This was from my first interview of the last cycle:
At the university where I was interviewing, they had all of the interviewees sit while the interviewers introduced themselves to the room. After, your interviewer would find you and take you to an empty room on the medical campus for the interview. My interviewer came up to me and asked my name to make sure he had his man. Affirming that I am, in fact, hithere3387, I stood to shake his hand. I was a full foot taller than he, and I could immediately sense that it bothered him.
The walk toward an empty room to conduct the interview was uncomfortably silent, so I decided that I'd try to make some small talk. As I had interviewed the previous cycle (obviously, to no avail) I knew that it was possible that he was a PhD. So, I asked him what he did for a living.
His response: "I'm a doctor."
Hithere3387: "MD? PhD? MD/PhD? Or something else?"
Doctor of some sort: "MD."
Hithere3387: "Very cool. In which field do you practice?"
MD: "Neurology."
Hithere3387: "Wow. How are you affiliated with the university? Do you teach here?"
Neurologist: "Sometimes."
Hithere3387: "You wouldn't mind if I asked which class, would you?"
Neurologist: "Don't worry about it, only 3rd and 4th year students take it."
As we arrived at an empty room, this extremely forced small talk started to wane. Or perhaps I should say, the chatter had waned to the point that I could confidently pronounce it dead. We entered the room, and the conversation doesn't improve much.
Neurologist: "So, what frustrates you the most about our health care system, here in the U.S.?"
Hithere3387: "The lack of comprehensive coverage for the population. I find it hard to justify the amount of money we spend on health care in this country while still being the only industrialized nation to not have a national health policy."
Neurologist: "What do you mean? How would you fix it?"
Hithere3387: "I mean that we spend more than any other nation, at around 2 trillion dollars a year, but fail to provide coverage for the entire population. And, I'm not sure how to fix it. I consider myself fairly informed about the issue, and the only thing I'm certain of is that it's extremely complex."
Neurologist: "There isn't enough money."
Hithere3387: "I have a hard time believing that. We spend more than literally, everyone else. Yet, we're the only industrialized nation that cannot cover its population. We certainly aren't the most populated country, so I have a difficult time believing that significant improvements cannot be made through health policy adjustments."
Neurologist: "I think it's an intractable situation, and I find your optimism naive."
Hithere3387: "Well, I can hardly deny that your perspective is likely the more informed."
And, later in the conversation:
Neurologist: "Do you think the process by which we select students for medical school is fair?"
Hithere3387: "Generally, yes. However, I believe that the cost of school is prohibitive."
Neurologist: "No one has trouble paying for medical school. Yes, it's expensive, but no one has trouble obtaining the money through loans."
Hithere3387: "Yes, I realize that the loan money is available to everyone who is admitted. But, I was referring to the cost of undergraduate school. Many under privileged students have a difficult time paying their way through college while maintaining what medical schools consider competitive grades. Not to mention the cost of applying to medical school and attending interviews."
Neurologist: "What do you mean?"
Hithere3387: "I'm referring to the application fees and travel costs. Further, if I could add an anecdote from my own life, the cost of dress clothing. It's all very expensive."
Neurologist: "Do you know what the number one limiting factor is for whether a student is admitted? Number of seats. So, I don't think your argument holds water."
Hithere3387: "Interesting." Thinking to myself, *I don't see how that's related.*
At this point in the interview, I had become very frustrated. And, although you wouldn't be able to tell by my demeanor, I was at a breaking point. The rest of the interview went down hill as I continued to argue with my interviewer.
Ultimately, I was rejected. I do not think that it was a result of the segments of conversation that I have recounted above, but rather as a consequence of how I responded to the pressure of being argued with when I thought I was being reasonable. I take responsibility for that one. My bad. But, when I was informed of the rejection, I inquired as to why. The response perplexed me. Apparently, unnamed neurologist told the committee that I was "overly-confident" during my interview. There were other reasons for my rejection. Things that I cannot deny (and, certainly should be held accountable for), but this was the reason that I was rejected instead of wait-listed or accepted. It was at that moment that I realized just how much of a crap-shoot this process really is.
