in dealing with applicants like the OP's friend.

You can't pick and choose which laws to obey and not to obey. Kim Davis, the County Clerk in KY, went to jail for doing the same thing. Why is she wrong and you right? (and to avoid hijacking the thread further into lala land, I firmly believe that she deserved going to jail!)

Seems like med schools are selecting not just for good stats, but also lucky people. Anyone ever read "Ringworld?" It springs to mind.

 

[Medgrant]

Well, they're also selecting for the people that didn't do stupid things to begin with.

I know a few med. students, residents, and physicians that have done some things that would make you question them as a human being, let alone a physician. The only difference is that they never got in trouble legally.. I can't fully agree with your statement.

 

[BluMist]

lol, we should start spreading that rumor around- get a misdemeanor, it'll make your app stand out!

misdemeanor is so 2014... need to get a felony nowadays to truly stand out

 

[Goro]

I have heard this argument used plenty of times in Adcom meetings. They usually win.

When you've got literally thousands of perfect candidates, why take the one that's got a misdemeanor? That's really what it comes down to.

 

[StudyLater]

Yeah, seriously. I've seen plenty of people get their fakes taken away and told to leave, but never seen the police get involved.

I am telling you guys this was a f*cking setup. The owner is probably using dumba*s young kids as a sacrifice for impunity on something even more f*cked up. OP's friend was a f*cking patsy.

Yes, someone who would balk at using a fake ID probably isn't going to be a rapist. But to claim that there is even a small reason to suspect that someone who uses a fake ID might be "predisposed" to get someone drunk and rape them is incredibly and offensively ridiculous.

I don't think you understand. If you get drunk with someone, you're already raping them. You're raping their soul, their future, and their dreams. Don't be a rapist. Just drink alone and never, EVER have drunk sex.

AND REMEMBER: if you're both drunk, well....you're the guy, and even if neither of you can give consent, you're automatically the rapist by law. That's just science, guys.

Legally, the first act is already predisposition. And the case here that occurred when someone purposely sought to get another underage drunk in order to have sex. That is, as all applicants should realize is rape. If anyone has used to a fake ID to get into a bar and buy someone a drink with the idea of maybe they would get lucky, which is about every college male I know, would be guilty of the same. I consider this incredibly and nearly universally common

gonnif, either you're even better at keeping a straight face than I am when saying ridiculous bullsh*t, or you're actually a ridiculous bullsh*tter. Either way, kudos man.

Your arguments all depend on the slippery slope fallacy.

Wait hold on a sec rachiie. Let's play this out. If you're cool with suggesting laws set "arbitrary lines," doesn't that mean there is also an "arbitrary line" between consensual sex and rape? And what about a bar fight and murder? I mean, it's probably only a few more good punches that could make the difference once the other guy is knocked out completely.

I think there's some validity to this.

It's the level of consequences that is the problem, and the degree to which you have to premeditate to do one versus the other. Getting someone else to buy you alcohol will get you zero jail time, in most states- the person doing the buying is at fault. Buying a fake ID (a criminal offense), using a fake ID (a second criminal offense), and subsequently buying alcohol (a third criminal offense) is way worse legally and requires a far higher degree of both premeditation and not giving a **** about the law. Smart people stay on the right side of the law when they're doing questionable things if at all possible.

And I didn't have my first sip of alcohol until I was 21, actually.

Agreed. Have someone else buy the alcohol. Also have them take the massive fall when your dumb a*s gets caught on a DUI charge and you need a bargaining tool.

Well, they're also selecting for the people that didn't do stupid things to begin with.

Or just those that were smart about doing stupid things.

I mean come on, success is always partially attributed to at least a little bit of luck. That one opportunity that opened up at just the right time etc.

 

[Mad Jack]

I know a few med. students, residents, and physicians that have done some things that would make you question them as a human being, let alone a physician. The only difference is that they never got in trouble legally.. I can't fully agree with your statement.

But students that have committed actionable offenses have a statistically, strongly proven chance of being doctors that have legal action taken against them down the road. That, in and of itself, is enough to cast judgment.

 

[NotASerialKiller]

Where is Teela Brown when you need her?

For the rest of you who are disagreeing with the very wise gonnif, pay attention to the article Mad Jack posted. The tl, dr is that dishonest doctors start out as dishonest students. While you can deride the slippery slope argument all you want, here it does have a basis in fact to justify our caution in dealing with applicants like the OP's friend.

You can't pick and choose which laws to obey and not to obey. Kim Davis, the County Clerk in KY, went to jail for doing the same thing. Why is she wrong and you right? (and to avoid hijacking the thread further into lala land, I firmly believe that she deserved going to jail!)

We do though, everyone does. Distinguishing the type of infraction is extremely important. If you take a black and white attitude then everyone who jaywalks, goes over the speed limit or eats a grape in the grocery store is more likely to do X Y and Z worse things. Even if this was true, it sets such an unreasonably high standard that no one would be good enough for medical school.

I don't think you guys are wrong, I'm just saying that what this viewpoint actually does is keep students who were caught doing something stupid out of med school, not ensure that only disturbingly honest boy scouts get in. I'm not sure that that is a bad thing, I'm just saying that it's different from pretending that you don't want to let them in because they're probably going to be dishonest doctors. Virtually everyone does silly and illegal but not harmful things when they're young. I don't disagree with being cautious with the ones you KNOW did something because they were caught, just with the implication that 75% of kids that age aren't doing the exact same things.

 

[Affiche]

I am telling you guys this was a f*cking setup. The owner is probably using dumba*s young kids as a sacrifice for impunity on something even more f*cked up. OP's friend was a f*cking patsy.



I don't think you understand. If you get drunk with someone, you're already raping them. You're raping their soul, their future, and their dreams. Don't be a rapist. Just drink alone and never, EVER have drunk sex.

AND REMEMBER: if you're both drunk, well....you're the guy, and even if neither of you can give consent, you're automatically the rapist by law. That's just science, guys.



gonnif, either you're even better at keeping a straight face than I am when saying ridiculous bullsh*t, or you're actually a ridiculous bullsh*tter. Either way, kudos man.



Wait hold on a sec rachiie. Let's play this out. If you're cool with suggesting laws set "arbitrary lines," doesn't that mean there is also an "arbitrary line" between consensual sex and rape? And what about a bar fight and murder? I mean, it's probably only a few more good punches that could make the difference once the other guy is knocked out completely.

I think there's some validity to this.



Agreed. Have someone else buy the alcohol. Also have them take the massive fall when your dumb a*s gets caught on a DUI charge and you need a bargaining tool.



Or just those that were smart about doing stupid things.

Age of consent is arbitrary lol but I'm not sure how you see a gray area with rape and murder.

 

[Mad Jack]

I am telling you guys this was a f*cking setup. The owner is probably using dumba*s young kids as a sacrifice for impunity on something even more f*cked up. OP's friend was a f*cking patsy.



I don't think you understand. If you get drunk with someone, you're already raping them. You're raping their soul, their future, and their dreams. Don't be a rapist. Just drink alone and never, EVER have drunk sex.

AND REMEMBER: if you're both drunk, well....you're the guy, and even if neither of you can give consent, you're automatically the rapist by law. That's just science, guys.



gonnif, either you're even better at keeping a straight face than I am when saying ridiculous bullsh*t, or you're actually a ridiculous bullsh*tter. Either way, kudos man.



Wait hold on a sec rachiie. Let's play this out. If you're cool with suggesting laws set "arbitrary lines," doesn't that mean there is also an "arbitrary line" between consensual sex and rape? And what about a bar fight and murder? I mean, it's probably only a few more good punches that could make the difference once the other guy is knocked out completely.

I think there's some validity to this.



Agreed. Have someone else buy the alcohol. Also have them take the massive fall when your dumb a*s gets caught on a DUI charge and you need a bargaining tool.



Or just those that were smart about doing stupid things.

Being smart about stupid things shows a whole lot more intelligence than being stupid about stupid things.

And don't ever drink and drive. That's just the stupidest **** you could ever do. I've done a lot of bad things in my life, but drinking and driving- no, just no. The consequences are so severe, it's never worth the risk.

 

[Goro]

The sin of solipsism is a dangerous thing, serial.

We do though, everyone does. Distinguishing the type of infraction is extremely important. If you take a black and white attitude then everyone who jaywalks, goes over the speed limit or eats a grape in the grocery store is more likely to do X Y and Z worse things. Even if this was true, it sets such an unreasonably high standard that no one would be good enough for medical school.

I don't think you guys are wrong, I'm just saying that what this viewpoint actually does is keep students who were caught doing something stupid out of med school, not ensure that only disturbingly honest boy scouts get in. I'm not sure that that is a bad thing, I'm just saying that it's different from pretending that you don't want to let them in because they're probably going to be dishonest doctors. Virtually everyone does silly and illegal but not harmful things when they're young. I don't disagree with being cautious with the ones you KNOW did something because they were caught, just with the implication that 75% of kids that age aren't doing the exact same things.

 

[Affiche]

Where is Teela Brown when you need her?

For the rest of you who are disagreeing with the very wise gonnif, pay attention to the article Mad Jack posted. The tl, dr is that dishonest doctors start out as dishonest students. While you can deride the slippery slope argument all you want, here it does have a basis in fact to justify our caution in dealing with applicants like the OP's friend.

You can't pick and choose which laws to obey and not to obey. Kim Davis, the County Clerk in KY, went to jail for doing the same thing. Why is she wrong and you right? (and to avoid hijacking the thread further into lala land, I firmly believe that she deserved going to jail!)

Oh please. The article he posted is only useful if you assume that all infractions are the same. They aren't.

 

[Mad Jack]

We do though, everyone does. Distinguishing the type of infraction is extremely important. If you take a black and white attitude then everyone who jaywalks, goes over the speed limit or eats a grape in the grocery store is more likely to do X Y and Z worse things. Even if this was true, it sets such an unreasonably high standard that no one would be good enough for medical school.

I don't think you guys are wrong, I'm just saying that what this viewpoint actually does is keep students who were caught doing something stupid out of med school, not ensure that only disturbingly honest boy scouts get in. I'm not sure that that is a bad thing, I'm just saying that it's different from pretending that you don't want to let them in because they're probably going to be dishonest doctors. Virtually everyone does silly and illegal but not harmful things when they're young. I don't disagree with being cautious with the ones you KNOW did something because they were caught, just with the implication that 75% of kids that age aren't doing the exact same things.

Hey, your odds are better to take a person who possibly has done something illegal than someone who has definitely done something illegal. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

 

[NotASerialKiller]

But students that have committed actionable offenses have a statistically, strongly proven chance of being doctors that have legal action taken against them down the road. That, in and of itself, is enough to cast judgment.

Do you have a link to a study like this? Interested to see, I can find it on my own if there are a bunch just thought you might have one in mind

 

[Goro]

I don't have access to Pubmed just now, but there are other papers to match the one posted above.

How about all of you take a step back and use this as a learning experience.

Oh please. The article he posted assumes that all infractions are the same. They aren't.

 

[NotASerialKiller]

Hey, your odds are better to take a person who possibly has done something illegal than someone who has definitely done something illegal. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Yup that's true. It's just that when it's such a minor offence that a whole pile of 20 year olds are likely to have done it, the getting caught or not aspect doesn't seem as important to distinguish.

The sin of solipsism is a dangerous thing, serial.

I was hoping that gluttony would be my worst one today

 

[Mad Jack]

Do you have a link to a study like this? Interested to see, I can find it on my own if there are a bunch just thought you might have one in mind

I already pasted the article it was from a couple pages back. It's in the NEJM, isn't available free online. But you should be able to get it through your school's library if they've got a subscription service. Granted, it only covered students found to have cheated or to have other actionable offenses in medical school, but those are on the same level as someone using a fake ID in most respects, so I think it is comparable.

 

[StudyLater]

Age of consent is arbitrary lol but I'm not sure how you see a gray area with rape and murder.

Ehem....yes well. Moving on.

Hey, your odds are better to take a person who possibly has done something illegal than someone who has definitely done something illegal. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Agreed with this. Would do the same thing in an adcom's position.

So essentially, OP is f*cked unless she's got some other really amazing stuff to show her integrity (and even then....perfectly whitewashed fence with a small black mark on it? Your eyes just focus on the mark).

Being smart about stupid things shows a whole lot more intelligence than being stupid about stupid things.

And don't ever drink and drive. That's just the stupidest **** you could ever do. I've done a lot of bad things in my life, but drinking and driving- no, just no. The consequences are so severe, it's never worth the risk.

Thanks mom. I think I know what I'm doing *teenage rolleyes*

 

[Mad Jack]

Yup that's true. It's just that when it's such a minor offence that a whole pile of 20 year olds are likely to have done it, the getting caught or not aspect doesn't seem as important to distinguish.



I was hoping that gluttony would be my worst one today

I would hardly say that most 20 year olds had fake IDs.

 

[Affiche]

You can't pick and choose which laws to obey and not to obey. Kim Davis, the County Clerk in KY, went to jail for doing the same thing. Why is she wrong and you right?

This isn't quite the same thing. The act of using a fake id doesn't harm anyone and discriminating against people does. Not only that, but consuming alcohol isn't even illegal unless you're under 21. It makes no sense to say that someone who consumes alcohol a few months early is comparable to someone who commits a crime that will never be legal.

Edit: neither is right, but there are varying degrees of immorality.

 

[Mad Jack]

Ehem....yes well. Moving on.



Agreed with this. Would do the same thing in an adcom's position.

So essentially, OP is f*cked unless she's got some other really amazing stuff to show her integrity (and even then....perfectly whitewashed fence with a small black mark on it? Your eyes just focus on the mark).



Thanks mom. I think I know what I'm doing *teenage rolleyes*

Wasn't a comment at you, that was just to general premeds that might be reading. Just -don't- drink and drive. A DUI will tank your app. Amongst much of the population, and particularly that subset of us that have worked the ICU or ED, drunk drivers have a special place of hatred in our hearts.

 

[StudyLater]

I would hardly say that most 20 year olds had fake IDs.

Depends on if you're at a party school.

This isn't quite the same thing. The act of using a fake id doesn't harm anyone and discriminating against people does. Not only that, but consuming alcohol isn't even illegal unless you're under 21. It makes no sense to say that someone who consumes alcohol a few months early is comparable to someone who commits a crime that will never be legal.

It's still against the law. Law is order. Order is life. Life is perfect.

 

[StudyLater]

Wasn't a comment at you, that was just to general premeds that might be reading. Just -don't- drink and drive. A DUI will tank your app. Amongst much of the population, and particularly that subset of us that have worked the ICU or ED, drunk drivers have a special place of hatred in our hearts.

Right. I promise I won't.

This is the last time I will be serious this week.

 

[NotASerialKiller]

I would hardly say that most 20 year olds had fake IDs.

For this example no, but I would say most would have absolutely no ethical issue with it.

And I just found out that alumni don't have access to my school's journal database. That's really frustrating, guess I'll have to take your word for it!

 

[StudyLater]

I'd post it for you here @NotASerialKiller but that'd be copyright infringement and if I did that, well, who knows just what else I'd do as a physician???

Certainly wouldn't share the privileged knowledge of journals with patients.

 

[Mad Jack]

This isn't quite the same thing. The act of using a fake id doesn't harm anyone and discriminating against people does. Not only that, but consuming alcohol isn't even illegal unless you're under 21. It makes no sense to say that someone who consumes alcohol a few months early is comparable to someone who commits a crime that will never be legal.

Edit: neither is right, but there are varying degrees of immorality.

It's disregard for the rules. Technically cheating on a test doesn't harm anyone. Technically forging paperwork that doesn't affect reimbursement doesn't harm anyone. But medicine is a profession, with ethical standards, so we're expected to act in a bit more ethical of a manner than the general public. No one cares if the English major writing for a blog cheated on an exam in college, but if you're a doctor and someone found out you'd cheated through medical school, your patients would probably seriously question your abilities. Just as they would if they found out you were illegally copying information you never obtained from one file to your own report, despite its generally being harmless. Great power, great expectations and responsibility, unfortunately. So every illegal and questionable thing you do can and will get an extra look from adcoms, and rightfully so. They want people that will make the profession (and their school) look as squeaky clean and respectable as possible.

 

[Affiche]

I'd post it for you here @NotASerialKiller but that'd be copyright infringement and if I did that, well, who knows just what else I'd do as a physician???

Certainly wouldn't share the privileged knowledge of journals with patients.

 

[NotASerialKiller]

I'd post it for you here @NotASerialKiller but that'd be copyright infringement and if I did that, well, who knows just what else I'd do as a physician???

Certainly wouldn't share the privileged knowledge of journals with patients.

Oh @StudyLater , you so crazy.

 

[StudyLater]

They want people that will make the profession (and their school) look as squeaky clean and respectable as possible.

Moral of the story: If you're going to be a crooked physician, make sure your record is squeaky clean first.

 

[Mad Jack]

For this example no, but I would say most would have absolutely no ethical issue with it.

And I just found out that alumni don't have access to my school's journal database. That's really frustrating, guess I'll have to take your word for it!

Background

Evidence supporting professionalism as a critical measure of competence in medical education is limited. In this case–control study, we investigated the association of disciplinary action against practicing physicians with prior unprofessional behavior in medical school. We also examined the specific types of behavior that are most predictive of disciplinary action against practicing physicians with unprofessional behavior in medical school.

Methods

The study included 235 graduates of three medical schools who were disciplined by one of 40 state medical boards between 1990 and 2003 (case physicians). The 469 control physicians were matched with the case physicians according to medical school and graduation year. Predictor variables from medical school included the presence or absence of narratives describing unprofessional behavior, grades, standardized-test scores, and demographic characteristics. Narratives were assigned an overall rating for unprofessional behavior. Those that met the threshold for unprofessional behavior were further classified among eight types of behavior and assigned a severity rating (moderate to severe).

Results

Disciplinary action by a medical board was strongly associated with prior unprofessional behavior in medical school (odds ratio, 3.0; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.9 to 4.8), for a population attributable risk of disciplinary action of 26 percent. The types of unprofessional behavior most strongly linked with disciplinary action were severe irresponsibility (odds ratio, 8.5; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.8 to 40.1) and severely diminished capacity for self-improvement (odds ratio, 3.1; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.2 to 8.2). Disciplinary action by a medical board was also associated with low scores on the Medical College Admission Test and poor grades in the first two years of medical school (1 percent and 7 percent population attributable risk, respectively), but the association with these variables was less strong than that with unprofessional behavior.

Conclusions

In this case–control study, disciplinary action among practicing physicians by medical boards was strongly associated with unprofessional behavior in medical school. Students with the strongest association were those who were described as irresponsible or as having diminished ability to improve their behavior. Professionalism should have a central role in medical academics and throughout one's medical career.

 

[Mad Jack]

Moral of the story: If you're going to be a crooked physician, make sure your record is squeaky clean first.

That goes for being any type of crooked person in general. But most people that frequently do illegal or irresponsible things eventually get caught.

 

[StudyLater]

Oh @StudyLater , you so crazy.

And so is @Mad Jack from what I hear

 

[StudyLater]

But most people that have gotten caught frequently do illegal or irresponsible things

Fixed that up for you. A implies B, but B doesn't necessarily imply A.

 

[NotASerialKiller]

Background

Evidence supporting professionalism as a critical measure of competence in medical education is limited. In this case–control study, we investigated the association of disciplinary action against practicing physicians with prior unprofessional behavior in medical school. We also examined the specific types of behavior that are most predictive of disciplinary action against practicing physicians with unprofessional behavior in medical school.

Methods

The study included 235 graduates of three medical schools who were disciplined by one of 40 state medical boards between 1990 and 2003 (case physicians). The 469 control physicians were matched with the case physicians according to medical school and graduation year. Predictor variables from medical school included the presence or absence of narratives describing unprofessional behavior, grades, standardized-test scores, and demographic characteristics. Narratives were assigned an overall rating for unprofessional behavior. Those that met the threshold for unprofessional behavior were further classified among eight types of behavior and assigned a severity rating (moderate to severe).

Results

Disciplinary action by a medical board was strongly associated with prior unprofessional behavior in medical school (odds ratio, 3.0; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.9 to 4.8), for a population attributable risk of disciplinary action of 26 percent. The types of unprofessional behavior most strongly linked with disciplinary action were severe irresponsibility (odds ratio, 8.5; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.8 to 40.1) and severely diminished capacity for self-improvement (odds ratio, 3.1; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.2 to 8.2). Disciplinary action by a medical board was also associated with low scores on the Medical College Admission Test and poor grades in the first two years of medical school (1 percent and 7 percent population attributable risk, respectively), but the association with these variables was less strong than that with unprofessional behavior.

Conclusions

In this case–control study, disciplinary action among practicing physicians by medical boards was strongly associated with unprofessional behavior in medical school. Students with the strongest association were those who were described as irresponsible or as having diminished ability to improve their behavior. Professionalism should have a central role in medical academics and throughout one's medical career.

Thanks! Do they go into detail about how they were classified, and what qualified as severe irresponsibility? I think that's the crux of this issue. For example it wouldn't surprise me if cheating IAs were highly predictive of this but minor marijuana/alcohol infractions were not.

 

[Affiche]

Thanks! Do they go into detail about how they were classified, and what qualified as severe irresponsibility? I think that's the crux of this issue. For example it wouldn't surprise me if cheating IAs were highly predictive of this but minor marijuana/alcohol infractions were not.

THIS.

 

[Mad Jack]

And so is @Mad Jack from what I hear

 

[StudyLater]

I'm assuming you got those tats after your acceptance.

 

[Affiche]

American Horror Story

 

[Mad Jack]

Thanks! Do they go into detail about how they were classified, and what qualified as severe irresponsibility? I think that's the crux of this issue. For example it wouldn't surprise me if cheating IAs were highly predictive of this but minor marijuana/alcohol infractions were not.

I'm really feeling too lazy to go through my school's convoluted offsite library service right now. Irresponsibility was the biggest correlate, not necessarily cheating, that much I remember. I'll dig it up tomorrow when I'm feeling a bit less lazy. But I would, personally, qualify going to a bar or club with a fake ID as pretty damn irresponsible if you know what the consequences are.

 

[Mad Jack]

I'm assuming you got those tats after your acceptance.

They got me mad diversity points in the admission process.

 

[StudyLater]

@Mad Jack I like your shiny new badge.

 

[Lancer]

with several thousand applicants for a few hundreds spots, yes. This year, with nearly 800,000 total applications across across schools, for less than 100,000 acceptances total, 700,000 have to be rejected.

Where did you get those stats?

Isn't the acceptance rate normally around 40%

 

[Gandyy]

If you're willing to use a Fake ID to enter a club, how do I know you won't use a fake ID to perform surgery or access drugs?

What are you talking about?

 

[Lawpy]

@Mad Jack I like your shiny new badge.

I hear you can get one in about 2 years.

 

[skinofteeth]

I'm sorry, but this is America, and we do have the right to reject laws, if we feel it is unjust, doesn't apply, or punishment is too harsh.

For example, we can use jury nullification in cases we deem the law is messed up in one way or another. It was used often during Prohibition of alcohol in the US.

 

[Fedekz]

I'm a police officer so I'll give you my $0.02

Even if the police say oh you'll be fine just take a class or two and it will all go away. After I arrest you or issue you a summons (criminal citation with mandatory court appearance) then it is completely out of my hands. After writing your arrest report you hardly ever follow up on it, likely never think about it, and where I work you have to go way out of your way to figure out the end outcome. So a cop saying it will be expunged and you'll be fine could be true based on his prior experiences, but your friends fate rests in the prosecuting attorneys office. It's the PA or DA office that makes decisions.

So she needs to follow up with the PA office and figure out if it will really be expunged, they are the people who really make those types of decisions.

 

[Donald Juan]

Background

Evidence supporting professionalism as a critical measure of competence in medical education is limited. In this case–control study, we investigated the association of disciplinary action against practicing physicians with prior unprofessional behavior in medical school. We also examined the specific types of behavior that are most predictive of disciplinary action against practicing physicians with unprofessional behavior in medical school.

Methods

The study included 235 graduates of three medical schools who were disciplined by one of 40 state medical boards between 1990 and 2003 (case physicians). The 469 control physicians were matched with the case physicians according to medical school and graduation year. Predictor variables from medical school included the presence or absence of narratives describing unprofessional behavior, grades, standardized-test scores, and demographic characteristics. Narratives were assigned an overall rating for unprofessional behavior. Those that met the threshold for unprofessional behavior were further classified among eight types of behavior and assigned a severity rating (moderate to severe).

Results

Disciplinary action by a medical board was strongly associated with prior unprofessional behavior in medical school (odds ratio, 3.0; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.9 to 4.8), for a population attributable risk of disciplinary action of 26 percent. The types of unprofessional behavior most strongly linked with disciplinary action were severe irresponsibility (odds ratio, 8.5; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.8 to 40.1) and severely diminished capacity for self-improvement (odds ratio, 3.1; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.2 to 8.2). Disciplinary action by a medical board was also associated with low scores on the Medical College Admission Test and poor grades in the first two years of medical school (1 percent and 7 percent population attributable risk, respectively), but the association with these variables was less strong than that with unprofessional behavior.

Conclusions

In this case–control study, disciplinary action among practicing physicians by medical boards was strongly associated with unprofessional behavior in medical school. Students with the strongest association were those who were described as irresponsible or as having diminished ability to improve their behavior. Professionalism should have a central role in medical academics and throughout one's medical career.

This study is looking at people who had unprofessional behavior in med school...not people who drank in college at 19. That's a big difference.