Illegal question on interview

[MrM45]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I interviewed at my top-choice school a few months ago. The interviewer asked if I plan on having children. I knew it's not allowed but didn't want to make a scene, so I answered truthfully and didnt bring it up to admissions Now, with no decision yet, I'm worried my response influenced the outcome. Is it too late to report this to admissions? Would doing so make a difference in any way?

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I interviewed at my top-choice school a few months ago. The interviewer asked if I plan on having children. I knew it's not allowed but didn't want to make a scene, so I answered truthfully and didnt bring it up to admissions Now, with no decision yet, I'm worried my response influenced the outcome. Is it too late to report this to admissions? Would doing so make a difference in any way?

It's easier to report soon after your interview to make sure your concerns aren't realized. I don't know if you had mentioned you were (getting) married in your interview or other parts of your application. What was the interview day format?

 

[MrM45]

It's easier to report soon after your interview to make sure your concerns aren't realized. I don't know if you had mentioned you were (getting) married in your interview or other parts of your application. What was the interview day format?

It was a traditional interview 1 on 1. I might have mentioned I was married (I dont remember) but the follow up question was "Do you plan on having any kids?"

 

[Med Ed]

"No, they're all gristle."

 

[wysdoc]

I interviewed at my top-choice school a few months ago. The interviewer asked if I plan on having children. I knew it's not allowed but didn't want to make a scene, so I answered truthfully and didnt bring it up to admissions Now, with no decision yet, I'm worried my response influenced the outcome. Is it too late to report this to admissions? Would doing so make a difference in any way?

Not all questions that make you uncomfortable in an interview are worth reporting to administrators, but if it is still on your mind you can let the admins know. It may at the minimum lead to them having a talk with this interviewer about question rules, or leaving him off the roster next year.
How did you react to the question at the time? Just answer it and move on, or something else?

 

[Goro]

Report it, as it's the only way we can get rid of bad interviewers

 

[polymerization]

I don't see any benefit to you by complaining. I don't mean that to say that there is no merit in your grievance, only that complaining puts you at a strategic disadvantage. Remember you are trying to navigate an asymmetric power dynamic in which the institution has all of the power, and you have none. The kind of discretion medical schools have means that they actually don't need a reason to reject you, and if they had one, they are under no obligation to share it with you.

In submitting a complaint, you have to essentially provide details on what the context of the discussion was about, what they asked, how you responded. Ultimately, if it was a single-instance, passerby follow-up question, I can see it just coming across like an oopsie-poopsie-doopsie-whoopsie that will not even make it back to your interviewer at worst, and maybe a slap on the wrist or warning e-mail at best. I promise no alarm bells will blare.

I doubt that particular piece of information would make it onto their evaluation of your interview (in which case the complaint is moot), and if it did, the adcom would be aware that they asked, so complaining does not actually provide the institution new information.

I think it's important that you don't have a decision yet. If you had been rejected, I could see that information being safely disseminated (though, it would have no direct benefit to you at that point, either).

Now, if you're in a batch of As that are waiting in the wings to be released next week, let's say, and you complain several months late about an issue that, from their perspective, was not an issue... well, there's no saying if they would change their decision, but it's an option they have. They might hesitate to reject you after complaining, but they can absolutely punish you by sending you to WL purgatory forever. So, if we're being optimistic about your chances, you're shooting yourself in the foot.

To be clear, they will probably apologize profusely and guarantee you that your application will be processed with the highest integrity. They could even offer you another interview. Considering the oversupply of qualified applicants, it's all lip service... just a CYA move to keep you from escalating further and offering them plausible deniability of your specific claim.

In other words, despite the valid concern, I see dodging inappropriate questions as a primary challenge of the interview. Complaining to an institution in which complaints are immediately diffused and absorbed without consequence is futile. While admissions officers are likely being genuine about wanting to root out these behaviors, actually doing so is harder than the vague aspirations inherent in any selective process.

Take it as a lesson. You did have options: you could have dodged the question, or just straight up lied like suggested earlier. Complaining in writing is like brandishing a knife and these institutions will react defensively, even if it is not immediately apparent to you. Better to trust the process than smothered and told to go gently into that good night.

 

[LizzyM]

I don't see making the admissions office aware that someone asked a specific question that is illegal is a "complaint". I agree with @Goro that it is the only way we will weed out those interviewers who need to be thanked for their service and not asked back next year. These interviewers put the school at risk of a lawsuit and no admissions office /dean's office wants that!

@MrM45 I would suggest that you drop an email to the admissions office. "Thank you for giving me the opportunity to interview on [date]. As time has passed, and I've reflected on the interviews, I wish to bring to your attention that [name] asked me if I planned to have children. I was taken aback by this question which was quite unanticipated. I hope that my response to the question will not be factored into the committee's decision."

Happy to have anyone wordsmith that response and I'd be very eager to see what, if any, response you get from the office.

 

[polymerization]

I don't see making the admissions office aware that someone asked a specific question that is illegal is a "complaint". I agree with @Goro that it is the only way we will weed out those interviewers who need to be thanked for their service and not asked back next year. These interviewers put the school at risk of a lawsuit and no admissions office /dean's office wants that!

@MrM45 I would suggest that you drop an email to the admissions office. "Thank you for giving me the opportunity to interview on [date]. As time has passed, and I've reflected on the interviews, I wish to bring to your attention that [name] asked me if I planned to have children. I was taken aback by this question which was quite unanticipated. I hope that my response to the question will not be factored into the committee's decision."

Happy to have anyone wordsmith that response and I'd be very eager to see what, if any, response you get from the office.

Creating a written record lodging a grievance against a specific faculty member is the definition of a complaint. That you personally would not perceive them to be a "complainer" and all of the stereotypes that may exist therein is a fair statement to make. It is less fair to imply that everyone across the admissions process will perceive it the same way—and the stakes for OP are much higher, and margin for error much smaller. Today's political climate doesn't help.

That you cannot claim what would happen with any degree of certainty is my point. For OP, sending this e-mail will not result in any kind of tangible benefit (though it may prove cathartic for a fraction of a second). They won't get a thorough investigation, or a report on findings. If the information is illegal to obtain, the adcom presumably should have ignored it as a matter of protocol. So, like you said, they may not even receive a response. It will not be longitudinally satisfying because even if internal cogs move, OP is left, again, totally helpless and in the dark.

If OP is rejected or on a perpetual WL from this particular school, they are left unsure if it is because their profile wasn't strong enough, because of their performance on the interview, because of their response to the particular question at hand, because they complained, or something else entirely. What they will know for sure is that they brought attention to themselves and ultimately did not matriculate. It will be difficult for them not to draw a straight line between action and outcome, whether it is right or wrong, simply due to the vacuum of information. Like I mentioned, the R e-mails don't come with elaborate rationales.

And, between us, if the interviewer is anyone of serious repute (a tenured faculty or someone with political capital), they aren't getting kicked off. You probably would already be aware of their colorful personality and the complaint would get filed away while the school circles the wagons to protect their ego.

I can appreciate the quality assurance argument, it just shouldn't come at the cost of OP's chances.

 

[Goro]

Creating a written record lodging a grievance against a specific faculty member is the definition of a complaint. That you personally would not perceive them to be a "complainer" and all of the stereotypes that may exist therein is a fair statement to make. It is less fair to imply that everyone across the admissions process will perceive it the same way—and the stakes for OP are much higher, and margin for error much smaller. Today's political climate doesn't help.

That you cannot claim what would happen with any degree of certainty is my point. For OP, sending this e-mail will not result in any kind of tangible benefit (though it may prove cathartic for a fraction of a second). They won't get a thorough investigation, or a report on findings. If the information is illegal to obtain, the adcom presumably should have ignored it as a matter of protocol. So, like you said, they may not even receive a response. It will not be longitudinally satisfying because even if internal cogs move, OP is left, again, totally helpless and in the dark.

If OP is rejected or on a perpetual WL from this particular school, they are left unsure if it is because their profile wasn't strong enough, because of their performance on the interview, because of their response to the particular question at hand, because they complained, or something else entirely. What they will know for sure is that they brought attention to themselves and ultimately did not matriculate. It will be difficult for them not to draw a straight line between action and outcome, whether it is right or wrong, simply due to the vacuum of information. Like I mentioned, the R e-mails don't come with elaborate rationales.

And, between us, if the interviewer is anyone of serious repute (a tenured faculty or someone with political capital), they aren't getting kicked off. You probably would already be aware of their colorful personality and the complaint would get filed away while the school circles the wagons to protect their ego.

I can appreciate the quality assurance argument, it just shouldn't come at the cost of OP's chances.

The wise gyngyn, whose contributions here are sorely missed, has pointed out that Faculty do indeed get removed from Adcoms, and people even get another chance at interviewing for the exact concerns the OP has raised.

 

[polymerization]

The wise gyngyn, whose contributions here are sorely missed, has pointed out that Faculty do indeed get removed from Adcoms, and people even get another chance at interviewing for the exact concerns the OP has raised.

...ironic they are presumably a gynecologist.

I don't doubt egregious cases do have relevant outcomes, they are just outcomes that don't benefit the OP. There is no world in which they will ever be interviewed by this individual ever again. It would be a pyrrhic victory. The only outcome they care about is getting in.

 

[Doodledog]

Hi: This should be reported because you are entering a career where ethical behavior, including reporting inappropriate interview behavior, is important. I can't know what will happen to the report, but I know what I believe will most likely happen. The letter will quickly make it to the Dean of Admissions if you didn't email it to them directly. The Dean will look at your file. If they feel that interviewer unfairly assessed you, then they will offer you a repeat interview. If not, they may not do that. They will email you to reassure you that the interviewer has had education on this matter and likely offer to speak with you if you have any questions. It's likely the interviewer doesn't understand why the question was inappropriate and may not have meant anything other than to be supportive in asking it. Regardless, it shouldn't ever be asked and NO dean wants it asked. I can also assure you that Deans of Admissions are not afraid to correct problematic interview behavior even when done by senior faculty. We do it regularly but nicely and most interviewers learn the boundaries and follow them. Senior faculty are not being forced to conduct interviews, they do them because they like interacting with applicants and thus generally will follow rules when they are explained fully.

There is no real possibility that sending this email will harm your application. But of course, as always, YMMV in accepting or believing that.

Generally speaking, the email draft that LizzyM wrote is good, although frankly I would leave out the last sentence. It's not needed, the Dean understands that concern anyway.

Best wishes to you on your journey and thanks for bringing up this relatively common situation.

 

[LizzyM]

And, between us, if the interviewer is anyone of serious repute (a tenured faculty or someone with political capital), they aren't getting kicked off. You probably would already be aware of their colorful personality and the complaint would get filed away while the school circles the wagons to protect their ego.

I've been an MD admissions interviewer for about 25 years.... and you?? I do know that people don't get asked back-- and on the grad admissions side, I've had that responsibility of thanking folks for their service and not asking them back.

 

[polymerization]

I've been an MD admissions interviewer for about 25 years.... and you?? I do know that people don't get asked back-- and on the grad admissions side, I've had that responsibility of thanking folks for their service and not asking them back.

I don't doubt your expertise. Unfortunately it does not erase the stakes for the applicant. I understand the implications are sharp and uncomfortable for someone of your station.

Ultimately, I am nobody. I'm nobody to such a degree that when a tenured professor decided to flex on me, a URM/FGLI nobody, it put me out on the street for about half the time you've been an MD interviewer. Literally. They wouldn't be fired for cause for 10 years, and it ended up having nothing to do with basically taking my 20s away from me. They took everything a person could possibly take and continued to live in a multi-million dollar penthouse as if it never happened, while I quite literally starved. When I reported it, like you suggested, I got a lot of hand-wringing and "you'll be OK, we will investigate," to no avail. I believed in the system, genuinely, and got burned.

Realize that what is an ordinary Monday for all of you within the ivory tower is existential for many of us applicants. I recognize a lot of people in my position would not recover from a situation like that.

You would think that, for all of the education and morality inherent to this specific subset of higher education, general malfeasance within medicine and medical education would be less common. And yet, it is not. Instead of insinuating that, evidently, we are the problem for strategically disengaging, isn't it administration's job to make sure your process is free of flagrant discrimination? It's giving victim-blaming.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I'm not discounting that the stakes are high for the applicant. The many admissions professionals I trust are empowered to offer alternatives like a make-up interview. We are serious about getting feedback, even if many applicants are afraid that complaining puts a black mark on their application. No one is going to make an announcement that an interviewer has been kicked off duty, and barring a truly documentable legal transgression, no interviewer is going to lose their job for asking a question. I don't know what else could be said to you that would make things better according to your expectations. However, academic culture (like any other workplace culture) still must be navigated, and we experience many situations where we (students, faculty, staff) have to accept "the way things work."

Many of us emphasize that an interview is a two-way street. Seriously, most of us make sure each student is at its best, and we show our best sides. I know applicants talk to each other through forums or other avenues, and one "bad experience" can extend to an applicant's perception of that school for potential residency or employment opportunities. The way our society works, one person's cares don't amount to a hill of beans, but a welcoming, inclusive environment does care about that one person.

I put a lot of information into Becoming a Student Doctor about the nuances of academic culture and a peek into "invisible curricula." How to take action requires a bit more training that you should get once you are a student doctor.

 

[PickaGodnPray]

@polymerization I don't think people understand how corrupt academia truly is. The rat race rewards those who step on the necks of others to further their own aspirations and they could care less about who suffers because of it. I have been in a position to hear about the stories many students must carry and stay silent because they fear retribution. Most of the stories I hear at my own institution I cannot tell if the faculty are monsters or just incompetent when it comes to empathy. Not all faculty are bad, but almost all know these things happen and being unwilling to step in and act professional is just as much of an injustice to the ones suffering. I can't do much, but I do share these stories to those who need to hear them to steer them into safer directions when choosing rotations/classes/committee members/etc.
All this to say, while limited as we are now, when you are in a position to make a difference, whether that be in academia or in clinic, try to make the path easier for those who come after. I am genuinely so happy we have people like you pursing the field despite how much it has tried to prevent you from entering as I think that is the only way we end up having the positive change academia has been preaching out for the last 15+ years.

 

[polymerization]

I don't know what else could be said to you that would make things better according to your expectations.

Yeah, that's a fair point. I agree that there probably wouldn't be anything you could say barring full, unrestricted transparency of the inner mechanics of the entire university system. Given its present opacity, though, you cannot deny the rational urgency of disengaging and, as you said, "accepting the way things are" as a logical consequence of the system we are tasked with navigating successfully... if we are lucky, making ne'er a peep for ~12 years to survive a capricious environment, even if perceived malice is not intentional and escalation infrequent.

It's not like in Europe where if I decide I'm dissatisfied I can pivot to some other socially subsidized academic program and live a new life. The punishment under consideration is often poverty in the form of hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and lifelong underemployment with respect to medicine.

I can acknowledge the issues are not personally yours (or anyone else's here) to bear or defend; that these same issues can be generalized to encompass higher education more broadly; and that, sometimes, the issues intersect with greater social problems that exist outside of education altogether and can compound the effects of institutional outcomes far beyond any one individual's intention. I can also understand that there are people trying to do right by students out there, which I appreciate.

Sincerely, this is just a frank analysis of the OP's situation from another applicant's POV, not intended as an indictment on others offering perspectives. It would be disingenuous for me to legitimize power-to-the-powerful on a couple of pinky-promises of benevolence, at least not when we can very easily conjure copious examples to the contrary with a few keystrokes.

For example:

 

[polymerization]

@polymerization I don't think people understand how corrupt academia truly is. The rat race rewards those who step on the necks of others to further their own aspirations and they could care less about who suffers because of it. I have been in a position to hear about the stories many students must carry and stay silent because they fear retribution. Most of the stories I hear at my own institution I cannot tell if the faculty are monsters or just incompetent when it comes to empathy. Not all faculty are bad, but almost all know these things happen and being unwilling to step in and act professional is just as much of an injustice to the ones suffering. I can't do much, but I do share these stories to those who need to hear them to steer them into safer directions when choosing rotations/classes/committee members/etc.
All this to say, while limited as we are now, when you are in a position to make a difference, whether that be in academia or in clinic, try to make the path easier for those who come after. I am genuinely so happy we have people like you pursing the field despite how much it has tried to prevent you from entering as I think that is the only way we end up having the positive change academia has been preaching out for the last 15+ years.

I really appreciate that, and I totally agree. Obviously the problem is complex and spans so many different stakeholders with variable degrees of blame for creating it.

I am just particularly resistant to punching down at students (prospective students at that), which bear literally zero power within this process... and that's irrespective of their situation outside of the application process. It could always be much worse.

And it seems like every fork in the road presents a double-bind in which your true decision circles the question "Which of these two bad options hurts the least?" In this case, OP is better served taking the microaggression on the chin, but some people will disagree with me, and I can understand why.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Sad to say this, but in our society, a lot of people get to where they are by punching down and stepping on others' throats. The complete subjectivity of clinical evaluations, where you can tick off one person and doom your career, is part of our medical education system. Professor/teacher evaluations are factored into reappointments and promotions for many lecturers without tenure. It's not a salve to say, "Welcome to the real world" when we maintain medicine as a profession is a "higher calling."

But we are human beings and not rationally-thinking computers, despite our education. Cognitive dissonance is everywhere, probably even more heightened in our political and world environment. Admissions is not a scientific equation, despite the desire by our faculty members to make it so.

I don't think academia is any less corrupt than other workplaces, but the audacity that we are somehow better than some FAANG or "industry job" is part of the Kool Aid you drink when you have to accept lower paychecks. 🙂

 

[Mr.Smile12]

...
It's not like in Europe where if I decide I'm dissatisfied I can pivot to some other socially subsidized academic program and live a new life. The punishment under consideration is often poverty in the form of hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and lifelong underemployment with respect to medicine.

Sidestepping the critique that Europe actually believes in social investment via a more socialistic government and culture... you also apply for medical school much earlier in life and don't have to take the MCAT. You might have to take an SJT and a different exam.

But I get the point: that's also true once you have a career and get laid off. Employer-based health insurance also makes it extremely difficult to "just quit." Ask the federal employees who got laid off over the last year for whatever reason (DOGE, DEI, restructuring). Our society believes in bootstrapping and no safety net to ease a transition or a retirement. Especially in current times, it is so rare to have someone in the same job for more than 10 years.

 

[polymerization]

Sidestepping the critique that Europe actually believes in social investment via a more socialistic government and culture... you also apply for medical school much earlier in life and don't have to take the MCAT. You might have to take an SJT and a different exam.

But I get the point: that's also true once you have a career and get laid off. Employer-based health insurance also makes it extremely difficult to "just quit." Ask the federal employees who got laid off over the last year for whatever reason (DOGE, DEI, restructuring). Our society believes in bootstrapping and no safety net to ease a transition or a retirement. Especially in current times, it is so rare to have someone in the same job for more than 10 years.

You said it! By the time we are applying to medical school, we do so often with less certainty, a higher absolute standard of performance, and stratospheric sunk-cost compared to most other developed nations. All of which compound to make the potential drawbacks of making a report for the collective good all the more personally fraught.

I don't mean to say this is all designed with perverse incentives in mind, but it's hard to see it differently from our vantage especially in light of actions taken like the OBBB (which seem particularly targeted and mercilessly cruel considering the insane disadvantage those disproportionately affected already incur inherently in participating within the system as it stood pre-OBBB).

 

[Mr.Smile12]

As an aside, we did have someone write about going to medical school in Spain... 🙂

Medical School Abroad: My Journey Studying Medicine in Spain | Student Doctor Network | SDN

Abstract: This article presents an American student's firsthand account of pursuing medical school in Spain. The author describes adapting to a post-high

www.studentdoctor.net

 

[anon2]

I'm going to throw a different counterpoint out there.

If you report, you face a range of consequences from at best, reconsideration and even re-interview, wiping out any unfair negative mark from that interviewer, to, as @polymerization said, outright CYA blackballing. Having 10 literally PTSD-inducing years in industry behind me, and another few in academia, I openly tell anyone who wants to listen about the absurdly illegal things my previous employers have done, and how the system is specifically designed to screw the cogs over.

Acknowledging I come from a position of extreme economic privilege, I still choose to say things as they are, come what may. My reasoning is simple: should I suffer retaliation for doing the correct thing, this is ipso facto a malignant place I am glad to be very far away from, before I got entangled.

Not entirely theoretical for me: in my own MMIs, one of the questions was regarding learner mistreatment and possible reporting. As can be expected, the tenor of my answer* got to the point where the interviewer followed up out loud: "Do you think there are any institutions which say mistreatment is okay?"

"I don't think that any institution will say [extreme emphasis] that mistreatment is okay. That is different from whether or not they place any priority on doing anything about it, versus the things needed to keep the lights on."

I am currently attending that school.

*: Reporting is okay and rational, so is not reporting due to well-grounded fear of retaliation. It's an immensely personal choice.