Illegal interview question?

[Ad2b]

No one, that I can see, EVER said or stated or implied the females should remain submissive or that we should cow-tow to our male supervisors and/or peers.

I applaud your willingness to apologize to Gastrapathy. You still miss a huge point.

YOU made a molehill out of microscopic dust.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[jl lin]

that happens?!?!?!

or worse...

 

[twistedroses]

No one, that I can see, EVER said or stated or implied the females should remain submissive or that we should cow-tow to our male supervisors and/or peers.

I applaud your willingness to apologize to Gastrapathy. You still miss a huge point.

YOU made a molehill out of microscopic dust.

Essentially what I got out of it is that I am better off accepting such remarks in the office place as a given, that doing otherwise would accomplish nothing and become a problem... This is what I consider as submission. If you think otherwise, than it is just a difference in opinions and we can just agree to disagree.

 

[jl lin]

Yea, regardless, those are questions you steer clear of asking on interviews. There are thousands of better, more relevant questions. So why go there in the first place?

Having said that, you have to be ready for people that take such dumb approaches to interviewing. B/c there are just people that don't get it. Whatever. Yes you have to finesse the situation back if you are put in that position. You shouldn't have to, but Ah, the games.

Senseless to me to focus on anything other than the role as a medical student and becoming a physician, and any relevant work, research, or education that will or has influenced you in the pursuit of medicine. All the other stuff is unnecessary.

 

[ZedsDed]

Essentially what I got out of it is that I am better off accepting such remarks in the office place as a given, that doing otherwise would accomplish nothing and become a problem... This is what I consider as submission. If you think otherwise, than it is just a difference in opinions and we can just agree to disagree.

If you're interviewer was a woman, then it would be extremely bizarre of her to hold the bigoted views that some are ascribing to her. The more likely and reasonable assumption would be what @Glazedonutlove said.

 

[Ad2b]

Essentially what I got out of it is that I am better off accepting such remarks in the office place as a given, that doing otherwise would accomplish nothing and become a problem.

Again, missing the point. There was NO malintent by the interviewer. None. There was nothing to "accept." There was nothing to be submissive to. She was not asking you questions to be condescending, she was not asking you questions to put you in your place, she was simply asking you a question.

That you want to report her? Honestly? As a woman *I* am ashamed for my gender. All that does is perpetuate the stereotype that women are looking for a fight at the simplest things and that men need to be very careful around us... and apparently, now women do as well.

Again: did she ask you out on a date? did she fondle you? did she ... no. She asked you a question. That is not illegal and does not violate the laws of EEOC as she is not making a decision based upon your gender.

 

[Stagg737]

This may not be catered to medical interviews, but here's a list of "illegal" interview questions. There are some missing and others on this list may not be illegal in a med interview (ie. what clubs/organizations are you a part of), but it's a decent jumping off point:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/careers/resources/interviewillegal.htm

Eh, everyone is aghast that she took a shot at an attending, but this is the internet and she was clearly just offended and responded with hostility to someone she probably thought was just a random poster.

I'm with the OP on this one, a woman should not have to answer the questions @Gastrapathy brought up regardless of whether they reflect a reality of the job. This implies that a man is applying to be a doctor while a woman is applying to be a female doctor, and a homosexual man is applying to be a gay doctor. If a physician (or anyone else) condescendingly assumes a female med student is a nurse, that is THEIR fault, not the woman's.
Similarly, you can't weed out gay applicants by asking if they would respond with hostility to homophobic comments in the workplace. It doesn't matter if these comments will occur or not, the point is that it is the hospital's responsibility to do everything they can to stop this from occurring, and trying to prevent this from occurring by accepting people who can handle abuse is just wrong. By asking these questions you're essentially saying, "Well we KNOW coworkers will have prejudices against people from your group, so we're only going accept the ones who won't get all pissy about it". The onus to prevent this has to be on the hospital, not the applicant.

IMO, the questions @Gastrapathy brought up were simply more specific versions of the question "How would you respond to adversity". While there's no need to say one would simply remain complacent if such events were ongoing, it is certainly useful in gauging the professionalism of the interviewee. Suggesting that complacency or aggression are the only two ways to handle an inappropriate situation shows neither professionalism or decent conflict resolution skills on the interviewee's part.

The question that the interviewer asked was not, to the best of my knowledge, one with well intentions. She did not ask whether I would be prepared facing future job discrimination, but rather followed up with how I could see myself handling the job of a doctor with my other "responsibilities as a woman". Nevertheless, I answered both questions respectfully.

However, I stand firm on my belief that attitudes encouraging female submission and complacency are misguided and should not be reinforced in the field. The fact that this person is an attending physician or not has no bearing on my attitude towards the matter (in fact it frightens me more because of the degree of influence and power he has on others). However I have come to realize that I cannot change the opinions of others. This is something that I shall simply attempt to mitigate myself as a physician.

It's difficult to gauge whether this question is inappropriate without the proper context and tone. However, the 'responsibilities as a woman' sounds very 1950's, so I understand why you would consider that inappropriate. I'd also say that the submission and complacency is less prevalent as a female thing and more commonly a 'level thing'. As a med student or intern, it's typically not your place to question the orders of an attending unless you're trying to understand the case. Unless they're being outright sexist or bigoted, questioning their behavior/decisions will often get you nowhere. The higher up the ladder you climb, the more your opinion counts for something. This is true for both men and women. I'm not saying to accept complacency, especially if a behavior in question is both ongoing and sexist. As others have stated, it's important to remain professional and pick battles which are both relevant and can yield a positive outcome lest you want your opinion to not be taken seriously.

 

[twistedroses]

Again, missing the point. There was NO malintent by the interviewer. None. There was nothing to "accept." There was nothing to be submissive to. She was not asking you questions to be condescending, she was not asking you questions to put you in your place, she was simply asking you a question.

That you want to report her? Honestly? As a woman *I* am ashamed for my gender. All that does is perpetuate the stereotype that women are looking for a fight at the simplest things and that men need to be very careful around us... and apparently, now women do as well.

Again: did she ask you out on a date? did she fondle you? did she ... no. She asked you a question. That is not illegal and does not violate the laws of EEOC as she is not making a decision based upon your gender.

Instead of questioning whether or not I'm understanding the point, I think that you need to go back and try to understand what I have said in the two previous posts. My comments was directed towards Gastrapathy, not the interviewer. I never once said that the interviewer was asking me to be submissive and I even clarified myself that illegal was an inappropriate term. I apologize if what I have said has infuriated you and left you ashamed of your own gender, but like I said, we can just agree to disagree. I came here to clarify points, but I honestly see nothing to be gained out of arguing on the internet. While this has been interesting, I shall return to real life now. Thanks for all of your advice.

 

[Ad2b]

So illegal was wrong word after a lengthy night working the ER. Got it.

LOL @ your comment about me being ashamed over one post of yours. Eh no. I would be if you actually followed through and reported her and MANY others followed your path. I happen to like be female and ALL the many GREAT things I can do BECAUSE I am a female. No one talks about that.

Three people interviewed: two guys, one woman who is blond, an athlete, polished ... who do you think got the job? You can either think the world is out to get you or that someone is inferring something that isn't there, or you can embrace whatever gender you are and learn to see the world as a glass half-full.

Last, as I too have things to do (MCAT thingyjigger), you don't get it. At all. You came her to vent about an interview question, asked if you should report her, got feedback that you're out of your blooming mind (to be blunt), and given evidence on why what you are doing is wrong.

and you're miffed. okay. Good luck to you in your other interviews. I *hope* you actually learned something from all of this as many tried to help you.

 

[Axes]

Again, missing the point. There was NO malintent by the interviewer. None. There was nothing to "accept." There was nothing to be submissive to. She was not asking you questions to be condescending, she was not asking you questions to put you in your place, she was simply asking you a question.

That you want to report her? Honestly? As a woman *I* am ashamed for my gender. All that does is perpetuate the stereotype that women are looking for a fight at the simplest things and that men need to be very careful around us... and apparently, now women do as well.

Again: did she ask you out on a date? did she fondle you? did she ... no. She asked you a question. That is not illegal and does not violate the laws of EEOC as she is not making a decision based upon your gender.

The interviewer probably meant no harm, but the socialized sexism that causes interviewers to ask such questions, and women to have to deal with misogyny in the workplace, is harmful. What if the women at the seneca falls convention decided to "see the glass half full" and not make a molehill out of microscopic dust? There's been significant progress since then, but not enough. I'm not trying to tell you how you should deal with the sexism you experience, it's not my place. But people can confront oppressive social structures without thinking the world is out to get them. And the interviewer is making a decision based on gender, because a male could not be asked this question, so if the answer at all affects the decision, then it is by definition a gendered decision.

 

[ZedsDed]

The interviewer probably meant no harm, but the socialized sexism that causes interviewers to ask such questions, and women to have to deal with misogyny in the workplace, is harmful. What if the women at the seneca falls convention decided to "see the glass half full" and not make a molehill out of microscopic dust? There's been significant progress since then, but not enough. I'm not trying to tell you how you should deal with the sexism you experience, it's not my place. But people can confront oppressive social structures without thinking the world is out to get them. And the interviewer is making a decision based on gender, because a male could not be asked this question, so if the answer at all affects the decision, then it is by definition a gendered decision.

I still fail to see how asking someone how they will deal with sexism in the workplace perpetuates said sexism.

 

[efle]

Analogy to Seneca falls, really?

 

[Winged Scapula]

It must be exhausting to be offended by every little thing.

 

[bc65]

These kinds of questions are so unnecessary. There are tons of better questions that would tell so much more about the person and that don't expose the school to EEOC violation charges.

Nice post, and you make some excellent points. However, here's the reality: While many schools will give potential interviewers some brief interview training and some do and don't guidelines for questions, in practice your interviewer is a staff member or a community volunteer who is doing interviews out of the goodness of their heart or because they were dragged out of their busy day at the last minute to fill in. From my point of view, and I suspect from the point of view of most schools and businesses, if you can't have a pleasant conversation with an interviewer, who is presumable well-intentioned and vetted by the school, without having to file a complaint about it, then you're probably not going to be able to walk into an exam room and relate well to patients either. Sure, there are certainly questions that cross the line, but I have yet to see one that really irks me, despite having read many of these "is this question legal" posts.

So sure, if a question is blatantly sexist or racist ( women don't belong in medicine; so you really think that your ethnic group is capable of doing the work) then complain. But if the question might be innocent, then take it that way. If you were really offended, but you're not sure if the question crosses the line, then wait until after your decision was made, or write in anonymously to the admissions office, indicate the question you were asked, and state that you were offended. I can assure you that either way, the school doesn't want to alienate potential students.

As a physician, you will have to walk into a room, greet a patient, and establish a relationship within a minute or so, because a minute later you might be injecting them, cutting them, undressing them, or groping up inside them. Some of these patients might be drunk, high, rude, racist, sexist, or criminals, but you'll still have to take care of them. So, if a well meaning interview question throws you into a tizzy, some of us might conclude that you may not have the temperament to be a physician.

 

[ZedsDed]

It must be exhausting to be offended by every little thing.

My response when the mods start commenting --->

 

[DokterMom]

There's a fabulous article in this month's Atlantic about 'taking offense' and the gyrations we are increasingly taking to avoid giving offense. That part was interesting, but in my opinion, the best part of the article was actually near the end (warning: long read) where the author tied that sensitivity to offense to emotional health and well-being. It's worth a read.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

 

[efle]

It must be exhausting to be offended by every little thing.

Pretty rich coming from the guy who slaps probations and bans on anything even borderline offensive/rude

 

[ZedsDed]

Pretty rich coming from the guy who slaps probations and bans on anything even borderline offensive/rude

He's a she. Don't you think it might be time to move on man?

 

[Glazedonutlove]

Pretty rich coming from the guy who slaps probations and bans on anything even borderline offensive/rude

ok what was this infamous comment

 

[efle]

He's a she. Don't you think it might be time to move on man?

never

ok what was this infamous comment

it doesn't refer to just me or to one instance

 

[Ad2b]

My response when the mods start commenting --->

I'm reporting you to the admins because of said comment at my MCAT prep table in the studious library of a medical school caused disruption in the epithelial lining of my nasal cavity as a caffeinated aspartame innolated carbonated beverage was expeditiously expelled to the anterior facial cavity.

 

[carpediem22]

As a female, this whole thread just makes me depressed. I'm not even going to comment on most of this because so much of it is so blatantly sexist, and it's sad that so many of you have taken to attacking @twistedroses. Want an example of internet bullying? Congrats, this thread meets the qualifications perfectly.

However, I will say that it's BS to think that the interviewer couldn't have held sexist or bigoted views just because she was a woman. I have known many, many women who hold astonishingly conservative and/or backwards view about women. The fact that so many women support Trump only reaffirms this.

There is sexism in medicine, and THIS is the problem -- not how women react to it. At my home institution, a senior-level faculty member and renowned physician/researcher just lost his job this year over sexual harassment charges from multiple women. The year before, a department chief lost his job for similar charges. Should those women have simply thought to themselves, "Oh, this is how it is, I better just learn how to accept it?" I'm not implying OP's situation is anything remotely close to sexual harassment, but to be quite honest the responses on this thread have me alarmed.

Rather than rejecting and belittling the reactions of women to sexist remarks and implying that women should just "deal with it" to survive in medicine, why are we not instead questioning why it is still so common for coffee cart boys to think women are nurses, or for male doctors to call their female colleagues "hun," or for female residents to be held to a higher standard than males? I reject the fact that this is just "the way it is" and that I should "deal with this" as a physician. That doesn't mean that I will be thrown into a "tizzy" if I walk into a room and a patient hurls sexist slurs or worse at me. I assure you; I won't be. In fact, I will probably smile and completely ignore it. However, if one of my superiors makes sexist remarks or implies that women are in some way less equipped to practice medicine, you can be sure as hell that I will do everything in my power to report him OR her.

I'm sure I'll get tons of hate posts for writing this; go ahead.

 

[Ad2b]

An innocuous interview question does NOT = harassment on any level.

It's that simple. That she wanted to report it? Makes me nauseous.

 

[carpediem22]

An innocuous interview question does NOT = harassment on any level.

It's that simple. That she wanted to report it? Makes me nauseous.

I didn't say it was. In fact, I explicitly stated that it WASN'T. But I do think the interviewer's questions were inappropriate. OP didn't say that she was going to report it, she posted on here to ask what to do. Why can't everyone have just said KINDLY, "Probably not worth reporting" rather than making condescending comments, suggesting she is unfit to practice medicine, and being flat out rude? Come on people. You don't even know her. Stop cyberbullying.

 

[bc65]

The question that the interviewer asked was not, to the best of my knowledge, one with well intentions. She did not ask whether I would be prepared facing future job discrimination, but rather followed up with how I could see myself handling the job of a doctor with my other "responsibilities as a woman". Nevertheless, I answered both questions respectfully.

As I suspected, and as I wrote in my first post above, the "offending" question implied issues around childcare. If you saw that as a sexist comment, I believe that you are mistaken. It is a biological fact that women, and not men, are the ones who get pregnant. So here are some facts for you: Female physicians have lower fertility rates than women in the general population, and lower rates than their male colleagues. This is not likely to be by choice. It is a fact that my surgical colleagues have difficulty in doing surgery when they are 8 months pregnant and can't reach the patient because their abdomens won't let them get close enough to the OR table. No, I'm not suggesting that they shouldn't be surgeons, just that it's something you should be aware of if you plan on both being a surgeon and getting pregnant. It is a fact that it will be difficult to be pregnant and /or have a child in the first two years of medical school, in the last two years of medical school, during internship, during residency, during fellowship, and in the early years of practice, at which time your fertility will have dropped percipitously. So, you should think about this before you go to medical school and before you choose a specialty. If you're lucky, someone will point all this out to you before you turn 43 and it's too late. All of this is probably what your interviewer was alluding to. You should be grateful that a stranger was considerate enough to want to bring this to your attention. Despite having gone to med school, too many physicians simply aren't aware of how fertility and childcare issues will affect their lives. Now, since I am male, there's no way that I would bring this issue up in an interview, because of my fear of the question being misconstrued, but for you to be offended by that particular question coming from a woman, just shows you to be overly sensitive. That interviewer was probably trying to be helpful.

 

[ZX10R]

Lol what... Apples and oranges. Sounds like someone has a complex and/or a problem with her job?

Every faculty Ph.D at medical schools says stuff like this; it's just a joke. This Ph.D is probably a professor at the school so she is teaching future MDs. For the basic science coarse it's much better to have Ph.Ds teach those classes then MDs because they've spent 7+ years working on that stuff. MDs take over for the clinical stuff and teaching you how to approach patients. When I went on interviews I heard the exact so thing at least 3 times, seriously it's just a joke. Personally I'm glad a group of Ph.Ds taught us biochemistry; they treated like a hardcore ochem class instead of just pathophsiologies and we learned to be better critical thinkers.

 

[ZedsDed]

Why can't everyone have just said KINDLY, "Probably not worth reporting" rather than making condescending comments, suggesting she is unfit to practice medicine, and being flat out rude? Come on people. You don't even know her. Stop cyberbullying.

They did.
OP responded inappropriately to questions the attending posed, hence she then got some ribbing for that. A wider discussion about sexism in medicine was then opened. I don't recall any of the "blatantly sexist" comments you are referring to.

 

[Glazedonutlove]

.

 

[bc65]

There is sexism in medicine, and THIS is the problem -- not how women react to it. At my home institution, a senior-level faculty member and renowned physician/researcher just lost his job this year over sexual harassment charges from multiple women. The year before, a department chief lost his job for similar charges.

See, this is the problem, right here. You are equating instances of sexual harassment, for which physicians were justifiably fired, to an innocuous interview question by a woman. This attempt to equate two very different behaviors hurts women, rather than helps them.

why it is still so common for coffee cart boys to think women are nurses

I'm not sure that's relevant to our discussion, or that I have control over what coffee boys think. And don't you think you should call them "coffee men", or better yet, "coffee servers"?

for male doctors to call their female colleagues "hun,"

Maybe some do. I haven't seen it. But nurses call male doctors "hun" sometimes. If you look for things to be upset about, I'm sure you'll find them.

However, if one of my superiors makes sexist remarks or implies that women are in some way less equipped to practice medicine, you can be sure as hell that I will do everything in my power to report him OR her.

But that's the point. No one did anything of the sort in this instance. But go ahead and report those coffee boys.

 

[carpediem22]

As I suspected, and as I wrote in my first post above, the "offending" question implied issues around childcare. If you saw that as a sexist comment, I believe that you are mistaken. It is a biological fact that women, and not men, are the ones who get pregnant. So here are some facts for you: Female physicians have lower fertility rates than women in the general population, and lower rates than their male colleagues. This is not likely to be by choice. It is a fact that my surgical colleagues have difficulty in doing surgery when they are 8 months pregnant and can't reach the patient because their abdomens won't let them get close enough to the OR table. No, I'm not suggesting that they shouldn't be surgeons, just that it's something you should be aware of if you plan on both being a surgeon and getting pregnant. It is a fact that it will be difficult to be pregnant and /or have a child in the first two years of medical school, in the last two years of medical school, during internship, during residency, during fellowship, and in the early years of practice, at which time your fertility will have dropped percipitously. So, you should think about this before you go to medical school and before you choose a specialty. If you're lucky, someone will point all this out to you before you turn 43 and it's too late. All of this is probably what your interviewer was alluding to. You should be grateful that a stranger was considerate enough to want to bring this to your attention. Despite having gone to med school, too many physicians simply aren't aware of how fertility and childcare issues will affect their lives. Now, since I am male, there's no way that I would bring this issue up in an interview, because of my fear of the question being misconstrued, but for you to be offended by that particular question coming from a woman, just shows you to be overly sensitive, immature, inexperienced, and argumentative. That interviewer was probably trying to be helpful, and you are apparently unaware and unappreciative.

Nobody on here knows what the interviewer's intentions were, we were not there. Don't presume to know and then make personal judgements about the OP.

And contrary to public opinion, my main life goal is not to make babies. If my fertility diminishes as a result of my decision to pursue a career in medicine, I'll adopt.

They did.
OP responded inappropriately to questions the attending posed, hence she then got some ribbing for that. A wider discussion about sexism in medicine was then opened. I don't recall any of the "blatantly sexist" comments you are referring to.

Honestly I think that Gastrapathy's comments were pretty sexist, attending or not.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Pretty rich coming from the guy who slaps probations and bans on anything even borderline offensive/rude

Dude I'm just here to do a job and enforce the rules; look to your left and look to your right. Its your fellow posters who are easily offended, not me.

There's very little IRL that offends me personally.

 

[carpediem22]

See, this is the problem, right here. You are equating instances of sexual harassment, for which physicians were justifiably fired, to an innocuous interview question by a woman. This attempt to equate two very different behaviors hurts women, rather than helps them.



I'm not sure that's relevant to our discussion, or that I have control over what coffee boys think. And don't you think you should call them "coffee men", or better yet, "coffee servers"?

Maybe some do. I haven't seen it. But nurses call male doctors "hun" sometimes. If you look for things to be upset about, I'm sure you'll find them.



But that's the point. No one did anything of the sort in this instance. But go ahead and report those coffee boys.

All of those examples are from Gastrapathy's response. Which is what OP originally became inflamed over.

I was not equating OP's situation to what happened at my institution. I was giving examples of sexism in medicine. Hence the new paragraph.

Honestly my response is not as much directed towards OPs situation and more directed towards the "learn to deal with offensive remarks" tone of the replies on this thread.

And with that, I'm out. Really think this thread needs to get shut down.

 

[ZedsDed]

Nobody on here knows what the interviewer's intentions were, we were not there.

Exactly. Here's what I said earlier about that:

If you're interviewer was a woman, then it would be extremely bizarre of her to hold the bigoted views that some are ascribing to her. The more likely and reasonable assumption would be what @Glazedonutlove said.

And didn't you say you did not think her questions were sexist?

Don't presume to know and then make personal judgements about the OP.

Yet you are comfortable speculating about the malicious intent of an interviewer.

Honestly I think that Gastrapathy's comments were pretty sexist, attending or not.

We will have to respectfully agree to disagree there.

 

[ZedsDed]

Really think this thread needs to get shut down.

One last thing:
I do have to ask why you think this? Because people here disagree with you? No one has crossed a line into unprofessionalism or harassment according to the TOS of SDN.

 

[Lawpy]

Sorry i'm not caught up yet, but did @Goro provide his thoughts in this matter?

 

[ZedsDed]

Sorry i'm not caught up yet, but did @Goro provide his thoughts in this matter?

Nope

 

[Lawpy]

Nope

The suspense is real...

 

[Glazedonutlove]

so much pressure on @Goro

 

[Goro]

OK OP, and you too, carpe, hold very still while I attempt to smack some sense into you. You might feel some pressure during the procedure.

Firstly, Ad2b, Gastrapathy, bc65 and Doktermom has commented expertly and spot on as to why there was nothing wrong not only with the interviewer's questions, but Gastrapathy's as well. You were asked "what would you do in that situation?" You arguments that "a man wouldn't be asked that question' is cow manure. Women, gays, blacks, etc all have to deal with situations in life in our society than men, heterosexuals, white, etc DON'T have to deal with.

I wouldn't have asked the original 1st question in that way, but it's a good question. The interviewer was inexpertly asking "have you sought out a female doctor's point of view about Medicine?" The second question is even better, but it could have been couched as "have you noticed anything different about how make and females approach the practice of Medicine"?

As interviewers, we're not allowed to ask things like "what does your husband think about your plans for a medical career?" because it implies that the candidate is a lesser to her S.O., and either needs his permission, or is a piece of property.

We're NOT allowed to ask "So when are you going to have kids?", because this assumes, as carpe pointed out, that women's function in life is merely to have babies. BUT, it is OK to ask someone on the lines of "Women face issues in any career than men simply don't. How would you advise a new pre-med about this?" because this shows that you have given some thought to a career in medicine and the issues that career women have to face.

I'm appalled that you two are screaming sexism where none exits. You wouldn't know sexism if it punched you in the nose. What I see is the now classic Millennial thin skin on parade here. I have students who are like this and I swear, light passes right through them.

Here are some sexist interview questions for you:
Why are pursuing a career in Medicine when you should be at home taking care of babies?
Are you a poor driver?
You must be poor at math
Why are you entering a career that's traditionally a Man's career?
You should be a nurse, not a doctor.
Wow! What a great figure you have! Nice cans!

It's not sexism to ask you how you would respond to a hypothetic situation.

Here's real sexism in action: In the mid 1960s, after my father died, my mom took over his sales job. She was deliberately paid less in salary. Why? Because she was a woman.

That's sexism. Just because something offends you, or hurts your feelings, doesn't mean it's sexist, or any other ___ist or ___ism. So develop a thicker skin or preceptors, residency directors and attendings will eat you alive.

I was just asked by an interviewer whether I have considered what it would be like to be a physician as a female. The follow up question - have I ever shadowed a female physician before? I thought it was illegal to ask such questions during interview.

I normally wouldn't think too much of it, but the entire interview was unpleasant and it seemed like more of an attack than well intentions.

Would it be appropriate to notify the admissions office? Or should I just let it go?

I was just asked by an interviewer whether I have considered what it would be like to be a physician as a female. The follow up question - have I ever shadowed a female physician before? I thought it was illegal to ask such questions during interview.

I normally wouldn't think too much of it, but the entire interview was unpleasant and it seemed like more of an attack than well intentions.

Would it be appropriate to notify the admissions office? Or should I just let it go?

I didn't say it was. In fact, I explicitly stated that it WASN'T. But I do think the interviewer's questions were inappropriate. OP didn't say that she was going to report it, she posted on here to ask what to do. Why can't everyone have just said KINDLY, "Probably not worth reporting" rather than making condescending comments, suggesting she is unfit to practice medicine, and being flat out rude? Come on people. You don't even know her. Stop cyberbullying.

 

[Lawpy]

OK OP, and you too, carpe, hold very still while I attempt to smack some sense into you. You might feel some pressure during the procedure.

Firstly, Ad2b, Gastrapathy, bc65 and Doktermom has commented expertly and spot on as to why there was nothing wrong not only with the interviewer's questions, but Gastrapathy's as well. You were asked "what would you do in that situation?" You arguments that "a man wouldn't be asked that question' is cow manure. Women, gays, blacks, etc all have to deal with situations in life in our society than men, heterosexuals, white, etc DON'T have to deal with.

I wouldn't have asked the original 1st question in that way, but it's a good question. The interviewer was inexpertly asking "have you sought out a female doctor's point of view about Medicine?" The second question is even better, but it could have been couched as "have you noticed anything different about how make and females approach the practice of Medicine"?

As interviewers, we're not allowed to ask things like "what does your husband think about your plans for a medical career?" because it implies that the candidate is a lesser to her S.O., and either needs his permission, or is a piece of property.

We're NOT allowed to ask "So when are you going to have kids?", because this assumes, as carpe pointed out, that women's function in life is merely to have babies. BUT, it is OK to ask someone on the lines of "Women face issues in any career than men simply don't. How would you advise a new pre-med about this?" because this shows that you have given some thought to a career in medicine and the issues that career women have to face.

I'm appalled that you two are screaming sexism where none exits. You wouldn't know sexism if it punched you in the nose. What I see is the now classic Millennial thin skin on parade here. I have students who are like this and I swear, light passes right through them.

Here are some sexist interview questions for you:
Why are pursuing a career in Medicine when you should be at home taking care of babies?
Are you a poor driver?
You must be poor at math
Why are you entering a career that's traditionally a Man's career?
You should be a nurse, not a doctor.
Wow! What a great figure you have! Nice cans!

It's not sexism to ask you how you would respond to a hypothetic situation.

Here's real sexism in action: In the mid 1960s, after my father died, my mom took over his sales job. She was deliberately paid less in salary. Why? Because she was a woman.

That's sexism. Just because something offends you, or hurts your feelings, doesn't mean it's sexist, or any other ___ist or ___ism. So develop a thicker skin or preceptors, residency directors and attendings will eat you alive.

Moderators, please sticky this.

 

[Axes]

As I suspected, and as I wrote in my first post above, the "offending" question implied issues around childcare. If you saw that as a sexist comment, I believe that you are mistaken. It is a biological fact that women, and not men, are the ones who get pregnant. So here are some facts for you: Female physicians have lower fertility rates than women in the general population, and lower rates than their male colleagues. This is not likely to be by choice. It is a fact that my surgical colleagues have difficulty in doing surgery when they are 8 months pregnant and can't reach the patient because their abdomens won't let them get close enough to the OR table. No, I'm not suggesting that they shouldn't be surgeons, just that it's something you should be aware of if you plan on both being a surgeon and getting pregnant. It is a fact that it will be difficult to be pregnant and /or have a child in the first two years of medical school, in the last two years of medical school, during internship, during residency, during fellowship, and in the early years of practice, at which time your fertility will have dropped percipitously. So, you should think about this before you go to medical school and before you choose a specialty. If you're lucky, someone will point all this out to you before you turn 43 and it's too late. All of this is probably what your interviewer was alluding to. You should be grateful that a stranger was considerate enough to want to bring this to your attention. Despite having gone to med school, too many physicians simply aren't aware of how fertility and childcare issues will affect their lives. Now, since I am male, there's no way that I would bring this issue up in an interview, because of my fear of the question being misconstrued, but for you to be offended by that particular question coming from a woman, just shows you to be overly sensitive. That interviewer was probably trying to be helpful.

The reason this line of questioning is inappropriate is because it assumes that a woman wants to have children and that she has not considered how this will affect her career. In more general terms, it is inappropriate for a professional interview to include questions about the interviewee's personal lifestyle choices; while there may be certain exceptions to this rule, pregnancy planning is not one of them. Also, as males, we are not in a position to tell those who do face sexism what is or isn't a sexist comment.

 

[ZedsDed]

Also, as males, we are not in a position to tell those who do face sexism what is or isn't a sexist comment.

Perspective does matter, but both sexes have the ability to use logic.

 

[NotASerialKiller]

OK OP, and you too, carpe, hold very still while I attempt to smack some sense into you. You might feel some pressure during the procedure.

Firstly, Ad2b, Gastrapathy, bc65 and Doktermom has commented expertly and spot on as to why there was nothing wrong not only with the interviewer's questions, but Gastrapathy's as well. You were asked "what would you do in that situation?" You arguments that "a man wouldn't be asked that question' is cow manure. Women, gays, blacks, etc all have to deal with situations in life in our society than men, heterosexuals, white, etc DON'T have to deal with.

I wouldn't have asked the original 1st question in that way, but it's a good question. The interviewer was inexpertly asking "have you sought out a female doctor's point of view about Medicine?" The second question is even better, but it could have been couched as "have you noticed anything different about how make and females approach the practice of Medicine"?

As interviewers, we're not allowed to ask things like "what does your husband think about your plans for a medical career?" because it implies that the candidate is a lesser to her S.O., and either needs his permission, or is a piece of property.

We're NOT allowed to ask "So when are you going to have kids?", because this assumes, as carpe pointed out, that women's function in life is merely to have babies. BUT, it is OK to ask someone on the lines of "Women face issues in any career than men simply don't. How would you advise a new pre-med about this?" because this shows that you have given some thought to a career in medicine and the issues that career women have to face.

I'm appalled that you two are screaming sexism where none exits. You wouldn't know sexism if it punched you in the nose. What I see is the now classic Millennial thin skin on parade here. I have students who are like this and I swear, light passes right through them.

Here are some sexist interview questions for you:
Why are pursuing a career in Medicine when you should be at home taking care of babies?
Are you a poor driver?
You must be poor at math
Why are you entering a career that's traditionally a Man's career?
You should be a nurse, not a doctor.
Wow! What a great figure you have! Nice cans!

It's not sexism to ask you how you would respond to a hypothetic situation.

Here's real sexism in action: In the mid 1960s, after my father died, my mom took over his sales job. She was deliberately paid less in salary. Why? Because she was a woman.

That's sexism. Just because something offends you, or hurts your feelings, doesn't mean it's sexist, or any other ___ist or ___ism. So develop a thicker skin or preceptors, residency directors and attendings will eat you alive.

Why should female applicants have to seek out female physicians to shadow (as the interviewer's question implies)? The only examples I've seen here are pretty generic sexist comments/situations that are not at all unique to medicine. Am I obligated to seek out a Jewish doctor to shadow regardless of my specialty interests so that an interviewer can be satisfied that I'm prepared if I run into an anti-Semitic patient or coworker?

 

[Axes]

Why are pursuing a career in Medicine when you should be at home taking care of babies?
Are you a poor driver?
You must be poor at math
Why are you entering a career that's traditionally a Man's career?
You should be a nurse, not a doctor.
Wow! What a great figure you have! Nice cans!

Goro, I respect your contribution to this site. That said, back when these examples were commonplace, many people justified them by saying, "relax, real sexism is not letting your wife out of the house," and before that it was, "relax, real sexism is not letting women own property," and so on. Women used to live in a state of coverture, and that was considered fine, because the people of the time had no reformed future to compare to the oppressive status quo. Just because the situation is better, doesn't mean it's ok, and we can only ever see the flaws if we listen to the people who are facing the problem.

*To be clear, I think the interview question was inappropriate but that it would be unwise to report it, and that the attending in this thread's comment was inappropriate.

 

[efle]

Also, as males, we are not in a position to tell those who do face sexism what is or isn't a sexist comment.

This is the most ridiculous thing you've said so far. Can only blacks or homosexuals etc be on the jury for hatecrime trials?

 

[Chelsea FC]

I am normally blind to subtle sexist remarks because as a male I have that luxury and is a personal battle I try to improve upon. So i refrain to comment if OP was right or not for being offended..... But I find it DAM funny how alot of individuals on here rip minorities(especially AA) a new one and say the worst thing about them on our weekly URM threads but when it has to do with something close to home (close to their life) they are reasonable... And me just sitting back like

 

[efle]

Goro, I respect your contribution to this site. That said, back when these examples were commonplace, many people justified them by saying, "relax, real sexism is not letting your wife out of the house," and before that it was, "relax, real sexism is not letting women own property," and so on. Women used to live in a state of coverture, and that was considered fine, because the people of the time had no reformed future to compare to the oppressive status quo. Just because the situation is better, doesn't mean it's ok, and we can only ever see the flaws if we listen to the people who are facing the problem.

*To be clear, I think the interview question was inappropriate but that it would be unwise to report it, and that the attending in this thread's comment was inappropriate.

Not quite, he isn't arguing that sexism is present but insignificant, he's saying it isn't present and his examples are not meant to dwarf a similar case, but to provide contrast against what is dissimilar.

 

[Axes]

Not quite, he isn't arguing that sexism is present but insignificant, he's saying it isn't present and his examples are not meant to dwarf a similar case, but to provide contrast against what is dissimilar.

That's a semantic distinction. Just erase the word "real" from both of my quoted phrases.

 

[bc65]

The reason this line of questioning is inappropriate is because it assumes that a woman wants to have children and that she has not considered how this will affect her career. In more general terms, it is inappropriate for a professional interview to include questions about the interviewee's personal lifestyle choices; while there may be certain exceptions to this rule, pregnancy planning is not one of them.

I agree. That's why I wouldn't personally ask that in an interview, nor should that be asked. But those are real and often urgent issues, and that's why I suspect ( but of course, can't know ) why that interviewer brought it up. There's no reason to suspect malicious intent, and a simple answer such as " yes, I've given those issues a lot of though and I believe that I can handle them" will suffice. If the interviewer persists in going into inappropriate territory, you can then say " I don't think that that's an appropriate topic to discuss in an interview" or, "that's too personal to discuss in an interview".

Also, as males, we are not in a position to tell those who do face sexism what is or isn't a sexist comment.

Sorry, that attitude itself is sexist. Despite being male, I can think and reason. I will refer you to Goro's excellent post above for examples of what is and isn't sexist.

 

[Axes]

This is the most ridiculous thing you've said so far. Can only blacks or homosexuals etc be on the jury for hatecrime trials?

Maybe poor phrasing on my part, but it wasn't an absolute statement. Analogy: if I punch someone, and it hurt them, I am in no position to tell them, "but I didn't punch you that hard." In short, impact matters more than intent, and we should consult the impacted when deciding if something is harmful or not.

As to your latter questions, such policy would probably lower the amount of people that get away with racism and homophobia in this country. To be clear I would not support designed juries.