Letters of Intent sent to waitlisted schools

[Entol]

Is it unethical to send several schools you are waitlisted at a letter of intent guaranteeing you will attend their school should you be admitted? I ask this because once you get the first acceptance, you can withdraw from all other schools and withdraw from all other waitlists as well, including those other schools who you sent an LoI to, so you will still be following your word.

I ask this because I'm very interested in two schools that I feel I will be waitlisted at, and either one I would be happy to withdraw from every other school for (including all waitlists as well).

-Entol

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AlternateSome1]

If you hold that lying is unethical, then what you propose is also unethical. You are assuming that you will have the ability to withdraw from the other before they accept you, keeping the letter of intent true (since you would have attended had they accepted you). A curcimstance that would violate this assumption would occur if you were accepted into both schools at about the same date.

~AS1~

 

[Entol]

Okay, but I am confused what the lying would be unless this act of random chance actually occurred? Would it be better to pick one school of the two and send them a letter of intent and send the other a letter of interest or include the stipulation about waitlist withdrawal in your letter of intent to both or what?

Originally posted by AlternateSome1
If you hold that lying is unethical, then what you propose is also unethical. You are assuming that you will have the ability to withdraw from the other before they accept you, keeping the letter of intent true (since you would have attended had they accepted you). A curcimstance that would violate this assumption would occur if you were accepted into both schools at about the same date.

~AS1~

 

[hope280]

sending two letter of intents is unethical and there is a chance that both schools will find out.

 

[TheFlash]

I've heard that schools keep a list of people who "intend" to come to their school. I know Jalby said that at least USC does this, so I'm sure that all the top schools do. And adcoms converse with one another. Would you want two adcoms to find out that you were on both of their respective lists? I don't think you do.

 

[jlee9531]

if you are waitlisted...and you want to send an LOI, you send it to the school you most want to attend....if you dont feel strongly about one school or the other then dont send LOIs. You can send letter of interests, but not intent letters.

is it so hard to understand that a letter of intent is only meant for the school you want to go to most, not to use to try and gain an acceptance at any school?? (which is unethical)...

 

[SoulRFlare]

I have it from a reliable source that some deans of admissions/adcoms really don't put much stock in letters of intent for this very reason. They know that a lot of students will send them to multiple schools, so they often don't pay any attention to them. But if you are serious about one particular school, i suppose an honest loi can't hurt if you combine it with a real effort to stay in touch with the school.

 

[Dr.Wolkower]

i do not think it matters

 

[AlternateSome1]

Originally posted by Entol
Okay, but I am confused what the lying would be unless this act of random chance actually occurred? Would it be better to pick one school of the two and send them a letter of intent and send the other a letter of interest or include the stipulation about waitlist withdrawal in your letter of intent to both or what?

Ok, if you need it drawn out:

Premise 1(factual): Turning down a school after stating that you would attend it is a lie.

Premise 2(connective): You would be forced to lie if you are accepted into both schools within a similar time frame.

Premise 3(evaluative): Lying is unethical.

Premise 4(evaluative): Entering into a situation where you might be forced into an unethical act is unethical..

Conclusion: Sending a LOI to two schools is unethical because you might be forced to lie.

Now, from this you can see that Premises 3 & 4 are my personal beliefs. If you do not believe them, then the same conclusion will not be held. The whole argument seems very similar to disclosing information to patients. Drug companies must list possible side effects, no matter how slim of a chance they have of occuring.

~AS1~

Edit:
This is also similar to why I consider drunk driving unethical. You may not kill someone, but you are risking it each time.

 

[ice_23]

What about financial aid considerations? Would you have to stipulate in the letter that you wish to go to the school but only if it is financially feasible?

-Ice