I was led to believe that the CBC was only looking for Felonies, Misdemeanors and arrests. However when I had the check done it found several alcohol violations I have back from when I was a teenager (19). Is this a mistake made by the background check company? I have contacted the courts to verify that the charges are indeed not felonies or misdemeanors, but infractions/violations which are equivalent to traffic violations. I have already been accepted to a school. What should I do.
Infractions on CBC!?
- Thread starter ANNIE8
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2008
- Messages
- 359
- Reaction score
- 0
I suppose you can contact the school that you were accepted to and see what effect these charges have on your acceptance...I would want to find that out sooner rather than later. I'm not necessarily surprised this showed up, certainly they aren't something that disappears, since you were 19. But sorry, that you thought it was only going to find misdemeanors and felonies...
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2006
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 0
Perhaps the incidents were misdemeanors?
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_In_Possession
It is a misdemeanor, not an infraction for every state. You are wrong and you better hope that the schools that accepted you dont get mad about being lied to.
It is a misdemeanor, not an infraction for every state. You are wrong and you better hope that the schools that accepted you dont get mad about being lied to.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2006
- Messages
- 2,173
- Reaction score
- 27
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
I am not going to search on a state by state basis but I dont think the odds are in your favor. Like Wikipedia or not, most states look at MIP as a misdemeanor and your CBC confirmed that.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 5,474
- Reaction score
- 56
As long as you reported them in your secondaries where asked, you should be OK. I would call the company and ask though. Listen, we all make mistakes when we're young (or even when we're old, hah), as long as you own up to it, and show that you're aware of what you did and taken steps to not let it happen again, then you should be okay. Full disclosure is a good thing.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
His problem is that he didnt report them because he was convinced that they wouldnt show up on his CBC.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 175
- Reaction score
- 1
This is exactly why I ran a CBC on myself. Yes it does cost $140, but it gave me peace of mind. I had something similar to yours in my history and it did not show up when I ran a CBC on myself. I would recommend to anyone who has something in their past that they are unsure about to run a CBC on themselves, you may see something that is wrong or that you forgot about. I know that you are allowed 10 days to review your CBC results before they go to schools, but that is only 2 business weeks and it is hard to get much accomplished in the legal world in that time frame.
The CBC did not confirm they are misdemeanors. In fact it says that the level of charge is a violation less than a misdemeanor. However it says this in the comment section at the bottom and not in the column where it asks the level of charge, in this column it says charge type N/A.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2006
- Messages
- 2,173
- Reaction score
- 27
did you call the CBC people yet? maybe it's something simple they can do over the phone...
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2008
- Messages
- 13,815
- Reaction score
- 130
Minor in possesion is a misdemeanor. What you are probably thinking of is that for some first time misdemeanors some states allow for the misdemeanor to be reduced to an infraction.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 5,474
- Reaction score
- 56
Forgetting about something: maybe...
But isn't the best option just to disclose everything to begin with???
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2007
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 0
How do you go about running a CBC on yourself?
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2008
- Messages
- 13,815
- Reaction score
- 130
There are companies you can pay to do it. A google should reveal them.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 412
- Reaction score
- 0
Where/how exactly are you supposed to disclose your infractions? I don't recall being asked about infractions anywhere on the AMCAS or my secondaries--only misdemeanors and felonies.
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2006
- Messages
- 655
- Reaction score
- 0
The OP's CBC doesn't even say it's a misdemeanor...obviously things vary from state to state.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2006
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 0
I have the same question...how do you run a CBC on yourself? And can we run the same one that AAMC will do? I'm sure there are many different types of background checks that might go further than others so it would be nice to use the same one AAMC uses to make sure.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 175
- Reaction score
- 1
On the AAMC website there is a link to Certiphi Screening which is the same company AAMC uses. You can, and I did, run the exact same CBC, which will be run on you if you get an acceptance. I can't find the exact link right but it is in the AMCAS tab, under something about the CBC.
If you are somewhat neurotic, such as myself, and have ~$150 (each search costs a different amount but $150 is the max) then I would advise this. If I find the link or if someone else does please post it.
As a note DON'T Google for a company doing CBC. There are A LOT of CBC scams out there which are looking to steal your personal information so I would only really use the one from the AAMC website.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 5,474
- Reaction score
- 56
If your secondaries didn't ask for it, then don't worry about it. If they need an explanation, they'll ask it of you.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2005
- Messages
- 1,465
- Reaction score
- 9
I wouldn't agree - the OP could be headed for serious trouble. I think the best course of action here is to contact the accepting school - and just be honest - no BS. Contact the admissions office - say that you learned that you had some violations on your CBC - and you want to know if there is anything you need to do, such as writing an explanatory letter. The quicker the OP gets on this, the better.
The OP didn't specify whether or not he/she checked "no" to any questions about misdemeanors on a primary or secondary app. I know medical students who have had MIPs - but not being truthful will get you into big-league trouble. It's not the crime, it's the cover-up.
You just can't hang your hat on the idea that the MIP was a non-reportable "violation" and not a misdemeanor. I haven't looked at the new AMCAS instructions, but - generally - when they ask about misdemeanors, they specify that they mean anything other than a non-alcohol traffic violation. Many states do not recognize any distinction between "violation" and "misdemeanor." My state does not - in fact, the law here defines a misdemeanor as "any violation of law within this state not classified as a felony is a misdemeanor." That includes municipal regulations... everything. Spitting on the sidewalk is a misdemeanor here.
I've seen people denied medical licenses over this sort of hair-splitting between "violation" and "misdemeanor." That CBC is going to follow you from now on. Start your career off right and be smart - call your school, apologize, and do whatever they tell you to do. You'll sleep better and, to my mind, that is the only way that this thing can be truly laid to rest. You're not likely to lose your acceptance over a couple of MIPs - but getting in major-league trouble over dishonesty, whether you intended so or not, is a much higher risk.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
Well OP wont tell us what state this is so nobody can really confirm if thats true. I dont have any infractions on mine (eg moving violations etc) so I cant vouch for whether or not infractions appear and thus dont matter. I was under the impression that ONLY misdemeanor/felonies would appear. Someone else who has their AMCAS check completed wiht an infraction on their record needs to weigh in.
The company contacted me and said they will file them under violations and not misdemeanors. There is a distinction, a violation is not considered a criminal charge and is on the same level as a traffic ticket, there is no court involved and the only punishment is a fine. That being said, I will still contact the school and let them know.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2006
- Messages
- 2,173
- Reaction score
- 27
so the schools are still going to see everything?
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2005
- Messages
- 1,465
- Reaction score
- 9
I think that's smart. It's a pain, but if you have any history with the law other than a traffic ticket, it's going to follow you - it certainly doesn't end when you are accepted to medical school. The issue can come up again when you are background-cleared by hospitals for 3rd year rotations, again when you apply for residency, again when you apply for a training license, and again when you apply for permanent licensure. Standards and rules are going to vary at each step in the process. A very minor history doesn't have to ever cause you much of a problem, but you definitely want to have at each step of the way a clear history of truthful answers and above-board conduct. A student who bases his answers on what he thinks is actually going to show-up on a CBC is just asking for trouble. Good luck.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2005
- Messages
- 687
- Reaction score
- 140
I used the link on the AAMC website to run my background screen as I wasn't exactly sure what was on there. I too was surprised to see that it does in fact show everything that is not a moving violation.
I had a couple thing on there that are upwards of ten years old, none of which are even misdemeanors. In fact, these screens even look for infractions for which you were charged but the charge was dismissed.
So, yes, these do look for a lot more than I think most people realize. They even note if there was anything found in your juvenile record, not explicitly just makes a note for whoever reads it to see that there is "something" there and they should ask the individual.
It really is a good idea to run this screen on yourself if for no other reason to verify that you understand what is on your record.
I had a couple thing on there that are upwards of ten years old, none of which are even misdemeanors. In fact, these screens even look for infractions for which you were charged but the charge was dismissed.
So, yes, these do look for a lot more than I think most people realize. They even note if there was anything found in your juvenile record, not explicitly just makes a note for whoever reads it to see that there is "something" there and they should ask the individual.
It really is a good idea to run this screen on yourself if for no other reason to verify that you understand what is on your record.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 175
- Reaction score
- 1
This is interesting because when I ran the check on myself it came up with all of the fields saying "clear". While a minor I did a few thing which were non-criminal but definitely more then a parking ticket. It did not show on my record, this is strange. I agree with your point that people should run these on themselves, just as you should check your credit history and credit score.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
probably to make sure you haven't committed any serious crimes?
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 5,474
- Reaction score
- 56
Well I actually agree with you wholeheartedly. In the discussion I was having above I was advocating for full disclosure. Then in the rebut there seemed to be some confusion between having an "infaction" and having a "misdemeanor". I still think the students should be proactive and and report everything, but some seem to want to hang on the technicality that it wasn't asked about on a secondary. I personally think that if one believes the infraction serious enough to warrant a thread like this, then it probably should have been reported somehow. The best course of action, in my opinion (as we agree) is still to report everything and ask what should be done. My post above was more just basically giving up on the point, rather than continuing to argue.
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2006
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 0
So why are they looking at minor violations (such as Jay-walking) in addition to felonies and misdemeanors?
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
OP, I just wanted to make a few comments because as you can already tell by the various responses/people who have done CBCs on themselves, you aren't the only one to fear little things from the past.
1. Don't take legal advice on SDN, it will drive you nuts. SDN is good for a lot of things ... but one big problem is that people (in general) love to give their impression of legal advice because it seems common sense. This is not the case, and you shouldn't ask legal opinions from anyone except an attorney, licensed in the state in question. These are the only people who you should turn to for legal issues, and if you are really concerned about this ... you should take a copy of the cbc, the questions asked on AMCAS and secondaries, and pay $150 to go over it with a lawyer for an hour.
2. You aren't a mind reader. All you can do is answer questions honestly when they are given to you. If the question states 'have you ever been convicted of, or plead no contest to any felony or misdemeanor??' That is what they want to know. The question did NOT state: ' list any potential infraction/dismissed misdemeanor from your past that you think maybe could show up on a CBC. If you answered the questions honestly, you haven't done anything wrong and you can approach the school with this confidence. You weren't trying (I assume) to be sneaky, you just answered what they asked for.
3. Just because something came up, doesn't mean it's going to sink you. If the school/AMCAS said not to mention misdemeanors where the charges were dropped, and your report comes back with a misdemeanor charge that was dropped .... it seems like you did what you were asked (once again, something you need to hear from a lawyer).
4. Like others said ... get on this right away. Infractions, let alone infractions that were supposed to be sealed when you turned 18, shouldn't sink you. However, you don't want to look dishonest. I think you should either a. call the school and try to talk with someone/get the ball rolling about how to go about explaining yourself or b. speak with a lawyer and ask what could potentially happen and what you should do from here.
I understand if you aren't comfortable with option b. Some people feel like going to a lawyer makes you seem guilty or offensive err whatever, but I suggest doing something along those lines. Good luck.
1. Don't take legal advice on SDN, it will drive you nuts. SDN is good for a lot of things ... but one big problem is that people (in general) love to give their impression of legal advice because it seems common sense. This is not the case, and you shouldn't ask legal opinions from anyone except an attorney, licensed in the state in question. These are the only people who you should turn to for legal issues, and if you are really concerned about this ... you should take a copy of the cbc, the questions asked on AMCAS and secondaries, and pay $150 to go over it with a lawyer for an hour.
2. You aren't a mind reader. All you can do is answer questions honestly when they are given to you. If the question states 'have you ever been convicted of, or plead no contest to any felony or misdemeanor??' That is what they want to know. The question did NOT state: ' list any potential infraction/dismissed misdemeanor from your past that you think maybe could show up on a CBC. If you answered the questions honestly, you haven't done anything wrong and you can approach the school with this confidence. You weren't trying (I assume) to be sneaky, you just answered what they asked for.
3. Just because something came up, doesn't mean it's going to sink you. If the school/AMCAS said not to mention misdemeanors where the charges were dropped, and your report comes back with a misdemeanor charge that was dropped .... it seems like you did what you were asked (once again, something you need to hear from a lawyer).
4. Like others said ... get on this right away. Infractions, let alone infractions that were supposed to be sealed when you turned 18, shouldn't sink you. However, you don't want to look dishonest. I think you should either a. call the school and try to talk with someone/get the ball rolling about how to go about explaining yourself or b. speak with a lawyer and ask what could potentially happen and what you should do from here.
I understand if you aren't comfortable with option b. Some people feel like going to a lawyer makes you seem guilty or offensive err whatever, but I suggest doing something along those lines. Good luck.
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
I agree with being up-front and honest, but how can you report something that you weren't asked about?? I just don't see where to draw the line or how you even go about reporting it when the school/AMCAS didn't ask for the information??
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2007
- Messages
- 5,932
- Reaction score
- 32
You are wrong. If you are going to make a claim that encompasses "every state," you should probably do a "search on a state by state basis." If you dont, then there is no support for your claim and you will likely end up spouting out false information (which is exactly what you did).
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
Oh dear god slightly inaccurate information on the intarnetz WHAT DO WE DO??? It wasnt like I was being paid to do a serious search, I did a glance over what I found given the extremely vague background that was in the first few posts. The majority of states fall into this category.
Seriously though, i am surprised that this isnt a misdemeanor everywhere. It is like seeing rape as a misdemeanor instead of a felony.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2007
- Messages
- 5,932
- Reaction score
- 32
Thats perfectly fine that you glanced over a vague background of information......but you shouldnt have stated so definitively your position if you knew you didnt do much research on it.
Did you reallly just compare rape to a minor in possession of alcohol?
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
From my experience alcohol can be just as destructive to lives as rape is, I gladly champion any chance to persecute people for using it.
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
I think you should ask a rape victim whether or not they think the two crimes should be on par.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
I think that person would need to go live in a family of alcoholics for 10+ years before she could answer that question.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2007
- Messages
- 5,932
- Reaction score
- 32
1. Men can be raped as well. Its not gender specific.
Clearly you have some life expereinces that are biasing your opinion on this matter.
We aren't talkign about alcoholism, or even people who are drunk/have been drinking...... all we are talking about is possession. But even then, you can drink alcohol and not become abusive and/or not become addicted......in fact, MOST people who drink alcohol don't have these problems. Alcohol is a substance...its a noun. Alcohol itself IS NOT destructive. People that ABUSE alcohol are destructive.
Rape, on the other hand, is a verb. It is an action that is ALWAYS destructive. I'm sorry, but rape and a minor in possession infraction are in no way comparable.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
Sorry I dont share your PC/semantics haze and this has gone off topic.
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
All he is saying is that raping another human being is in no way shape or form close to a 19 year old kid getting caught drinking a 6 pack on a Friday night with his buddies. All I'm saying is that comparing rape to a possession infraction is definitely going to ruffle feathers around here, and saying that isn't being PC ... it's using common sense.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,251
- Reaction score
- 7,069
Saying rape applies to men is being PC, come on....
K not coming back to this thread since it got totally derailed by an offhand comment that was completely irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. Sorry if you feathers are ruffled
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Saying rape applies to men is being PC, come on....
K not coming back to this thread since it got totally derailed by an offhand comment that was completely irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. Sorry if you feathers are ruffled
I didn't even read the 'men' comment ... but agreed, I don't want to argue this any further.
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2008
- Messages
- 2,058
- Reaction score
- 455
Saying rape applies to men is being PC, come on....
K not coming back to this thread since it got totally derailed by an offhand comment that was completely irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. Sorry if you feathers are ruffled
you should seriously be banned for your little rape=alcohol equation.
