I exaggerated my EC's on AMCAS and I got called on it.

[efle]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Ad hoc is not the correct term. Being "irrational" and being "rational" on Kantian terms is a much more complex concept than one where you can just call someone irrational where the outcome is a net gain of suffering. You must be careful to not think everything through a utilitarian lens when thinking about distinct and separate philosophies - that's the kind of stuff that will get you crucified in a Philosophy paper, you must be as generous to the opposing position as possible or your argument will not be strong enough to hold up scrutiny. That's just the philosophy student in me coming out. Later today I'll post a more detailed description of what Kant means by rational and irrational.

Furthermore, yes Kant's ethics would not permit you from killing someone to save 100. Likewise, Kant's ethics would not let you kill someone for lying or being unethical. Punishment was also very important to Kant and rehabilitation rather than straight punishment was his preferred method. Like I have said over and over, Kant gets a bad rap for being an absolutist because of the black-box-ish formulations of the categorical imperative. The CI is in many ways a logical black box where something either is or is not wrong. The important part people miss is that Kant himself admitted that the CI would never work, that it was only a theoretical construct, and that it didn't even agree completely with his prior positions. Thus, framing Kant only within the context of the CI is like calling a sand pit in the middle of a rainforest a desert.

You should read Groundworks @efle. It's a boring, difficult and confusing book but I think your opinion on Kant would really change if you actually took a look at what he wrote.


Anyways, I'll just quickly reiterate my problems with utilitarianism and why I think it's inadequate. 1) You can't measure human suffering 2) Conversely, utilitarianism leaves no room for "utility monsters" that is people who derive so much happiness from an activity that they should therefore be allotted the bulk of that activity 3) Utlitarianism does not allow for the discrimination of suffering even though it allows for the discrimination of happiness. John Stuart Mill wrote "Socrates dissatisfied is better than the pig satisfied" and went on to describe how some pleasures differ from others, I.e there are some pleasures that are better than others. The fault in this is that the same cannot be said for suffering. There isn't a method of discrimination in Mill or Bentham (Bentham didn't even discriminate between goods) for suffering. I know the last time you brought this up you called it a "got ya" question but really it is not soluble in a utilitarian framework unless you make some novel, non-utilitarian backflips. A homeless man has healthy organs that could save 5 dying people. He has no family and nobody would know when he was gone and nobody would know you did it and therefore you would not be punished. You kill him in your clinic, humanely, and harvest his organs and save 5 others. Is this permissible? Utilitarianism says yes. I'm presuming @efle's response would be something along the lines of this action violating the homeless man's rights or dignity and would thus cause a net gain of suffering. I don't agree with this view. For one, you can't really measure this. We could up the ante and say save 1000, 1 billion, 6 trillion and you would have to pick a point where a single man's dignity is more important than a multitude's right to life and any point you picked on that spectrum would be arbitrary. Secondly, the lack of punishment prevents this from being a public issue that would lead to public backlash and therefore public suffering. The only thing the public sees is the saved lives.

You could apply the same logic to the non-extreme case of Eugenics. Eugenics is at its root a conflict between the rights of an individual and the benefit of humanity. A utilitarian framework would permit Eugenics on all accounts and I don't think we as a society are comfortable with that.

I do think it is ad hoc, the idea that rationality and evil are exclusive isn't an independently supported conclusion, its a qualification for "rationality" you have to introduce to protect absolutism from attacks about its practicality. To say all rational minds would arrive at a deontological axiology and behave according to the CI is way off. Rational minds could arrive at other conclusions, including ones that make for suffering. Its like Descartes adding a primitive relation qualification to mind-brain interaction.

I certainly don't think violating the mans rights is what protects him - its the damage it would do to society to dispel everyone's belief that their life (so long as they are innocent) is off limits, even from greater needs. If such an organ harvesting program could be performed in guarunteed total secret, there is no utilitarian objection. Same with eugenics; there is value in people collectively believing they retain protections and freedoms, but if you could secretly put something in the water of all Huntingtons patients to block them from having children, utilitarianism does not object.

As to limits of utilitarianism, I agree there are some. The private nature of pleasure and suffering makes external assessment impossible, and while I could agree that some pleasures may be much greater than others, which pleasures take the higher vs lower positions would vary per individual, as would overall degrees. I think utilitarianism is still very useful though, because 1) it informs us in cases of clear "good of the few vs good of the many" and 2) quantitative assessment may not be necessary; you can set the goal to be everyone healthy, educated, with decent resources, and give them all the options/make all paths accessible to the capable (eg all grad and professional school free). Then the system will naturally tend towards maxed as people choose what they prefer.

I think being unable to ever harm the few for the sake of the many is the really fatal flaw. You couldn't justify military action against genocide/human rights violations because of the inevitable collateral.

Of course I only take issue with absolute/CI ethics, if Kant calls that nonsense himself and backs off from it in favor of relative morals then he's cool w/ me

 

[DrDarce]

I do think it is ad hoc, the idea that rationality and evil are exclusive isn't an independently supported conclusion, its a qualification for "rationality" you have to introduce to protect absolutism from attacks about its practicality. To say all rational minds would arrive at a deontological axiology and behave according to the CI is way off. Rational minds could arrive at other conclusions, including ones that make for suffering. Its like Descartes adding a primitive relation qualification to mind-brain interaction.

I certainly don't think violating the mans rights is what protects him - its the damage it would do to society to dispel everyone's belief that their life (so long as they are innocent) is off limits, even from greater needs. If such an organ harvesting program could be performed in guarunteed total secret, there is no utilitarian objection. Same with eugenics; there is value in people collectively believing they retain protections and freedoms, but if you could secretly put something in the water of all Huntingtons patients to block them from having children, utilitarianism does not object.

As to limits of utilitarianism, I agree there are some. The private nature of pleasure and suffering makes external assessment impossible, and while I could agree that some pleasures may be much greater than others, which pleasures take the higher vs lower positions would vary per individual, as would overall degrees. I think utilitarianism is still very useful though, because 1) it informs us in cases of clear "good of the few vs good of the many" and 2) quantitative assessment may not be necessary; you can set the goal to be everyone healthy, educated, with decent resources, and give them all the options/make all paths accessible to the capable (eg all grad and professional school free). Then the system will naturally tend towards maxed as people choose what they prefer.

I think being unable to ever harm the few for the sake of the many is the really fatal flaw. You couldn't justify military action against genocide/human rights violations because of the inevitable collateral.

Of course I only take issue with absolute/CI ethics, if Kant calls that nonsense himself and backs off from it in favor of relative morals then he's cool w/ me

what are you guys talking about

 

[Lawpy]

what are you guys talking about

You'll be surprised where philosophical discussions can take you around. For me, it allows me through look at the world (and SDN) as if i'm stoned.

Will you guys knock off the Kantian philosophy discussion before my computer melts into a puddle of Silicon??

Mine vaporized into a cloud of electrons

 

[efle]

what are you guys talking about

Why Kant was a loser

 

[ImmunoLove]

Why Kant was a loser

Hm, that might be the dumbest thing you've said, smart sir. On that note, let's drop Phil 101 and stick to the purpose of the thread. It's interesting and all, but it's out of place, especially for those who might need to go through all this to get an answer to their own dilemmas. Sorry to be a mama bear, but "knock it off"! 🙂

 

[ZedsDed]

Hm, that might be the dumbest thing you've said, smart sir. On that note, let's drop Phil 101 and stick to the purpose of the thread. It's interesting and all, but it's out of place, especially for those who might need to go through all this to get an answer to their own dilemmas. Sorry to be a mama bear, but "knock it off"! 🙂

He was mostly joking. Is it just me or does sarcasm really get lost in translation on SDN?

 

[efle]

Hm, that might be the dumbest thing you've said, smart sir. On that note, let's drop Phil 101 and stick to the purpose of the thread. It's interesting and all, but it's out of place, especially for those who might need to go through all this to get an answer to their own dilemmas. Sorry to be a mama bear, but "knock it off"! 🙂

I'm only kidding. This thread was pretty resolved in the first five pages was it not? The dude clearly lied and just has to pray it didnt get centrally reported so that all schools will toss his app

 

[ImmunoLove]

He was mostly joking. Is it just me or does sarcasm really get lost in translation on SDN?

I was joking too (sort of), kind of like a "haha, yeah...so...let's say we stop with this discussion before heads explode, eh?". I think elfie knows I approve of his smarts.

EDIT: On the other hand, you're right, the dilemma has been resolved more or less, and why not continue discussing Kant?

Honestly, haven't had my morning cup of Joe yet, so my tolerance/care level is a little low.

 

[efle]

Elfie? Et tu, immunolove?

 

[Lawpy]

Honestly, derailing is bad yes, but if all flame threads (DO/URM/Carib/Top 20/prestige/politics) are derailed into philosophical discussions, SDN will be a far far better place.

Elfie? Et tu, immunolove?

There's an efle in reflect. And deflect. 😛

 

[ImmunoLove]

Elfie? Et tu, immunolove?

🤣🤣🤣

 

[ZedsDed]

I was joking too (sort of), kind of like a "haha, yeah...so...let's say we stop with this discussion before heads explode, eh?". I think elfie knows I approve of his smarts.

EDIT: On the other hand, you're right, the dilemma has been resolved more or less, and why not continue discussing Kant?

Honestly, haven't had my morning cup of Joe yet, so my tolerance/care level is a little low.

Great, now I've joined the masses of peeps who can't detect online sarcasm😛

 

[ImmunoLove]

Honestly, derailing is bad yes, but if all flame threads (DO/URM/Carib/Top 20/prestige/politics) are derailed into philosophical discussions, SDN will be a far far better place.



There's an efle in reflect.

good point. I think you guys are awesome. I avoid those other threads (but wait, why flame on DO? DO is awesome...Actually no don't answer that...don't want to derail in that direction)

 

[ImmunoLove]

Great, now I've joined the masses of peeps who can't detect online sarcasm😛

It's ok, happens to all of us eventually. Here Here Zed!

 

[Lucca]

Hm, that might be the dumbest thing you've said, smart sir. On that note, let's drop Phil 101 and stick to the purpose of the thread. It's interesting and all, but it's out of place, especially for those who might need to go through all this to get an answer to their own dilemmas. Sorry to be a mama bear, but "knock it off"! 🙂

I'll just PM @efle later. But for now it's game day so yah.

But lol I honestly didn't know what this thread was about. I was just reading Efle's posts, sry for derailing.

 

[Catman21]

what are you guys talking about

they are stroking the old e peen

 

[efle]

they are stroking the old e peen

 

[SoppyElk]

Haha my first thread. Welcome to SDN. This is going to be a lot of fun!

 

[Planes2Doc]

Well I meant exaggeration in general, wasn't specifically trying to defend the OP. What most people probably do is a similar extreme of exaggeration but with entries and verifiers that won't be able to prove them wrong.

I think you're right that fear keeps people honest. But fear of being the OP's position is different from an internal belief that any amount of dishonesty is wrong even if it would help you get into medical school. His mistake was stupidly exaggerating hours in a situation where he will be caught if anyone looks into it. I think a lot of people are exaggerating but doing a better job or just not getting caught. Even people who are more honest than average when put into an insanely competitive situation like this will be pushed to lie. It's not a good thing, but I don't think for a second that he is the exception.

This is a terrific point! Like you said before, applicants that blatantly lie about activities are in the minority. The consequences of getting caught is absolutely huge. On the other hand, applicant still find ways to exaggerate the hours and still keep them verifiable.

First, let's look at the person who "innocently" exaggerates hours. For example, you can someone with 276 hours, and rounds up to 300. This probably isn't a "lie" according to a bunch of posters here, and is deemed acceptable. So, what do those 24 hours, or 6 shifts signify? For a pre-med with a typical "crappy" hospital volunteering gig, those "guesstimated" hours are torture. It's a slap in the face to an applicant that actually did those hours and gave the exact amount. This is of course assuming the applicant is doing the whole dog and pony show for medical school admissions. Don't forget that volunteering is supposed to be something people do because they enjoy it, and therefore there shouldn't be a reason to embellish hours in any way whatsoever.

The bigger problem is people that are gaming the system that are still getting verifiable hours. For instance, the more adventurous ones will sign in and ditch the shift. If the ADCOM attempts to verify, the hours will come back as legitimate. Also, my ex-girlfriend used to be an office manager in a nursing home. Her younger cousin amd her friends had mandatory community service hours to do for high school graduation. So she ended up signing off on them and they never volunteered at all! While this isn't common, I'm sure this occurs among pre-meds that somehow know a volunteer coordinator or other employee that can vouch for them. Then of course, you have people sitting on their phones or stufying and doing a half ass job. As long as they still do what is asked, it's not really unethical.

As for the latter, a lack of oversight allows people to put in as little or as much effort as they want, usually with the same end result. Now id hours were all verified for all applicants, or more random checks were done, you would suddenly see the hours drop like a rock. You will see way kore applicants closer to the 100 hour range of there were oversight, and they couldn't embellish hours or spend them doing nothing.

 

[Gandyy]

I'm a non-trad as well, and I'll have the same problem. My plan is to estimate as well as I can, and then get in touch with my contact at the organization to make sure we're on the same page. Maybe just a short email saying "I will be required to list the number of hours that I volunteered for X organization on my med school application. I estimate that I worked 300 hours. Does that sound right to you? If so, could you confirm via email and use this figure in any reference letters?" The response that email could presumably be used as support if anyone questioned anything.

Seems to me that a good faith estimate with confirmation from the organization should be sufficient. There's a big difference between a) outright lying about your hours (like the OP), and b) simply not having accurate records of activities that you participated in long before you were considering applying for med school, but doing the best you can to get the number right.

Yea I am a non-trad as well so I had to best estimate as I could for a few of my activities.

Also I had no way of getting contacts for a few of my activities either so I followed these instructions.

https://www.aamc.org/students/apply...anlistasacontactforanactivity-experience.html

 

[jaxon]

Why Kant was a loser

Perhaps, but at the very least he was a loser before his time.

 

[Free411]

Provided nothing specific... just stuff anyone could find by google searching the place. Didn't provide director's name or #.

Dude this is your problem. There is no way admissions at any school has the time to call and verify every single activity on your application. But it doesn't help either when you list an activity with no contact information. That probably started as a yellow flag and taking more time to think about it probably turned the situation into a red flag. Your only giving us so much information, but who knows, you probably had other activities listed within that same time period and if you were going to school too the whole situation might have seemed way too implausible. That may have led them to call you on your hours. I'm obviously just speculating, but 250 hours over 6 months is not too crazy if you can verify it and you were passionate about what you were doing.

 

[Gandyy]

Dude this is your problem. There is no way admissions at any school has the time to call and verify every single activity on your application. But it doesn't help either when you list an activity with no contact information. That probably started as a yellow flag and taking more time to think about it probably turned the situation into a red flag. Your only giving us so much information, but who knows, you probably had other activities listed within that same time period and if you were going to school too the whole situation might have seemed way too implausible. That may have led them to call you on your hours. I'm obviously just speculating, but 250 hours over 6 months is not too crazy if you can verify it and you were passionate about what you were doing.

https://www.aamc.org/students/apply...anlistasacontactforanactivity-experience.html

You can list activities that are not verifiable as long as you have some reason, (hopefully a good one). If you have a volunteer experience from 8 years ago..... its not unreasonable for you to not have a contact. It depends on the situation, and the applicant.

What is messed up here is that OP literally knowingly added many hours to this activity.

250 Hours in 6 Months needs to come with some context as you say. 250 Hours in 6 Months if you are doing NOTHING ELSE, is not really that crazy.

250 Hours in 6 Months with classes, and the normal pre-med EC workload is pretty outrageous.

 

[Free411]

https://www.aamc.org/students/apply...anlistasacontactforanactivity-experience.html

You can list activities that are not verifiable as long as you have some reason, (hopefully a good one). If you have a volunteer experience from 8 years ago..... its not unreasonable for you to not have a contact. It depends on the situation, and the applicant.

What is messed up here is that OP literally knowingly added many hours to this activity.

250 Hours in 6 Months needs to come with some context as you say. 250 Hours in 6 Months if you are doing NOTHING ELSE, is not really that crazy.

250 Hours in 6 Months with classes, and the normal pre-med EC workload is pretty outrageous.

Exactly.

That's probably what caught him. No offense, but this kid's overall discourse and mindset seems fairly sketchy, so that leads me to think he made some other blunders that he is not telling us.

And honestly, I'm not entirely sure why he even thought he needed to go from 100 to 250 hours.

 

[Free411]

This whole story is so weird. There had to be something else to the situation.

 

[Doug Underhill]

First, let's look at the person who "innocently" exaggerates hours. For example, you can someone with 276 hours, and rounds up to 300. This probably isn't a "lie" according to a bunch of posters here, and is deemed acceptable. So, what do those 24 hours, or 6 shifts signify? For a pre-med with a typical "crappy" hospital volunteering gig, those "guesstimated" hours are torture. It's a slap in the face to an applicant that actually did those hours and gave the exact amount.

Are you sure you should be doing medicine if you find your volunteering gig "torture"? I like mine, even if it is kind of slow at times. Like, I understand that it's not the coolest thing you could be doing, but it shouldn't be torture.

 

[Gandyy]

Are you sure you should be doing medicine if you find your volunteering gig "torture"? I like mine, even if it is kind of slow at times. Like, I understand that it's not the coolest thing you could be doing, but it shouldn't be torture.

Torture is probably an exaggeration yes, but doing secretary work as a volunteer is pretty damn bad.

 

[Doug Underhill]

Personally, I round every shift to 5 hours when counting, because that's how much time I plan for it to take. Sometimes, it's 4 hours, sometimes it's five and a half.

 

[Stagg737]

Are you sure you should be doing medicine if you find your volunteering gig "torture"? I like mine, even if it is kind of slow at times. Like, I understand that it's not the coolest thing you could be doing, but it shouldn't be torture.

I think it depends on the position. I had to volunteer in a particular department in a hospital for a class, and they legitimately would not let me help with anything. They wouldn't even let me deliver samples to other departments or talk to the patients (they were mostly asleep anyway, but it was still annoying). I ended up studying the majority of time and got almost nothing out of it other than asking about a few things with the patient care procedures when the nurses had slow days. If it wasn't required, I would have quit after the second day and tried to find something else. For people in smaller towns though, clinical volunteering could potentially be awful, so I'd understand why it could potentially be really bad.

 

[Doug Underhill]

I'm in the inner city and it's great. You have a lot more opportunity for patient contact at free clinics, I think.

 

[7331poas]

Why would you people want patient contact?

That would be my dream to be able to get volunteering hours and study while doing it.

 

[el_duderino]

Why would you people want patient contact?

If you don't enjoy patient contact, you are thinking about the wrong profession. Go do something other than medicine.

 

[Spector1]

If you don't enjoy patient contact, you are thinking about the wrong profession. Go do something other than medicine.

there's always pathology :O

 

[caffeinemia]

Might they report this to AMCAS? I don't know. Fact is, you attested to the veracity of everything on the application and you admit that what you listed was a falsehood. That is unacceptable. If they reject you for falsifying your application, they might be obligated to report this to AMCAS. If you withdraw, they might not have the standing to report to AMCAS as you are no longer an applicant to their school. I really don't know how this works at that level between the Dean of Admissions and AMCAS .

Honestly, the fact that there needs to be a protocol for this is a little sad and distressing. Our profession is headed in the wrong direction if we're even considering providing advice on how to gain admission to those who do not even have that basic moral compass. Sorry to be a hard-ass, but really? You're giving him/her advice on how to side step the system? This should be abandoned to the wolves...

 

[Planes2Doc]

Are you sure you should be doing medicine if you find your volunteering gig "torture"? I like mine, even if it is kind of slow at times. Like, I understand that it's not the coolest thing you could be doing, but it shouldn't be torture.

I spent 95% of my time doing bitch work, which involved cleaning beds, cleaning other stuff, running errands, making kits, and other pointless things. There was little patient interaction. The patient interaction I had was great, but unfortunately the lack of it didn't help boost this experience.

I hate it when people say "if you don't volunteer, you shouldn't be a doctor." What does providing free labor to a hospital show? Aside from pre-meds, I have never seen other college students devote so much time to rack up volunteer hours. Does that make them bad people?

With so many eager pre-meds looking to volunteer and do virtually anything, it's no surprise that these hospitals take advantage of them and give them bitch work to do. Also, since I was in the suburbs and didnt have too many hospitals to choose from, it wasn't so easy to just pick a new place like everyone says to do.

 

[el_duderino]

I spent 95% of my time doing bitch work, which involved cleaning beds, cleaning other stuff, running errands, making kits, and other pointless things. There was little patient interaction. The patient interaction I had was great, but unfortunately the lack of it didn't help boost this experience.

I hate it when people say "if you don't volunteer, you shouldn't be a doctor." What does providing free labor to a hospital show? Aside from pre-meds, I have never seen other college students devote so much time to rack up volunteer hours. Does that make them bad people?

With so many eager pre-meds looking to volunteer and do virtually anything, it's no surprise that these hospitals take advantage of them and give them bitch work to do. Also, since I was in the suburbs and didnt have too many hospitals to choose from, it wasn't so easy to just pick a new place like everyone says to do.

I don't think you need to volunteer at a hospital, but you do need to dedicate time to something worthwhile without compensation. It shows that there's something you care about, and that you are willing to put in work.

 

[Doug Underhill]

With so many eager pre-meds looking to volunteer and do virtually anything, it's no surprise that these hospitals take advantage of them and give them bitch work to do. Also, since I was in the suburbs and didnt have too many hospitals to choose from, it wasn't so easy to just pick a new place like everyone says to do.

Try free clinics, hospices, and other organizations you may have overlooked. My research job is at a large hospital (in a non-clinical capacity) and the volunteer opportunities are limited compared to our smaller clinics.

 

[ChrisMack390]

I spent 95% of my time doing bitch work, which involved cleaning beds, cleaning other stuff, running errands, making kits, and other pointless things. There was little patient interaction. The patient interaction I had was great, but unfortunately the lack of it didn't help boost this experience.

I hate it when people say "if you don't volunteer, you shouldn't be a doctor." What does providing free labor to a hospital show? Aside from pre-meds, I have never seen other college students devote so much time to rack up volunteer hours. Does that make them bad people?

With so many eager pre-meds looking to volunteer and do virtually anything, it's no surprise that these hospitals take advantage of them and give them bitch work to do. Also, since I was in the suburbs and didnt have too many hospitals to choose from, it wasn't so easy to just pick a new place like everyone says to do.

It shows that you aren't entitled and don't think you are above the other hospital staff.

 

[caffeinemia]

I spent 95% of my time doing bitch work, which involved cleaning beds, cleaning other stuff, running errands, making kits, and other pointless things. There was little patient interaction. The patient interaction I had was great, but unfortunately the lack of it didn't help boost this experience.

I hate it when people say "if you don't volunteer, you shouldn't be a doctor." What does providing free labor to a hospital show? Aside from pre-meds, I have never seen other college students devote so much time to rack up volunteer hours. Does that make them bad people?

With so many eager pre-meds looking to volunteer and do virtually anything, it's no surprise that these hospitals take advantage of them and give them bitch work to do. Also, since I was in the suburbs and didnt have too many hospitals to choose from, it wasn't so easy to just pick a new place like everyone says to do.

Your comment shows that you know really know nothing about doctoring yet. It's gonna be a interesting when you reach intern-year of residency, if you do. #youdontjackaboutbitchworkyet.

 

[LizzyM]

Your comment shows that you know really know nothing about doctoring yet. It's gonna be a interesting when you reach intern-year of residency, if you do. #youdontjackaboutbitchworkyet.

I've wondered about that... I would think that even M3 year is full of "you are my bitch" assignments from the house staff.

 

[Spirit of the Student Doc]

There is a large difference between an overly inflated number of hours from a young undergraduate doing a many hours in a short time than in a older nontraditional student estimating hours for a long-committed activity spread over several years. As older and presumably more mature applicants, don't lose your judgement and confidence in the midst of easily panicked and neurotic herd of premeds on SDN

 

[candbgirl]

So I wonder what happened with OP and his problem.

 

[7331poas]

I spent 95% of my time doing bitch work, which involved cleaning beds, cleaning other stuff, running errands, making kits, and other pointless things. There was little patient interaction. The patient interaction I had was great, but unfortunately the lack of it didn't help boost this experience.

I hate it when people say "if you don't volunteer, you shouldn't be a doctor." What does providing free labor to a hospital show? Aside from pre-meds, I have never seen other college students devote so much time to rack up volunteer hours. Does that make them bad people?

With so many eager pre-meds looking to volunteer and do virtually anything, it's no surprise that these hospitals take advantage of them and give them bitch work to do. Also, since I was in the suburbs and didnt have too many hospitals to choose from, it wasn't so easy to just pick a new place like everyone says to do.

How is it that it seems like every-time I see you posting, its bitching about ECs and how miserable you are.

We get it.

 

[jaxon]

I spent 95% of my time doing bitch work, which involved cleaning beds, cleaning other stuff, running errands, making kits, and other pointless things. There was little patient interaction. The patient interaction I had was great, but unfortunately the lack of it didn't help boost this experience.

I hate it when people say "if you don't volunteer, you shouldn't be a doctor." What does providing free labor to a hospital show? Aside from pre-meds, I have never seen other college students devote so much time to rack up volunteer hours. Does that make them bad people?

With so many eager pre-meds looking to volunteer and do virtually anything, it's no surprise that these hospitals take advantage of them and give them bitch work to do. Also, since I was in the suburbs and didnt have too many hospitals to choose from, it wasn't so easy to just pick a new place like everyone says to do.

None of the things you listed here is "bitch work." It might be manual labor, simple housekeeping, etc., but you're helping out a facility that saves lives and heals people. No matter how insignificant or annoying it might seem to you, what you did was still important.

 

[Psai]

How is it that it seems like every-time I see you posting, its bitching about ECs and how miserable you are.

We get it.

Hospital volunteering is a miserable waste of time
The point is to learn what doctors do and how the hospital works. You don't get anything out of doing housekeeping. That should be done by paid staff

 

[Goro]

Shadowing tells you what doctors do.

Clinical volunteering is to show us that you really want to be around all those sick people and that you know what you're getting into.

Not all of this activity needs to be done in a hospital.

Hospital volunteering is a miserable waste of time
The point is to learn what doctors do and how the hospital works. You don't get anything out of doing housekeeping. That should be done by paid staff

 

[Gandyy]

None of the things you listed here is "bitch work." It might be manual labor, simple housekeeping, etc., but you're helping out a facility that saves lives and heals people. No matter how insignificant or annoying it might seem to you, what you did was still important.

The level of unrealistic political correctness in this post... The whole point of doing pre-med volunteering is to LEARN something.

Yes, those manual labor tasks and housekeeping tasks are important so that our hospitals are clean. But thats not the kind of stuff pre-med volunteering should really amount to. Patient Contact is key

 

[el_duderino]

Instead of trying to check the boxes and play a game, you could actually try being someone interesting, doing worthwhile things that take effort and selflessness, and getting actual experience with the profession you want to dedicate your life to.

Jesus. Some people seem to feel that med school is their right for being so darn smart and they resent having to pretend like a good person who knows what they're getting into.

 

[Gandyy]

Instead of trying to check the boxes and play a game, you could actually try being someone interesting, doing worthwhile things that take effort and selflessness, and getting actual experience with the profession you want to dedicate your life to.

Jesus. Some people seem to feel that med school is their right for being so darn smart and they resent having to pretend like a good person who knows what they're getting into.

I dont really think that many people actually HATE volunteering for a handful of hours like you are describing.

 

[IlDestriero]

My volunteer work was nearly all related to helping the poor and homeless. I organized a fund raiser for a food bank and volunteered hundreds of hours there. I may have neglected to mention that most of the hours were part of required community service for the nearly constant trouble that my hell raising fraternity got into, but that's water under the bridge now. I did some limited ED volunteering as well to check that box and get some "clinical" time.
I'll say one thing for the food bank, they were all good people there and the disadvantaged recipients were also very appreciative, which was pretty much exactly the opposite of my ED time, though I met a couple billionaires there which was interesting. Often one thing the food banks, etc. need is real leadership and organization skills. A lot of the regulars there have huge hearts, but need direction. That's a place where a motivated and committed college student can really help, and gain useful and productive EC time. Instead of finding ways to hide in forgotten storage rooms to study or trick the system into giving you extra hours when you were really in the Bahamas or out playing drinking games, man up and do something meaningful and useful in your own community. Now I have trouble giving these places time, it's too limited and valuable, so I give them money instead, but I still do Guest Chef night at one place.