How do scumbags get into medical school?

[monopolova]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I was thinking of how schools are looking for people with certain qualities (honesty, moral aptitude, honorable motivations, etc.) and how the process is designed to weed out the undesirables.

With the letters of rec. and the interviews and the personal statements, how do people like Dr. Kevorkian, strip mall plastic surgeons, pharmaceutical reward addicts, etc. get into med school in the first place? I'm thinking that perhaps people change and become sleaze balls, but then again, what would that say about the state of the profession?

 

[ndi_amaka]

As a sidenote: many would consider Dr. Kevorkian a hero rather than a scumbag. But that's an argument for a different thread.


Back to the point:
I always wonder why it is assumed that doctors are some how super human? We want to be doctors...not nuns or priests. Strip the white coat off and we're still human. Writing a personal statement about how you fed starving African children during spring break doesn't somehow negate that fact.

I mean, I guess you can see it as...if you are going into the profession, you have a certain standard to uphold. But hey, after 8 yrs of school, 4+ yrs of residency and haggling with insurance companies some people may forget that little aspect and go for whatever makes the quickest buck.

 

[stoic]

I was thinking of how schools are looking for people with certain qualities (honesty, moral aptitude, honorable motivations, etc.) and how the process is designed to weed out the undesirables.

With the letters of rec. and the interviews and the personal statements, how do people like Dr. Kevorkian, strip mall plastic surgeons, pharmaceutical reward addicts, etc. get into med school in the first place? I'm thinking that perhaps people change and become sleaze balls, but then again, what would that say about the state of the profession?

Man, that's a really tall horse you're riding around on.

 

[Blake]

It's easy volunteering and doing tons of ECs even though you hate doing it.

 

[cmed13]

You can allways get into the us medical system. Foreign medical schools are a dime a dozen some are good some suck...but you can allways find a way....even scumbags. I wont touch on my Hero Jack. End of life decisions are a hard topic into which religion and politics play too big a role...IMHO...but again thats another topic.

 

[monopolova]

As a sidenote: many would consider Dr. Kevorkian a hero rather than a scumbag. But that's an argument for a different thread.


Back to the point:
I always wonder why it is assumed that doctors are some how super human? We want to be doctors...not nuns or priests. Strip the white coat off and we're still human. Writing a personal statement about how you fed starving African children during spring break doesn't somehow negate that fact.

That is true; I am attracted to the idea that all doctors must be upstanding members of society. But I am just pointing out that this process is so stringent when it comes to seeking people of excellent moral character -- it is just heart breaking to me to imagine that someone who has some moral defecit should take the seat of someone else who might have done much more good.

 

[ndi_amaka]

That is true; I am attracted to the idea that all doctors must be upstanding members of society. But I am just pointing out that this process is so stringent when it comes to seeking people of excellent moral character -- it is just heart breaking to me to imagine that someone who has some moral defecit should take the seat of someone else who might have done much more good.

Uuuum...seeking people of excellent moral character???

Where exactly does the admissions committee measure that??? A GPA of 3.8 = Mother Theresa and a 2.9= Dahmer?

And I'm interested in fhow you would figure out who has moral deficit and who has upstanding character?

 

[nikolai521]

good gpa, good MCATS, good ECs, good interview and application

 

[ndi_amaka]

good gpa, good MCATS, good ECs, good interview and application

Equals good person??? Are you kidding me?

 

[monopolova]

Man, that's a really tall horse you're riding around on.

Don't you consider yourself to be a moral human being? If you are, don't be ashamed or afraid to admit as such; defending virtue is not vanity. Thanks for your meaningful contribution.

 

[Swack]

The only thing I can think of that could determine your character are LORs. These should be from people you know well and can testify to your character, but of course these aren't fool proof. I'm sure it can raise some flags though if you can get noone to write you a letter of recommendation.

 

[pseudoknot]

The admissions process does not seem to be designed to screen people out based on character or integrity. If the scumbags in question are good students who can get good grades and MCAT scores, then the only thing that might hold them back is the interview, and there are some people who can BS their way through that. Letters of recommendation aren't going to help much, because they tell you only that a few professors liked the applicant. (I would think letters from extracurricular activities could be more informative, but I don't get the impression from posts here that those are absolutely required for admission.)

It's pretty hard to get a good read on someone's character when you don't know them. Real background checks are extremely time consuming and expensive (and not perfect).

 

[monopolova]

Uuuum...seeking people of excellent moral character???

Where exactly does the admissions committee measure that??? A GPA of 3.8 = Mother Theresa and a 2.9= Dahmer?

And I'm interested in fhow you would figure out who has moral deficit and who has upstanding character?

Well take your pick: letters of rec and interviews are great places to start. I was under the assumption that these two parts of the process were put in place for the purpose of ensuring that an applicant was of sound mind and could display some moral clarity. (I realize that the letter of rec has become useless since apparently a ton of applicants choose to craft letters themselves or pick and choose what they send, but nevertheless.)

 

[ndi_amaka]

Horrible doctors don't come into medical school that way....they develop over time. Unless you are suggesting that the admissions committee invest in a crystal ball that can see 20 yrs into a persons future, I think it's up to the medical school itself to introduce students to ethics in real life medical situations.

 

[ndi_amaka]

Well take your pick: letters of rec and interviews are great places to start. I was under the assumption that these two parts of the process were put in place for the purpose of ensuring that an applicant was of sound mind and could display some moral clarity. (I realize that the letter of rec has become useless since apparently a ton of applicants choose to craft letters themselves or pick and choose what they send, but nevertheless.)

Interviews last what...30 minutes? I can usually hide my KKK cloak and nazi flag for about that long. Smile and bat my eyes. Shoot, some people can fake their true identity for years....look at Mark Hacking.

And a letter of recommendation?? It's a joke...out of the 4+ yrs of college you have 30-40 professors. i'm sure you can make three write that you are not the world's worst individual.

 

[Blake]

Interviews last what...30 minutes? I can usually hide my KKK cloak and nazi flag for about that long.

Disturbing...

 

[ndi_amaka]

Disturbing...

It's called sarcasm.

I'm black.

 

[monopolova]

Horrible doctors don't come into medical school that way....they develop over time. Unless you are suggesting that the admissions committee invest in a crystal ball that can see 20 yrs into a persons future, I think it's up to the medical school itself to introduce students to ethics in real life medical situations.

Yeah, I think I agree with you to a certain extent; I still think that people can't change so much. There has to be a way to see a glimmer of something in someone. Maybe we can resort to phrenology. lol "He's got the sloping forhead of a stagecoach robber." 😀

 

[Rugger81]

Man, that's a really tall horse you're riding around on.

ahahahahaha. that's exactly what i was thinking.

instead of b?tching about the immorality you perceive in others (and an admissions process that we have NO control over), why not just try to be a good person yourself?

there have been sleazy people in all professions since time began. this is nothing new. and honestly, do you really believe that a high paying career like a physician attracts only the morally pure? get real.

 

[Harps]

I will be interviewing ppl for the 2005-2006 cycle...MWAHAHHAHAHAHA

watch out...I am gonna get those fake little buggers...and make'em pay....lol


-Harps

 

[monopolova]

ahahahahaha. that's exactly what i was thinking.

instead of b?tching about the immorality you perceive in others (and an admissions process that we have NO control over), why not just try to be a good person yourself?

there have been sleazy people in all professions since time began. this is nothing new. and honestly, do you really believe that a high paying career like a physician attracts only the morally pure? get real.

Wow, you're more sickened by my desire to eliminate those who corrupt medicine than by the corrupters themselves. Do you feel threatened?

Revise your last clause. You will find I never presumed applicants to be morally pure; that's why I raised the questions I did in the first place. Duh.

 

[ndi_amaka]

Wow, you're more sickened by my desire to eliminate those who corrupt medicine than by the corrupters themselves. Do you feel threatened?

Revise your last clause. You will find I never presumed applicants to be morally pure; that's why I raised the questions I did in the first place. Duh.

But you imply that they SHOULD be morally pure.

Why?

 

[Blake]

It's called sarcasm.

I'm black.

You had me there. Funny though, I remember your comment in the '' any black female... '' thread.

 

[ndi_amaka]

You had me there. Funny though, I remember your comment in the '' any black female... '' thread.

And?

 

[Blake]

And?

Whoa, I didn't mean anything bad. Anyway, I'm out of here!

 

[ndi_amaka]

Whoa, I didn't mean anything bad. Anyway, I'm out of here!

😕 oooooooooooh-kay.

 

[monopolova]

But you imply that they SHOULD be morally pure.

Why?

lmao First, I expect they be morally acceptable -- not pure.

Second, doctors hold an important position in society -- they preserve health and life. In order to fulfill such an awesome responsibility, one needs a certain level of character and dedication. For example, people just looking to make a buck will do whatever they want to (including bypass those pesky laws and regulations) to make that buck. You and I, presumably, assume that the laws and regulations desserve to be followed because a. it is innately correct to do so, and b. such laws provide the pleasing side effect of saving lives!

Doctors are faced with tough decisions every day since they deal with life every day. Wouldn't it be natural that ethics be an important quality necessary to guide their actions lest they choose an action motivated by greed or sloth that ultimately puts another human being in peril?

 

[tupac_don]

That is true; I am attracted to the idea that all doctors must be upstanding members of society. But I am just pointing out that this process is so stringent when it comes to seeking people of excellent moral character -- it is just heart breaking to me to imagine that someone who has some moral defecit should take the seat of someone else who might have done much more good.

It's all trial and error. Really it comes down to what impression you make in 30-45 min interview. You could be very honest and moral, but not give them what they want and have them dismiss you. Or you might be slick and completely immoral, but know just what to say and what answer to give. So really I don't think the process is very good at weeding out those with low morals. If someone has blatant low morals yea ok then. But most people who want to do immoral stuff and are intelligent, will minimize chance of being implicated. Therefore, they will put their best foot forward in front on people who they get LOR's from, and the adcoms. On the other hand very honest person may say something that adcoms don't like or be too honest, which might eliminate them. You get the picture.

 

[monopolova]

It's all trial and error. Really it comes down to what impression you make in 30-45 min interview. You could be very honest and moral, but not give them what they want and have them dismiss you. Or you might be slick and completely immoral, but know just what to say and what answer to give. So really I don't think the process is very good at weeding out those with low morals. If someone has blatant low morals yea ok then. But most people who want to do immoral stuff and are intelligent, will minimize chance of being implicated. Therefore, they will put their best foot forward in front on people who they get LOR's from, and the adcoms. On the other hand very honest person may say something that adcoms don't like or be too honest, which might eliminate them. You get the picture.

Yeah, I agree with you, too. I think I should say that the process is not as much stringent as that the process hopes and prays that it is stringent in weeding out certain individuals.

 

[ndi_amaka]

Yeah, I agree with you, too. I think I should say that the process is not as much stringent as that the process hopes and prays that it is stringent in weeding out certain individuals.

What is your definition of morally acceptable?

 

[monopolova]

What is your definition of morally acceptable?

That's an excellent, fair, valid, and, unfortunately, tough question. lol

Well, I think it comes down to:

a. following all laws
b. living a life where one "practices what one preaches" in terms of health and wellness (i.e. don't do drugs for one)
c. giving patients treatment and continuing with one's education not because of financial gain but because, as a doctor, it is what is simply right (doctors who go to lectures, sign in, and then leave or doctors who give extra unnecessary treatments just to collect come to mind)

I mean, I don't think these are too much to ask. This is what I am referring to; sorry if I didn't make it clear. I brought this up because I am sick of 20/20 or Dateline doing a story about another plastic surgeon who was not board certified and killed a patient or some doctors who kept their license without taking the time to be educated properly. I just wondered "how are these people getting into med school while other wonderful folks are getting rejected".

I frankly can't believe the way some people are responding to my concerns. I'm not condemning medicine; I'm condemning those who deserve it.

 

[pseudoknot]

I frankly can't believe the way some people are responding to my concerns. I'm not condemning medicine; I'm condemning those who deserve it.

I for one thoroughly agree with what you've said. 👍

 

[monopolova]

I for one thoroughly agree with what you've said. 👍

Thank you!! 😀

 

[jlee9531]

I will be interviewing ppl for the 2005-2006 cycle...MWAHAHHAHAHAHA

watch out...I am gonna get those fake little buggers...and make'em pay....lol


-Harps

ill be joining you in that battle shortly my friend 😉.

 

[there_is_no]

i'm all for doctors being moral people and all that. i'd have to say that my own reasons for pursuing medicine fall into the "saving kids in africa" category. but as this debate spirals into disasterous ones that i've joined into before, i just want to give one word to the wise for those people, who like me, went into the interviews a little bit blind. sample interview line of questioning:

interviewer: "so why do you want to become a doctor"

me: "to help people, blah, blah, blah" (essentially that's the answer everyone says)

interviewer: (shruggingly) "do you think everyone should feel the same way?"

me: (emphatically) "yeah, i think it's important that doctors have these standards, blah, blah, blah"

interviewer: "well what do you think of people who do medicine because they're good at it? not cause they're trying to be all moral."

me: (fumbling now) "um, what do you mean?"

interviewer: "let me put it this way. say your car is broken. are you going to go to the mechanic who loves his job because he feels benevolent about his work and therefore about himself. or are you going to go to the mechanic who knows what he's doing."

me: (knowing i've been stumped) "i guess i'd go to the mechanic who knows what he's doing."

point of the story. i came out of the interview at first thinking because of other things that he said, that this guy is a jaded doctor who used to want to do medicine for the "right" reasons and then fell of the path somewhere. but then i realized, you know just because these are the reasons i want to do medicine, doesn't mean that i'm right and other people are wrong. just because my personal statement might play to the liberal, global perspective people out there and please the moralists, doesn't necessarily make my cause better than other people's.

this is not to become a moral relativist, but if there are people who are really good at science and are choosing medicine because they think that they can make a good dime doing it and are willing to take in the inherent sacrifices that medicine takes, then i can live with that. heck, those guys are going to be saving people's lives or helping them in ways which might not mean much to the doctor, but mean a lot to the patient. and it is true, medicine at first blush seems to be the "highest" calling in some ways. but then, if you take a step back, there are many ways in which people contribute to this world and also on the other hand, in some ways, everyone's job is just another job too.

and as far as rule b goes: "living a life where one 'practices what one preaches'" i think a lot of people would want that, would want to think that they do that, but at the core, we're all hippocrites in a sense. maybe some more blatant than others, but we all fall short in our own ways, especially if we judge ourselves by the same standards we set.

example, i just had mcdonald's recently, and yes i'd probably go to the surgeon who smokes up if he's going to fix me up the best.

as far as "saving kids in africa," having tried, i realized maybe in some ways i'm the one who needs saving. i live in america... but that's another discussion altogether.

anyways, i'm all for the debate as long as people are trying to understand the flip side of the argument. best of luck this application round. it definitely isn't fun, but it's better after you get in. that is until you actually start school. ha ha.

That's an excellent, fair, valid, and, unfortunately, tough question. lol

Well, I think it comes down to:

a. following all laws
b. living a life where one "practices what one preaches" in terms of health and wellness (i.e. don't do drugs for one)
c. giving patients treatment and continuing with one's education not because of financial gain but because, as a doctor, it is what is simply right (doctors who go to lectures, sign in, and then leave or doctors who give extra unnecessary treatments just to collect come to mind)

I mean, I don't think these are too much to ask. This is what I am referring to; sorry if I didn't make it clear. I brought this up because I am sick of 20/20 or Dateline doing a story about another plastic surgeon who was not board certified and killed a patient or some doctors who kept their license without taking the time to be educated properly. I just wondered "how are these people getting into med school while other wonderful folks are getting rejected".

I frankly can't believe the way some people are responding to my concerns. I'm not condemning medicine; I'm condemning those who deserve it.

 

[pseudoknot]

interviewer: "well what do you think of people who do medicine because they're good at it? not cause they're trying to be all moral."

I think your story was interesting, but I also believe that it speaks to a somewhat different argument than the one made here. The question of someone's motivations for entering medicine, which may or may not be primarily altruistic, is fundamentally separate from the issue of whether that person has integrity. One could easily imagine a person who really, truly wants to help people, but also lies a lot, doesn't follow rules, takes shortcuts, etc. (I'm sure many of us have known such people; I certainly have).

On the other hand, a person could be going into medicine for the money, or prestige, or whatever other reason is unacceptable to people here, and yet be of fine moral character. Personally, I'd take the latter.

 

[there_is_no]

point taken, i sort of felt that i was going on a tangent when i was writing it up anyways. i was just hoping to add some practical relevance to the admissions process at hand.

I think your story was interesting, but I also believe that it speaks to a somewhat different argument than the one made here. The question of someone's motivations for entering medicine, which may or may not be primarily altruistic, is fundamentally separate from the issue of whether that person has integrity. One could easily imagine a person who really, truly wants to help people, but also lies a lot, doesn't follow rules, takes shortcuts, etc. (I'm sure many of us have known such people; I certainly have).

On the other hand, a person could be going into medicine for the money, or prestige, or whatever other reason is unacceptable to people here, and yet be of fine moral character. Personally, I'd take the latter.

 

[vhawk]

I think that it is interesting that there is this unspoken law that says that the only way someone can be a good doctor is if they are compassionate and kind and noble. To me this seems ridiculous, and the mechanic analogy is very apt. Why because they are doctors in charge of our health does their moral character become so much more of an issue? They have to treat child molesters and nuns equally, and their job, for the most part, is very similar to fixing a car. I know its not romantic, but its still a job. Prove to me that a cold, greedy, intelligent and capable person cant be a good doctor. It sounds good to say these other things are necessary, and adcoms probably DO look for them, but to me it seems like what baseball scouts always say. They look for these obscure "intangibles" only because thats what they have always done. LEts take the Billy Beane approach, and actually judge physicians by their ability to perform the work, eh?

 

[vhawk]

sorry that was so long....

 

[automaton]

this is a really fascinating thread for me. not because i want to know how scumbags get into medical school, but because the OP made a moral stand and is paying the consequences of it. what's interesting is that the moral stand taken is rather modest in my opinion, yet it invites a similar amount of hostility as a dogmatic and intrusive moral stand (i.e. killing abortion doctors).

what this thread tells me is that many people in today's society are uncomfortable with taking ANY moral stand. many are relativists, or closet nihilists. any hint of objective morality is met with opposition; they only allow the morality that they determine for themselves. but is this really self-determination, or actually a pertuated form of non-determinism? i think the latter is closer to the truth.

carry on.

 

[vhawk]

I am a moral relativist, and proud of it. And to go on another tangent, about this whole abortion doctors thing....any of you aCTUALLY against abortion? I guess I mean this in the vein of "Abortion IS murder" not just distasteful....Cause it always kinda makes me wonder. I know this lady says she thinks abortion is murder and these doctors are murderers....but she is lying, or if not is a horrible and weak person. Because if I knew that my next door neighbor was constantly murdering children, would it matter what the law said? Wouldnt you stop him? This is why I dont actually believe anyone is against abortion, or at least that deep down they dont really think abortion is murder. Yes, it is super late, which is my excuse for not knowing better than to bring this up, but you called me a moral relativist, so....

 

[IndyZX]

I'm glad to see that not all premeds are blind to the realities of the world into which they are entering. I want to be on an admission committee when I get into medical school, because I desperately want to ask the applicants, "Would you do this (go through all the studying/debt/training) if you were paid as much as a high-school teacher?"

 

[pseudoknot]

I think that it is interesting that there is this unspoken law that says that the only way someone can be a good doctor is if they are compassionate and kind and noble. To me this seems ridiculous, and the mechanic analogy is very apt.

I don't think they HAVE to have any of those three qualities, although doctors who are not perceived as kind or compassionate generally have poor rapport with patients, which probably doesn't help matters. There is a big difference between compassion and integrity. The first is, IMO, strongly desirable for physicians, but not strictly essential. The second is essential.

Why because they are doctors in charge of our health does their moral character become so much more of an issue?

Trust. This is the foundation of the doctor-patient relationship. That's why communications between doctors and patients are legally considered privileged information. I don't need to like my doctor, but if I can't trust him, he's no good to me. Do I need to have the same level of trust in a mechanic? Are you kidding? Does ANYONE trust his or her mechanic???

 

[pseudoknot]

Actually, vhawk, this post you made in a "should I disclose a conviction" thread really sums up what I mean by the sort of character doctors (and everyone else, really) should have.

This sort of question has been posted here before, but I guess it kind of depends on what you are going for. In my opinion, the matter of "Will they even check?" is kind of irrelevant. Maybe this is too much to ask of FFA(future fysicians of America), but how about a little integrity? Its ok to make mistakes in life but you needn't be ashamed. If they want to know something, and I think we all understand the spirit of the question, be forthcoming. It wont hurt you, but even if it did, isnt a little ethical purity and a good night's sleep more important than sneaking and praying not to get caught?

 

[vhawk]

Ok, I guess you are right, and the OP probably meant that sort of integrity as well. I guess I just get frustrated from all these people who put charm and likeability ahead of competence, which I guess is best summed up by this claim that GPA and MCAT should be irreleveant, and they arent what makes a good doctor. Integrity is important, but I disagree with your comparison to the mechanic. I think it is equally important in EVERY profession, including mechanic....however I am unlikely to die if my oil isnt changed correctly or my radiator blows out. Still, for competent ANYTHING integrity is important, but this "bedside manner" seems to be a highly over-stressed part of what makes a good physician,

 

[pseudoknot]

I hear you. Maybe you should start a thread called "How do idiots get into medical school?" I bet it will be really popular. 😀

 

[automaton]

I hear you. Maybe you should start a thread called "How do idiots get into medical school?" I bet it will be really popular. 😀

a better question is "how do adcoms find non-idiots who actually want to be doctors?" face it, 98% of premeds are idiots, and thanks to the enlightened selection process, in medical school it's 99%.

 

[rockstar2525]

a better question is "how do adcoms find non-idiots who actually want to be doctors?" face it, 98% of premeds are idiots, and thanks to the enlightened selection process, in medical school it's 99%.

What are you talking about?

 

[skypilot]

Still, for competent ANYTHING integrity is important, but this "bedside manner" seems to be a highly over-stressed part of what makes a good physician,

Only problem with this theory is that communication is such a big part of the job. So someone who is an excellent technician but a poor communicator might cause some serious problems.

 

[Will Ferrell]

A lot of premeds are greedy, grade-grubbers. They participate in activities not out of altruism. If med schools did not look at ECs would you all still fly to Africa for spring break to feed children?

Why does everyone want to be dermatologists? A primary care physician does as much good for his community. Why not a nurse? They are the real ones taking care of the patients.