My thoughts on the medical school admissions process...

[alpinism]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Trust me OP, adcoms aren't impressed by some 2 week "medical mission" trip to Guatemala or Vietnam.

Its the applicants who completed a summer long public health project overseas, served in the peace corps, or did an internship with WHO/UNICEF/UNAIDS that get a significant admissions boost.

 

[slopes23]

If you honestly think that people that come from wealthier families have store bought resumes and were given their acceptance then you have true problems. I wonder if you had taken this tach during your interview if you would have still been admitted, or would you have been seen as a bitter, and immature kid, who is mad because he now just noticed life isn't fair. You cant control what socioeconomic family you are born into. You seem to think that people who are well off are less deserving of the rewards if the same hard work they put in relative to their less wealthy classmates. At the end of the day, wealthy or not, anyone who gets an admission into medical school put in a lot of work to get there, and its never going to be the exact same situation between people, but everyone struggles through out the process, and everyone has to put the time in to do well on their mcat, grades, EC etc. If you dont put in the effort and have the skill to convert that effort into results no amount of mcat classes or tutoring are going to get you good grades.

By your logic, you would equally say that people who are in the top 5% of IQ and had to do little studying to get good grades or a good mcat, and are socially adept should be held to a different standard then their lower IQ classmates? Yet I am sure this is not the view you have.

Get off your high horse, thinking that you have done enough in your life that you have earned the right to pass out judgement on who is worthy to join you in medical school and who isn't.

 

[CharmanderMD]

While I have lots of thoughts on this topic, nothing infuriates me more than the ridiculous costs of practice exams. The least amcas could do is more than ONE of them free given the ridiculous amounts of money we have to shell out on everything else.

 

[BlackBox]

We are all familiar with the criteria that medical schools use to evaluate prospective students. Students are expected to excel or at least be proficient in each of these areas to be granted an interview. Doing so is supposed to show that you, as a pre-med, are capable of handling the tough coursework that will be thrown at you during medical school. The truth is, while success in the above factors does make for a successful medical student, it also implicitly suggests something else: that the student is well off.

I took an entire summer off to study for the MCAT. I did practically nothing but study from May until the beginning of August, yet I still did not feel ready to take my MCAT in September. I ended up taking another month and a half (from December to January) to study to really ace the MCAT. Additionally, to boost my application, I spent about 4 weeks in total shadowing doctors, and another 10-15 hours a week as an unpaid research assistant throughout the first three years of my college career. Thankfully, I was able to do this because I received a full scholarship to my state school.

I was fortunate enough to gain admission to my medical school of choice very early in the application season; however, many students aren't so lucky. Many students are wait-listed or are rejected point-blank from every school they apply to. Faced with rejection, many students pursue other interests. If I were to not get accepted this cycle, I believe I would join the ranks of students who pursue other interests. Why? While I would like to take a year off to boost my application and retake the MCAT, the truth is, I lack the resources to provide for myself in that gap year.

However, the students who do have the resources to take a gap year fully take advantage of those resources. They spend months doing research (often for free). They spend thousands of dollars on outreach trips abroad. They spend thousands on expensive MCAT review courses. And then, when the reapply in the following cycle, they are accepted. It's been shown that students who take a year off have a substantially higher chance of getting accepted into medical school. This is expected to be the obvious result - if a student has an additional year (that's 25% longer than the average college student who graduates in 4 years) to boost their application - they're bound to at least marginally increase their chances). As a result of this, many of these privileged pre-meds get into medical school.

The question that I ask is this: if those students who did not get accepted from medical school had the resources to go on lavish medical missions in Guatemala or to enroll in expensive Kaplan MCAT preparatory classes, would they have gotten accepted to medical school? How much of a factor did Daddy's money have on a given privileged kid gaining admission?

I believe money plays a tremendous factor. As a recently admitted student, I feel surrounded by students who are sons or daughters of to-do medical professionals, researchers, lawyers, etc. I would go so far as to say that more than half of my future classmates I have met so far come from households with income in the top 5% of society.

For example, I received a phone call from my med school "peer mentor". He was a third year medical student who gave me a call congratulating me on gaining acceptance, and told me that he was here for me had I any questions for him, etc. I asked him questions about the curriculum and the environment, to which he gave excellent and helpful responses. However, the moment I asked him about FAFSA - the free application for federal student aid - he told me frankly that he was "fortunate enough that family could cover the cost of attendance." He then offered to put me in touch with on the financial aid officers that the school had hired. I politely refused his offer. When I probed him about his place of residence, the response was similar. He had no idea about anything - he was living in a $1200/month studio apartment fully paid for by daddy. I knew then that he was in a total state of disconnect. He simply didn't see money the same way as the rest of us did.

There's something wrong with this picture. Isn't America supposed to be a country where upward mobility is encouraged? What exactly does the American dream promise? Why is it that the bulk of America's future doctors are rich, spoiled, disconnected people? How can this generation of people be taught to empathize with and care for those who have nothing when they themselves have unfairly snatched admission by flashing their store-bought resumes to the admissions staff?

As a senior who has been talking to pre-med students for my entire college career, I know the tell-tale signs of a pre-med who isn't going to make it. Do they have to take a part-time job so they can pay the bills? Probably not going to be able to afford the time to work in a research lab for free 10-15 hours a week. Definitely not going be able to afford a KAPLAN test prep course. Can't take classes over the summer because their scholarship doesn't cover it? Probably not going to be able to take all of the classes they need to take to take their MCAT on time (during junior year).

Now, there are the few students who do make it despite coming from a middle-class family. These are often your extremely hard-workers. Other middle-class students are simply lucky. Perhaps they went to a great high school which prepared them well and they were able to secure a scholarship, or a paid internship, etc. And of course, there are hard-working and intelligent students who come from well to-do families who deserve their admission to medical school.

But the majority of applicants are neither extremely hard-working nor extremely intelligent. They are simply your run-of-the-mill applicant. And for those applicants who are struggling to stand out amongst their peers, a lot of cash goes a long way. Ten hours a week of research instead of waiting tables is not only going to make them more competitive, but it's also going to make them smarter and more capable.

Sure, you might say that medical school committees often take note when students are having to support themselves through school and give them extra consideration when making admissions decisions, but the number of students admitted through such means is few and far between. The standard that medical schools set for admission can only be afforded by the children of the top 5-10% of society. If medical schools wanted to truly create an admissions process that is more conscious of socioeconomic barriers, then the medical schools would have already done so. But that is not the priority. So long as the AMA and the medical schools are able to produce capable physicians, they are content.

I didn't write this piece with the hope of inciting a rebellion. I wrote this as a reflective piece based on my personal experience. Next time you hear news of a young student gaining acceptance to medical student on his second, third, or fourth try, I hope you view his story as more than one of perseverance and indomitable spirit. I see that acceptance more as a credit to his parents' success in providing the best opportunities for their child.

I love this post. It begins to get at the heart of a major issue with the admission's process: How much of an advantage do applicants have coming from a stable environment with adequate resources and support?

The answer is simply this: A lot.

Coming from very humble roots, the idea of becoming a doctor was IMPOSSIBLE- it was like winning the lottery- don't waste your time. I think many students take for granted everything they have of have been given. For example, parental guidance may seem trivial to those who have had it, but you couldn't even begin to imagine how not having someone to give you advice can have a negative impact. This is especially true of younger children, where the entire course of their lives can be permanently altered.

 

[slopes23]

@BurberryDoc: You're absolutely right in that I need to keep my mouth shut about this kind of thing while I'm in medical school (or even afterward). This isn't the type of subject that would make for polite dinner conversation. That's why I created a second account to make this post. I don't want my friends knowing that I feel this way because I have friends from all across the board.

I admit that my initial post in this thread simplifies the differences between the top 5% and the middle-class. As for not providing constructive commentary: trust me, I would have provided some had there been any constructive commentary to suggest. I wrote this piece up hoping to spark some lively discussion where there might have been some solutions being thrown around. I think it's important to bring up your complaints even if you don't have a solution because someone else might - man is a social and collaborative being - what I cannot see, you might.

When you went through and dissected the OP, you did a fantastic job of providing anecdotal evidence about your own case. Thank you very much for that. Your story is indeed inspiring. However, you pretty much completely failed to address the main point of the post. Let me reiterate it for you here: Right now, it is MUCH EASIER to make yourself a competitive applicant for medical school (High grades, MCAT, research, volunteering, etc.) if you come from a wealthy background. There are a disproportionate amount of students from wealthy households who attend medical school. I am not suggesting in any form or fashion that it is impossible for those who are middle class to gain acceptance to medical school. I am only saying that it is much, much harder.



I guess I'm a fool then. I know plenty of privileged students of average or below-average intelligence who have taken a year off to improve their application. You call me a fool, yet you don't present any evidence to the contrary. Your second sentence is just anecdotal.



There you go again with the anecdotal evidence. I assure you that you in the minority if you spent 4 months fundraising to send kids to Guatemala. I can offer anecdotal evidence of my own: at my university, all of the students I know who go on these medical missions have their parents pay for them.



I prefaced that paragraph with "here's an example." Typically, what follows are sentences describing that one particular experience. I talk elsewhere in the post about how I believe that upwards of 50% of my class seem to have their medical education paid for by their parents. That is a piece of information that has helped shape my perspective of my medical class.



Again with the anecdotes. These unavoidable calamities which may or may not help someone empathize better don't simply occur to rich or to the poor. They occur uniformly across the board. If you control for these negative experiences, I firmly believe that someone who is middle-class is more likely to be able to empathize with a patient who is unable to afford their medical treatments or is laid off from their job. I am not judging an individual, I am judging a group. INDIVIDUALS experience things such as MS or giving birth to disabled children. However, THE ENTIRE MIDDLE CLASS wrestles with affording rent, mortgages, bills, layoffs, etc. They are more relatable (empathic) to the common man because they ARE the common man. I think this is an entirely fair statement to make.



Things like failing out of medical school or not completing medical school or getting into an accident are things that can happen to anyone, rich or poor, and are rarities. Those should not stop us from being able to make broad generalized statements that apply to the MAJORITY of people within a certain group. The fact that there is an exception doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a rule. If that were the case, Orgo would be a nightmare - eek - exceptions everywhere!

Sigh. The point is, I am writing about an observable fact, and you're throwing in your observations based on your own experience. I am saying "most apples are red," and you are saying "some apples are yellow."

Let me just point out that your defense to anything that anyone says against you is that what they are saying is all anecdotal, and therefore its not a powerful or even valid argument in comparison to yours. Well you should know that everything that you seem to be spitting as fact is all anecdotal as its surveyed from your own [limited] experiences. Dont believe me well here is just one of a plethora of quotes that could be pulled from your posts

"I believe that upwards of 50% of my class seem to have their medical education paid for by their parents. That is a piece of information that has helped shape my perspective of my medical class. "

So what you try and portray as a statistic is actually complete bs because i doubt you surveyed more then 5 people to finally come to this conclusion. You admit this by prefacing it with "I believe". So not only are YOUR posts anecdotal, they are also hypocritical as you provide just as weak support for your arguments.

 

[histidine]

I love this post. It begins to get at the heart of a major issue with the admission's process: How much of an advantage do applicants have coming from a stable environment with adequate resources and support?

The answer is simply this: A lot.

Coming from very humble roots, the idea of becoming a doctor was IMPOSSIBLE- it was like winning the lottery- don't waste your time. I think many students take for granted everything they have of have been given. For example, parental guidance may seem trivial to those who have had it, but you couldn't even begin to imagine how not having someone to give you advice can have a negative impact. This is especially true of younger children, where the entire course of their lives can be permanently altered.

Well of course. But giving people significant advantages to level the playing ground can have very interesting effects - see the flipside in the "affluenza" defense. Wealthy parents didn't spend time with their son to teach him morals. He drives drunk and kills a few kids. Who's responsible? The kid or parents? The judge said the kid was not completely at fault, as the didn't have, as you put it, adequate parental guidance.

Where do we draw the line for personal responsibility when every aspect of who we are as individuals is shaped by our family, our friends, and the rest of our environment.

 

[highhopes92]

Let me just point out that your defense to anything that anyone says against you is that what they are saying is all anecdotal, and therefore its not a powerful or even valid argument in comparison to yours. Well you should know that everything that you seem to be spitting as fact is all anecdotal as its surveyed from your own [limited] experiences. Dont believe me well here is just one of a plethora of quotes that could be pulled from your posts "I believe that upwards of 50% of my class seem to have their medical education paid for by their parents. That is a piece of information that has helped shape my perspective of my medical class. " So what you try and portray as a statistic is actually complete bs because i doubt you surveyed more then 5 people to finally come to this conclusion. You admit this by prefacing it with "I believe". So not only are YOUR posts anecdotal, they are also hypocritical as you provide just as weak support for your arguments.

As someone who comes from a lower middle class family, from a town with low income households, the idea of medical schools is very rarely tossed around. I have been fortunate with need based scholarships to attend school and be able to not have to spend more then 20 hours a week working to support myself. However, to put things in perspective, if you're wealthy enough to afford a car (gas, car insurance, parking pass) to drive to hospitals to clinics etc for volunteering you are already at a huge advantage for medical school applications and even then you need to have time between studying and working to go to the hospital. Also, affording the study books, practice tests and study material not even including the courses is still absurdly expensive. Then the actual application cycle requires a LOT of money and caters to people who can afford to apply to 20+ schools. Yes there is FAP, but that only goes so far. Also what about the families that don't qualify for FAP but are still not able to afford all these different aspects.

It is a process that caters to the wealthy, can someone from a lower socioeconomic status do it? Of course, but it is certainly easier if you have money

 

[BlackBox]

If you honestly think that people that come from wealthier families have store bought resumes and were given their acceptance then you have true problems. I wonder if you had taken this tach during your interview if you would have still been admitted, or would you have been seen as a bitter, and immature kid, who is mad because he now just noticed life isn't fair. You cant control what socioeconomic family you are born into. You seem to think that people who are well off are less deserving of the rewards if the same hard work they put in relative to their less wealthy classmates. At the end of the day, wealthy or not, anyone who gets an admission into medical school put in a lot of work to get there, and its never going to be the exact same situation between people, but everyone struggles through out the process, and everyone has to put the time in to do well on their mcat, grades, EC etc. If you dont put in the effort and have the skill to convert that effort into results no amount of mcat classes or tutoring are going to get you good grades.

By your logic, you would equally say that people who are in the top 5% of IQ and had to do little studying to get good grades or a good mcat, and are socially adept should be held to a different standard then their lower IQ classmates? Yet I am sure this is not the view you have.

Get off your high horse, thinking that you have done enough in your life that you have earned the right to pass out judgement on who is worthy to join you in medical school and who isn't.

You seem to have taken this a bit personally. I believe the OP was simply making the argument that when you spend more time studying (b/c you don't have to make ends-meet) and with better materials (b/c they are paid for by someone else), and go on free CV-building excursions to make yourself a more attractive applicant, you have an advantage. It's tough to argue with that. Also implied in the post is that the applicants selected for in this process are potentially NOT what the AAMC actually wants- by their own missions.

While everyone puts in a great amount of work to get where they are, some have to traverse a tougher rout. For example, not having to worry about how your life will be funded (food/clothes/apartment/transportation/MCAT prep courses & materials) during undergrad is a clear advantage in this process.

Take this from someone who dropped out of high school at 16 and slept in his car during large parts of undergrad- money matters.

EDIT: I brought this up at one of my interviews and even forwarded the socioeconomic vs MCAT paper to the interviewer. Only children are afraid to stand-up for what they believe.

 

[sourdoughllama]

it's family education and support in the general sense rather than strictly financial support that provides the outsized advantage to students from professional-class families.

Agreed. I'm surprised no one has said this yet, but the advantage of coming from an educated/affluent family is long term. From birth, people from these families are experiencing things poor people do not get access to (i.e. dance class, music class, tutoring, interacting with professionals, interacting with intellectuals). This discrepancy only grows bigger as the education level gets higher. Poor people do not have access to the same type of SAT prep, or inside scoop on the top schools, or interview tips, etc, etc. These small differences can play a huge role in how well someone performs. It's no huge coincidence top undergrads/med schools have such a ridiculous over representation of wealthy families - it is because they have been swimming in resources since birth and are quantitatively better candidates for said schools. Do I agree with poor people needing some sort of affirmative action? Maybe, but most likely not - I'm a proponent of the best candidates getting accepted based on merit. I'm definitely in the bottom half of the SES ladder and I don't think I've accomplished anything extraordinary to get where I am, but there is a huge difference of how well rounded as a person you can be depending on your family SES. Having/not having the cash to study for the MCAT for a summer or paying for interviews/apps is meaningless; having your whole life limited due to resources is the true limiting factor

 

[histidine]

Agreed. I'm surprised no one has said this yet, but the advantage of coming from an educated/affluent family is long term. From birth, people from these families are experiencing things poor people do not get access to (i.e. dance class, music class, tutoring, interacting with professionals, interacting with intellectuals). This discrepancy only grows bigger as the education level gets bigger. Poor people do not have access to the same type of SAT prep, or inside scoop on the top schools, or interview tips, etc, etc. These small differences can play a huge role in how well someone performs. It's no huge coincidence top undergrads/med schools have such a ridiculous over representation of wealthy families - it is because they have been swimming in resources since birth and are quantitatively better candidates for said schools. Do I agree with poor people needing some sort of affirmative action? Maybe, but most likely not - I'm a proponent of the best candidates getting accepted based on merit. I'm definitely in the bottom half of the SES ladder and I don't think I've accomplished anything extraordinary to get where I am, but there is a huge difference of how well rounded as a person you can be depending on your family SES

Definitely agree. I think that the leveling of the playing field between wealthy families and middle class and poor should occur in the early stages of one's development. The public school system should be hauled over. Wealthy districts should not be the only key holders to first class education. Affirmative action needs to happen, but in today's society it is happening too late to make much of a difference.

 

[BlackBox]

Well of course. But giving people significant advantages to level the playing ground can have very interesting effects - see the flipside in the "affluenza" defense. Wealthy parents didn't spend time with their son to teach him morals. He drives drunk and kills a few kids. Who's responsible? The kid or parents? The judge said the kid was not completely at fault, as the didn't have, as you put it, adequate parental guidance.

Where do we draw the line for personal responsibility when every aspect of who we are as individuals is shaped by our family, our friends, and the rest of our environment.

I actually can't tell if you're serious with this post. Please see post #59.

As a side, I don't believe vehicular manslaughter due to driving while intoxicated is a relevant comparison to being unable to afford better study materials or a child born into an abusive situation. Sorry, I just don't draw the line there. I don't believe a child born into a situation where adequate parental guidance is absent excuses murder- the fact you made the comparison indicates you have missed, and will likely never understand the point.

 

[histidine]

I actually can't tell if you're serious with this post. Please see post #59.

As a side, I don't believe vehicular manslaughter due to driving while intoxicated is a relevant comparison to being unable to afford better study materials or a child born into an abusive situation. Sorry, I just don't draw the line there. I don't believe a child born into a situation where adequate parental guidance is absent excuses murder- the fact you made the comparison indicates you have missed, and will likely never understand the point.

Harsh insult buddy. I was giving an over the top example of the kinds of ridiculous things that happen when the excuse of "lack of parental guidance" is misused. I wasn't countering your point. No need to get all defensive.

 

[BurberryDoc]

@BurberryDoc: You're absolutely right in that I need to keep my mouth shut about this kind of thing while I'm in medical school (or even afterward). This isn't the type of subject that would make for polite dinner conversation. That's why I created a second account to make this post. I don't want my friends knowing that I feel this way because I have friends from all across the board.

I admit that my initial post in this thread simplifies the differences between the top 5% and the middle-class. As for not providing constructive commentary: trust me, I would have provided some had there been any constructive commentary to suggest. I wrote this piece up hoping to spark some lively discussion where there might have been some solutions being thrown around. I think it's important to bring up your complaints even if you don't have a solution because someone else might - man is a social and collaborative being - what I cannot see, you might.

When you went through and dissected the OP, you did a fantastic job of providing anecdotal evidence about your own case. Thank you very much for that. Your story is indeed inspiring. However, you pretty much completely failed to address the main point of the post. Let me reiterate it for you here: Right now, it is MUCH EASIER to make yourself a competitive applicant for medical school (High grades, MCAT, research, volunteering, etc.) if you come from a wealthy background. There are a disproportionate amount of students from wealthy households who attend medical school. I am not suggesting in any form or fashion that it is impossible for those who are middle class to gain acceptance to medical school. I am only saying that it is much, much harder.



I guess I'm a fool then. I know plenty of privileged students of average or below-average intelligence who have taken a year off to improve their application. You call me a fool, yet you don't present any evidence to the contrary. Your second sentence is just anecdotal.



There you go again with the anecdotal evidence. I assure you that you in the minority if you spent 4 months fundraising to send kids to Guatemala. I can offer anecdotal evidence of my own: at my university, all of the students I know who go on these medical missions have their parents pay for them.



I prefaced that paragraph with "here's an example." Typically, what follows are sentences describing that one particular experience. I talk elsewhere in the post about how I believe that upwards of 50% of my class seem to have their medical education paid for by their parents. That is a piece of information that has helped shape my perspective of my medical class.



Again with the anecdotes. These unavoidable calamities which may or may not help someone empathize better don't simply occur to rich or to the poor. They occur uniformly across the board. If you control for these negative experiences, I firmly believe that someone who is middle-class is more likely to be able to empathize with a patient who is unable to afford their medical treatments or is laid off from their job. I am not judging an individual, I am judging a group. INDIVIDUALS experience things such as MS or giving birth to disabled children. However, THE ENTIRE MIDDLE CLASS wrestles with affording rent, mortgages, bills, layoffs, etc. They are more relatable (empathic) to the common man because they ARE the common man. I think this is an entirely fair statement to make.



Things like failing out of medical school or not completing medical school or getting into an accident are things that can happen to anyone, rich or poor, and are rarities. Those should not stop us from being able to make broad generalized statements that apply to the MAJORITY of people within a certain group. The fact that there is an exception doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a rule. If that were the case, Orgo would be a nightmare - eek - exceptions everywhere!

Sigh. The point is, I am writing about an observable fact, and you're throwing in your observations based on your own experience. I am saying "most apples are red," and you are saying "some apples are yellow."

Friend, the point is that you are painting with a VERY broad brush, and for what you are calling "anecdotes", I counter, as many before me have, that your observation is not specific to medical school admissions - money gives you an advantage in life, certainly. That doesn't mean that people who do not have that advantaged are passed over or even held to the same standard - yes, a certain academic benchmark must be met, but if you are working 3 jobs to put yourself through college, then 3 hours a week of volunteering over two summers may be substantial enough, vs. two unpaid summer research internships for the financially well off students. I stand by my initial commentary - your original post is childish, cry-baby nonsense.

I calls em like I see's em.

 

[histidine]

I thought I'd just interrupt this conversation with a little tidbit. Everyone here has the time to voluntarily post on an internet forum using, presumably, a computer or smartphone. We all live in the USA. Those facts alone almost guarantee that we are better off than most people on this earth. All of us are privileged in some way.

 

[BlackBox]

Harsh insult buddy. I was giving an over the top example of the kinds of ridiculous things that happen when the excuse of "lack of parental guidance" is misused. I wasn't countering your point. No need to get all defensive.

When you pose an argument, expect a defense.

I fail to understand the point of making a comparison b/t getting away with murdering several people and not having all the resources (money/knowledge) that others do. I literally laughed when I read, where do you draw the line? Uh yea, it's vehicular manslaughter. Wait...yep, that's where the line is. lol

 

[sourdoughllama]

That doesn't mean that people who do not have that advantaged are passed over or even held to the same standard - yes, a certain academic benchmark must be met, but if you are working 3 jobs to put yourself through college, then 3 hours a week of volunteering over two summers may be substantial enough, vs. two unpaid summer research internships for the financially well off students. .

But what isn't mentioned here is that yes, while that snapshot (med school app) may cut the poor student a little slack, the poor student is just a less impressive person to begin with. They're not as articulate/well cultured/well rounded as a person from a wealthy family. Of course, there are those who can pull it off, but in general, that is not the case. The accumulation of discrepancy of resources overtime is way bigger than what you're painting with that scenario. Some kids don't even know what the SAT is while others have been preparing for it for years. Then the same goes for knowing to talk to professors, knowing to go to a career center, learning how to interview well, etc. It's not as black and white as that

 

[histidine]

When you pose an argument, expect a defense.

I fail to understand the point of making a comparison b/t getting away with murdering several people and not having all the resources (money/knowledge) that others do. I literally laughed when I read, where do you draw the line? Uh yea, it's vehicular manslaughter. Wait...yep, that's where the line is. lol

There is a difference between a defense and an insult. Here's a defense: The point is that not everyone draws the line in the same place. Which is why the guy got off with just some counseling. How do you not get the link. He got off of murder by saying he didn't have all the resources that others do.

Here's an insult: Maybe you should have slept in your car less and went to class more.

 

[SunsFun]

Trust me when I tell you that I realize the OP was not writing a personal attack. However, their 'insight' is poorly informed, and suggested a very narrow scope of the socioeconomic diversity of entering medical students, and is marked with undertones that villify the middle and upper class, while also providing no constructive commentary to what steps could/should be taken to resolve their complaints. I'm of the opinion that you don't complain about something if you don't have an idea (good or bad) on how to resolve the issue at hand. More simply, put up or shut up. That the OP was accepted to medical school, is commendable, but when you start making claims like "How can this generation of people be taught to empathize with and care for those who have nothing when they themselves have unfairly snatched admission by flashing their store-bought resumes to the admissions staff?" You lose all credibily. (See my comments on Toni Braxton and Jack Osbourne.) I don't believe in luck - I believe in creating opportunities for yourself when they don't avail themselves. If you want to call 'luck' my living in the New York metro area (as opposed to say, a rural area like central Nebraska_ where I was able to contact 100's upon 100's of researchers and physicians before being told "yes, you can have an opportunity to volunteer with my lab/observe my practice", then sure, I'm very lucky. I do not believe luck has played any role in my achievements. Certainly, luck prevails, as the adage goes, but I personally wouldn't regard myself "lucky." I am not concerned with the perceived validity/reffutability of my comments, but rather that I was heard by the OP - I am not incorrect in my proposition, that they will want to keep these sentiments to themselves in medical school - if their entering class is as socioeconomically privileged as stated, these remarks will most likely come off inflammatory and alienate the OP from their classmates - bad move in an environment like medical school.

Your luck started as you were born in the US (or got an opportunity to come here). Plenty of people arguably a lot more intelligent, hard-working, and empathetic than me will never have the same opportunity just because they had a tough luck being born in a third world country. To say that luck means nothing to someone's success is IMO a complete lunacy.

 

[slopes23]

You seem to have taken this a bit personally. I believe the OP was simply making the argument that when you spend more time studying (b/c you don't have to make ends-meet) and with better materials (b/c they are paid for by someone else), and go on free CV-building excursions to make yourself a more attractive applicant, you have an advantage. It's tough to argue with that. Also implied in the post is that the applicants selected for in this process are potentially NOT what the AAMC actually wants- by their own missions.

While everyone puts in a great amount of work to get where they are, some have to traverse a tougher rout. For example, not having to worry about how your life will be funded (food/clothes/apartment/transportation/MCAT prep courses & materials) during undergrad is a clear advantage in this process.

Take this from someone who dropped out of high school at 16 and slept in his car during large parts of undergrad- money matters.

The disadvantages you are stating are of the more extreme case, and it's awesome that you overcame them and have come this far and continued to persevere. But the average college student does not have these disadvantages, and I am sure the OP did not drop out of highschool, and slept in his car during his undergrad. However, I digress.

It's not so much that I have strong feelings on the topic personally on way or the other, I just strongly dislike people who think they have the world figured out and are gods gift to the world, meaning that they somehow think they have the right to judge others and their situation. Focus on your own situation, keep your head down, and get to freaking work. The same problems he criticizes, he himself contributes to. How? Some how he thinks he is better than 50% of his cohort, because he has so much life experience to know that he earned his way, and that all the "rich kids" don't deserve to be there. This is the worst type of elitist there is because they feel that they worked to get to where they are and passionately feel the need to judge others based on little or no facts. Then he has the nerve to tell people that their arguments are anecdotal, when his arguments are as well. I don't like it when people talk out of their a** and I hate people who are ignorant. Honestly believing the things that this kid believes is ignorance I apologize. Is it a more ideal situation to have money? Sure, there are a lot of things that make this whole process more ideal. Money is merely one of them.

Perhaps a tip to Mr. Anonymous -- Be more humble, because it's clearly something you didn't learn while you were supposedly struggling. Learn to have empathy for your cohorts, all of them. Rich or poor, recognize that you don't know their situation and whatever unique barrier they had to overcome to be there joining you and understand that everyone overcame barriers of one sort or another in order to make it. Don't stereotype your classmates because you are minimizing their accomplishments, doing them a disservice, all just to make yourself feel better about being there. Next use this newly learned humility and empathy and apply it to your patients when you finally become an actual doctor some day.

People with such strong feelings against other people always strike me as ignorant, because it shows me that they never took the time to picture the world from any other perspective than their own. And more importantly (and frightening) is that you don't think you need to.

 

[Wait For It]

If I was a parent, and I decided to make more sacrifices when raising my child (whether it be through sacrifices in my time, hard earned money, and the opportunity costs of their use for this purpose -i.e. towards my standard of living), should I or should I not be able to create opportunities and advantages for my children?

(i.e. potentially middle class family with some children who instead of having a certain standard of living, put a large portion of their savings towards their children's undergraduate and graduate education, test prep, etc.)

 

[BurberryDoc]

Your luck started as you were born in the US (or got an opportunity to come here). Plenty of people arguably a lot more intelligent, hard-working, and empathetic than me will never have the same opportunity just because they had a tough luck being born in a third world country. To say that luck means nothing to someone's success is IMO a complete lunacy.

Yeah, but what you are suggesting is perhaps out of the context/scope of this discussion - when you start talking about individuals on student visas from other countries, you begin to split hairs. By the way, I was not born in the United States, I was born in southern asia, and my parents moved to the U.S. some months after I was born. Any way you slice it, lets assume, since the vast majority of US medical school applicants are educated in the United States, that this is who we are talking about here. If you insist on taking your arguments to such extremes, I am done discussing this topic with you.

 

[BlackBox]

There is a difference between a defense and an insult. Here's a defense: The point is that not everyone draws the line in the same place. Which is why the guy got off with just some counseling. How do you not get the link. He got off of murder by saying he didn't have all the resources that others do.

Here's an insult: Maybe you should have slept in your car less and went to class more.

Still not agreeing with the comparison.

 

[BlackBox]

The disadvantages you are stating are of the more extreme case, and it's awesome that you overcame them and have come this far and continued to persevere. But the average college student does not have these disadvantages, and I am sure the OP did not drop out of highschool, and slept in his car during his undergrad. However, I digress.

It's not so much that I have strong feelings on the topic personally on way or the other, I just strongly dislike people who think they have the world figured out and are gods gift to the world, meaning that they somehow think they have the right to judge others and their situation. Focus on your own situation, keep your head down, and get to freaking work. The same problems he criticizes, he himself contributes to. How? Some how he thinks he is better than 50% of his cohort, because he has so much life experience to know that he earned his way, and that all the "rich kids" don't deserve to be there. This is the worst type of elitist there is because they feel that they worked to get to where they are and passionately feel the need to judge others based on little or no facts. Then he has the nerve to tell people that their arguments are anecdotal, when his arguments are as well. I don't like it when people talk out of their a** and I hate people who are ignorant. Honestly believing the things that this kid believes is ignorance I apologize. Is it a more ideal situation to have money? Sure, there are a lot of things that make this whole process more ideal. Money is merely one of them.

Perhaps a tip to Mr. Anonymous -- Be more humble, because it's clearly something you didn't learn while you were supposedly struggling. Learn to have empathy for your cohorts, all of them. Rich or poor, recognize that you don't know their situation and whatever unique barrier they had to overcome to be there joining you and understand that everyone overcame barriers of one sort or another in order to make it. Don't stereotype your classmates because you are minimizing their accomplishments, doing them a disservice, all just to make yourself feel better about being there. Next use this newly learned humility and empathy and apply it to your patients when you finally become an actual doctor some day.

People with such strong feelings against other people always strike me as ignorant, because it shows me that they never took the time to picture the world from any other perspective than their own. And more importantly (and frightening) is that you don't think you need to.

Agree completely- maybe some of OP's points are extreme (especially coming from a middle-class background), but he/she makes some good points... as do you.

 

[SunsFun]

If you honestly think that people that come from wealthier families have store bought resumes and were given their acceptance then you have true problems. I wonder if you had taken this tach during your interview if you would have still been admitted, or would you have been seen as a bitter, and immature kid, who is mad because he now just noticed life isn't fair. You cant control what socioeconomic family you are born into. You seem to think that people who are well off are less deserving of the rewards if the same hard work they put in relative to their less wealthy classmates. At the end of the day, wealthy or not, anyone who gets an admission into medical school put in a lot of work to get there, and its never going to be the exact same situation between people, but everyone struggles through out the process, and everyone has to put the time in to do well on their mcat, grades, EC etc. If you dont put in the effort and have the skill to convert that effort into results no amount of mcat classes or tutoring are going to get you good grades.

By your logic, you would equally say that people who are in the top 5% of IQ and had to do little studying to get good grades or a good mcat, and are socially adept should be held to a different standard then their lower IQ classmates? Yet I am sure this is not the view you have.

Get off your high horse, thinking that you have done enough in your life that you have earned the right to pass out judgement on who is worthy to join you in medical school and who isn't.

You're arguing against a strawman. None of the points you attributed to him are his actual arguments. The analogy with IQ is deeply flawed as well.

 

[histidine]

Still not agreeing with the comparison.

Ok, let me try again.

1) You state that the lack of resources, specifically parental guidance, is a negative factor that permanently alters a child's life. I agree.
2) You don't state this, but disadvantages, including troubled households, domestic abuse, etc, are hardships that are taken into account in med school admissions.
3) Lack of parental guidance, although definitely a disadvantage, would be a difficult thing for adcoms to judge.
4) When people do go about using "lack of parental guidance" as a defense, ridiculous things happen- like being excused for drunken triple murder.

 

[SunsFun]

Yeah, but what you are suggesting is perhaps out of the context/scope of this discussion - when you start talking about individuals on student visas from other countries, you begin to split hairs. By the way, I was not born in the United States, I was born in southern asia, and my parents moved to the U.S. some months after I was born. Any way you slice it, lets assume, since the vast majority of US medical school applicants are educated in the United States, that this is who we are talking about here. If you insist on taking your arguments to such extremes, I am done discussing this topic with you.

You made an absolute statement that luck had no role in your success. I just showed that it did to a huge degree and this is not splitting hairs or taking it to an extreme.

P.S. Being born in some inner city parts of the US is pretty much on par with being born abroad opportunity-wise.

 

[BurberryDoc]

You made an absolute statement that luck had no role in your success. I just showed that it did to a huge degree and this is not splitting hairs or taking it to an extreme.

P.S. Being born in some inner city parts of the US is pretty much on par with being born abroad opportunity-wise.

It hasn't. End of story. Smart ideas, foresight, planning, savings, nickel-and-diming, for a brighter future. Resourcefulness and humility. Discipline, commitment, talent. Do you want to say I am "lucky" to posess these qualities? I stand by my word, luck has had nothing to do with my success (relative to others in the United States.) I am a white male, but that is about as far as I will let you take the "luck" argument. I realize that luck prevails, but I will never concede my accomplishments are due to luck.

Best of luck to you, SunsFun.
(See what I did there?)

 

[histidine]

Lot of people chiming in on what it's like coming from a disadvantaged background. I thought I'd share my experience growing up with more money than I could spend.

 

[Distinct]

It hasn't. End of story. Smart ideas, foresight, planning, savings, nickel-and-diming, for a brighter future. Resourcefulness and humility. Discipline, commitment, talent. Do you want to say I am "lucky" to posess these qualities? I stand by my word, luck has had nothing to do with my success (relative to others in the United States.) I am a white male, but that is about as far as I will let you take the "luck" argument. I realize that luck prevails, but I will never concede my accomplishments are due to luck.

Best of luck to you, SunsFun.
(See what I did there?)

You are lucky that you weren't hit by a car this morning. Or that you weren't hit by a drunk driver in a car. You were lucky to be born intelligent enough to handle your coursework.

 

[BlackBox]

Ok, let me try again.


1) You state that the lack of resources, specifically parental guidance, is a negative factor that permanently alters a child's life. I agree.


2) You don't state this, but disadvantages, including troubled households, domestic abuse, etc, are hardships that are taken into account in med school admissions.


3) Lack of parental guidance, although definitely a disadvantage, would be a difficult thing for adcoms to judge.


4) When people do go about using "lack of parental guidance" as a defense, ridiculous things happen- like being excused for drunken triple murder.

Thank you for the numbering system. It really helped me- As you already implied, I didn't attend class much.

1. Me too. This is my whole point.

2. Correct, I never stated this. In extreme cases, it's already too late for some kids.

3.Agreed. It's all subjective with no formal way to quantify.

4. I still can't believe that this isolated example of extremism (further hyped by the media) is a fair comparison to any of my points above. Even if I had argued for those disadvantages to be quantitatively considered in the application process (which you already stated I didn't in point #2), the comparison is far too extreme to be of any value. In all seriousness, you have implied that if parental guidance is considered is considered in the medical school application process, something as serious as a murderer walking free can occur. By your words, ridiculous things happen. I just don't buy into this thin-edge-of-the-wedge analogy.

So IMO your comparison is invalid either b/c it can't apply to what I said in my original post, or it's too extreme to be relevant. To put it another way, let's say for example that AMCAS does factor in parental guidance in deciding medical school admissions. Is the worst thing that can happen something as serious as a free pass on murder? It's just an absurd comparison.

 

[BurberryDoc]

You are lucky that you weren't hit by a car this morning. Or that you weren't hit by a drunk driver in a car. You were lucky to be born intelligent enough to handle your coursework.

This doesn't even warrant a intelligible response. For the love of Christ, I hope we never have to encounter each other again in the course of our education and clinical training.

 

[histidine]

Thank you for the numbering system. It really helped me- As you already implied, I didn't attend class much.

1. Me too. This is my whole point.

2. Correct, I never stated this. In extreme cases, it's already too late for some kids.

3.Agreed. It's all subjective with no formal way to quantify.

4. I still can't believe that this isolated example of extremism (further hyped by the media) is a fair comparison to any of my points above. Even if I had argued for those disadvantages to be quantitatively considered in the application process (which you already stated I didn't in point #2), the comparison is far too extreme to be of any value. In all seriousness, you have implied that if parental guidance is considered is considered in the medical school application process, something as serious as a murderer walking free can occur. By your words, ridiculous things happen. I just don't buy into this thin-edge-of-the-wedge analogy.

So IMO your comparison is invalid either b/c it can't apply to what I said in my original post, or it's too extreme to be relevant. To put it another way, let's say for example that AMCAS does factor in parental guidance in deciding medical school admissions. Is the worst thing that can happen is a free pass on murder? It's just an absurd comparison.

I literally just through the example into the mix. As I stated earlier, it wasn't meant to counter your post. It was merely meant to provoke thought. A judge deemed it fair for a kid to get off with affluenza. Clearly fairness is not a strong point of our society, nor is it a strong point of the med application process.

 

[BlackBox]

I literally just through the example into the mix. As I stated earlier, it wasn't meant to counter your post. It was merely meant to provoke thought. A judge deemed it fair for a kid to get off with affluenza. Clearly fairness is not a strong point of our society, nor is it a strong point of the med application process.

Okay- let's put it to rest. I apologize for insulting you. I'll try not to cry myself to sleep tonight thinking of yours' jk

 

[SunsFun]

It hasn't. End of story. Smart ideas, foresight, planning, savings, nickel-and-diming, for a brighter future. Resourcefulness and humility. Discipline, commitment, talent. Do you want to say I am "lucky" to posess these qualities? I stand by my word, luck has had nothing to do with my success (relative to others in the United States.) I am a white male, but that is about as far as I will let you take the "luck" argument. I realize that luck prevails, but I will never concede my accomplishments are due to luck.

Best of luck to you, SunsFun.
(See what I did there?)

I certainly hope my luck doesn't run out and same to you.

I guess we are at two extremes and will have to agree to disagree. I believe that (almost) all of my accomplishments are primarily due to luck. The hard work is just improving my odds. The acceptances to medical schools honestly felt like winning a lottery.

 

[histidine]

Okay- let's put it to rest. I apologize for insulting you. I'll try not to cry myself to sleep tonight thinking of yours' jk

I know you are strong 😍

 

[SunsFun]

Two points I want to bring up after reading this thread without replying to anyone in particular.

It seems like quite a few people see success of numerous others (including specific personal examples) from underprivileged background as a sign that hard work is a way out. I will not argue that it means a great deal and along with positive attitude can take people far. But this sort of ignored the bigger picture of overall disparity. Just because someone made it doesn't mean it's okay that others from the same place are facing additional obstacles.

This brings me to my second point. Several responses boil down to "life isn't fair, so suck it up and deal with it". This includes asking OP for specific solutions if he is to speak about unfairness. I feel that acknowledging a problem but then rationalizing it away under the pretense of not having any good ideas to consider. Raising awareness in and of itself is important. Making sure more bright people acknowledge it as a problem is certainly better than just "deal with it". I don't have any good (that I am comfortable discussing here) ideas as to how to fix this but I still think this issue should be brought up. I mean, being honest, how many of you If you had a similar question in your interview or MMI scenario would say something like "life isn't fair, those people should just like deal with it"?

 

[acceptmeplease]

I came from a low-middle class, single-parent household, and I don't completely buy into wealthy people having an advantage in this process. I've had to sleep in cars. I've had to work 3 jobs to pay for school. And I still call bs for a few reasons. When I didn't have "time", I got less sleep. I was up at 4 am and went to bed late.

1) the wealthy people still had to put in the work. Discipline is not an economic variable about which I've ever learned. Who cares if people paid for prep classes or had special study material? The rich student still had to sit through the class. The material didn't absorb itself.

2) I saw the argument about the social aspects of poverty. One can learn social constraints through free resources such as television, YouTube, library books. My father doesn't own a tie let alone know how to tie one. I still managed to learn what types of suits to wear to interviews and how to wear them.

3) there are some advantages poorer people have over the "elite". The include learning independence early, learning the value of self-made hard work, the consequences of not sticking to a budget, the ability to empathize with poor patients.

For every minute someone spends coming up with an excuse why they cannot succeed, a flash card could have been reviewed.

 

[acceptmeplease]

Also, why wouldn't people provide the best environment socially and professionally for their children? This is modern day fitness.

You'd better believe my children will be privileged to the resources that I didn't have.

 

[SunsFun]

Also, why wouldn't people provide the best environment socially and professionally for their children? This is modern day fitness.

You'd better believe my children will be privileged to the resources that I didn't have.

It's just a different mindset. I don't know about others but I am an egalitarian. I can care less about some socio-evolutionary fitness argument. I care about more people having a fair chance and adequate opportunities.

 

[bunnyg]

Thankfully, I was able to do this because I received a full scholarship to my state school.


Do you think any middle class kid would have gotten this no matter how smart he/she was?? If you are middle class you are basically screwed. Don't have enough money to pay for college but have enough to receive LITTLE/NOTHING from the state.

 

[Espadaleader]

I believe we all respect the hard work an sacrifice of all pre-medical students. Rich or poor. Hard work is required on behalf of the student regardless. I respect everyone of my peers in this process because we all give up something for this. However, money and resources are a huge benefit in this process and it is important not to downplay it. Again, I don't think anyone is saying "you're rich, you don't deserve your spot" - its just important to be objective.

I'll change my status to Pre-medical. I didn't know it was a faux pas.

Peace.

 

[sourdoughllama]

1) the wealthy people still had to put in the work. Discipline is not an economic variable about which I've ever learned. Who cares if people paid for prep classes or had special study material? The rich student still had to sit through the class. The material didn't absorb itself.

2) I saw the argument about the social aspects of poverty. One can learn social constraints through free resources such as television, YouTube, library books. My father doesn't own a tie let alone know how to tie one. I still managed to learn what types of suits to wear to interviews and how to wear them.

3) there are some advantages poorer people have over the "elite". The include learning independence early, learning the value of self-made hard work, the consequences of not sticking to a budget, the ability to empathize with poor patients.

1) Agreed. But the quality of resources can vary highly. Of course wealthy people have to work hard. No one claimed a 3.0/25 rich kid will get in to med school; it's just that with the same amount of effort, rich kids will have more support and resources to achieve more
2) Also agreed, but only given that the poor kid interacts enough with wealthy folk/intellectual folk to even begin to know where to look. If you don't even know what the SAT is, how can you look up study methods? I'm all for asking questions but sometimes I don't know what to ask because I'm too misinformed.
3) Ya

Unrelated:
"Life is unfair, suck it up" - The fact that we are all mostly in med school/applying to med school is a testament that our lives are in lots of ways on the "fair" end of the spectrum. I'd like to see a hobo turned plastic surgeon. If there's one, then they can school me in "life is unfair, suck it up" all day long

 

[acceptmeplease]

1) Agreed. But the quality of resources can vary highly. Of course wealthy people have to work hard. No one claimed a 3.0/25 rich kid will get in to med school; it's just that with the same amount of effort, rich kids will have more support and resources to achieve more
2) Also agreed, but only given that the poor kid interacts enough with wealthy folk/intellectual folk to even begin to know where to look. If you don't even know what the SAT is, how can you look up study methods? I'm all for asking questions but sometimes I don't know what to ask because I'm too misinformed.
3) Ya

Unrelated:
"Life is unfair, suck it up" - The fact that we are all mostly in med school/applying to med school is a testament that our lives are in lots of ways on the "fair" end of the spectrum. I'd like to see a hobo turned plastic surgeon. If there's one, then they can school me in "life is unfair, suck it up" all day long

Well, life isn't fair. It isn't fair that my mother dropped out of high school and became a drug addict or that my two older sisters became drug users themselves and didn't finish high school either. I didn't have a lot growing up. I didn't have my own bed until my freshman year of high school. We ate macaroni and cheese more than 5 nights a week because that's all my mom could afford. So what. You know what I did? I didn't settle for excuses. I can't change my family's past, but I can change my future. A defeatist attitude will accomplish nothing.

I'm not saying there aren't people worse off than what I was, but I'm saying I had it pretty damn rough.

Don't pity the poor, they just have more potential for improvement.

 

[sourdoughllama]

..

 

[BlueLabel]

Let's think about this from another perspective. Let's say you're an underprivileged kid with minimal family support. You work tooth and nail to claw your way to a good university, where you have to make sacrifices to your social life and work like a dog just to keep your grades up and your head above water. You struggle to keep this up while studying for the MCAT, and you rely on FAP and the sweat off your back to just barely afford application fees and interviews.

Success!! You were accepted! Your strong work ethic propels you to a career in a high-paying specialty that suits the lifestyle you always wanted for yourself and your family. Finally, at long last, you can savor the fruits of your labor. Fast forward a generation or so.

Now Jr. is applying to medical school. Is your honest contention that you expect him to enjoy NO benefit over others? In fact, have you not been working your entire life for the SOLE purpose of being able to provide your children with such benefits? What is the point of accumulating wealth in the first place if you cannot use it at least in some way for the benefit of yourself and your offspring? Obviously philanthropy is an important priority and I intend to place a special priority on charitable giving, but at least for me - I want to know I'm working hard so I can provide for my children someday.

How would you feel if someone told you that all the effort you poured into making sure you could provide well for your family was negated? Let's strip away all this nonsense and leave the OP bare for what it really is: a diatribe against capitalism.

OP, you don't want all men to be equal; the bitterness and scorn that drips from your post makes it clear that your main priority is that the wealthy be made low. The problem with this absurd obsession on one particular facet of fortune is that it neglects the multitude of ways in which men and women are unequal. In looks, in cleverness, in motivation, in grace, in courtesy, in size and shape, we are different. It would be impossible to negate any, much less all, of these inequalities.

The only real solution to the problem you pose is to get on board with Karl. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Great philosophy, terrible policy.

Good luck in school and I hope you have a change of heart along the way.

 

[BurberryDoc]

Let's think about this from another perspective. Let's say you're an underprivileged kid with minimal family support. You work tooth and nail to claw your way to a good university, where you have to make sacrifices to your social life and work like a dog just to keep your grades up and your head above water. You struggle to keep this up while studying for the MCAT, and you rely on FAP and the sweat off your back to just barely afford application fees and interviews.

Success!! You were accepted! Your strong work ethic propels you to a career in a high-paying specialty that suits the lifestyle you always wanted for yourself and your family. Finally, at long last, you can savor the fruits of your labor. Fast forward a generation or so.

Now Jr. is applying to medical school. Is your honest contention that you expect him to enjoy NO benefit over others? In fact, have you not been working your entire life for the SOLE purpose of being able to provide your children with such benefits? What is the point of accumulating wealth in the first place if you cannot use it at least in some way for the benefit of yourself and your offspring? Obviously philanthropy is an important priority and I intend to place a special priority on charitable giving, but at least for me - I want to know I'm working hard so I can provide for my children someday.

How would you feel if someone told you that all the effort you poured into making sure you could provide well for your family was negated? Let's strip away all this nonsense and leave the OP bare for what it really is: a diatribe against capitalism.

OP, you don't want all men to be equal; the bitterness and scorn that drips from your post makes it clear that your main priority is that the wealthy be made low. The problem with this absurd obsession on one particular facet of fortune is that it neglects the multitude of ways in which men and women are unequal. In looks, in cleverness, in motivation, in grace, in courtesy, in size and shape, we are different. It would be impossible to negate any, much less all, of these inequalities.

The only real solution to the problem you pose is to get on board with Karl. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Great philosophy, terrible policy.

Good luck in school and I hope you have a change of heart along the way.

Check and Marx.

 

[acceptmeplease]

Let's think about this from another perspective. Let's say you're an underprivileged kid with minimal family support. You work tooth and nail to claw your way to a good university, where you have to make sacrifices to your social life and work like a dog just to keep your grades up and your head above water. You struggle to keep this up while studying for the MCAT, and you rely on FAP and the sweat off your back to just barely afford application fees and interviews.

Success!! You were accepted! Your strong work ethic propels you to a career in a high-paying specialty that suits the lifestyle you always wanted for yourself and your family. Finally, at long last, you can savor the fruits of your labor. Fast forward a generation or so.

Now Jr. is applying to medical school. Is your honest contention that you expect him to enjoy NO benefit over others? In fact, have you not been working your entire life for the SOLE purpose of being able to provide your children with such benefits? What is the point of accumulating wealth in the first place if you cannot use it at least in some way for the benefit of yourself and your offspring? Obviously philanthropy is an important priority and I intend to place a special priority on charitable giving, but at least for me - I want to know I'm working hard so I can provide for my children someday.

How would you feel if someone told you that all the effort you poured into making sure you could provide well for your family was negated? Let's strip away all this nonsense and leave the OP bare for what it really is: a diatribe against capitalism.

OP, you don't want all men to be equal; the bitterness and scorn that drips from your post makes it clear that your main priority is that the wealthy be made low. The problem with this absurd obsession on one particular facet of fortune is that it neglects the multitude of ways in which men and women are unequal. In looks, in cleverness, in motivation, in grace, in courtesy, in size and shape, we are different. It would be impossible to negate any, much less all, of these inequalities.

The only real solution to the problem you pose is to get on board with Karl. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Great philosophy, terrible policy.

Good luck in school and I hope you have a change of heart along the way.

Fo sho.

 

[deleted480308]

Let's think about this from another perspective. Let's say you're an underprivileged kid with minimal family support. You work tooth and nail to claw your way to a good university, where you have to make sacrifices to your social life and work like a dog just to keep your grades up and your head above water. You struggle to keep this up while studying for the MCAT, and you rely on FAP and the sweat off your back to just barely afford application fees and interviews.

Success!! You were accepted! Your strong work ethic propels you to a career in a high-paying specialty that suits the lifestyle you always wanted for yourself and your family. Finally, at long last, you can savor the fruits of your labor. Fast forward a generation or so.

Now Jr. is applying to medical school. Is your honest contention that you expect him to enjoy NO benefit over others? In fact, have you not been working your entire life for the SOLE purpose of being able to provide your children with such benefits? What is the point of accumulating wealth in the first place if you cannot use it at least in some way for the benefit of yourself and your offspring? Obviously philanthropy is an important priority and I intend to place a special priority on charitable giving, but at least for me - I want to know I'm working hard so I can provide for my children someday.

How would you feel if someone told you that all the effort you poured into making sure you could provide well for your family was negated? Let's strip away all this nonsense and leave the OP bare for what it really is: a diatribe against capitalism.

OP, you don't want all men to be equal; the bitterness and scorn that drips from your post makes it clear that your main priority is that the wealthy be made low. The problem with this absurd obsession on one particular facet of fortune is that it neglects the multitude of ways in which men and women are unequal. In looks, in cleverness, in motivation, in grace, in courtesy, in size and shape, we are different. It would be impossible to negate any, much less all, of these inequalities.

The only real solution to the problem you pose is to get on board with Karl. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Great philosophy, terrible policy.

Good luck in school and I hope you have a change of heart along the way.

Bluelabel wins the internet....

My grandfather left school in 6th grade to run the farm because his dad died. He managed to convince my dad to go to college even though he couldn't help. My dad built his own construction business and all of his kids are now successful professionals (me, the 33yr old matriculating med student is the relative failure). Three generations kicked their asses week in and week out to get me where I am and if you think I don't expect to give my kids the fruits of our efforts you are an idiot. That's not unearned privilege, that's a hard earned inheritance.

 

[BlackBox]

Those who have the resources will and should do all they can for their children, whether they come from humble of lavish roots. However, there is a clear advantage to coming from wealth. I don't think we should try to level the playing field by making rich-people poor. I sure as hell don't want that for my kids. There's just a problem. Call it life's unfair, or whatever, there's just a difference.

@sourdoughllama makes a good point- it's not always easy to know which questions need asking, especially at very impressionable ages (I'm thinking K-8-ish). During those years Google and YouTube didn't exist for me! I can't even imagine not having these resources now and no one is going to take them away from me! It's funny b/c I had no idea what the SAT was until I found out I needed it for a 4yr school.

No matter what the debate/opinion on this thread, I am amazed by all the inspiring stories from some of the posters!

 

[Tommyguns89]

I think socio-economic factors should play a higher role in admissions if only for the MASSIVE amount of distrust there is of physicians from the working class. I am from a working class family and neighborhood and pretty much everyone I have ever came in contact with has a high distrust of professionals, especially lawyers and doctors. If I had a dime for every time I was working with my dad and he or somebody went on a rant about the pharmaceutical industry giving kickbacks to doctors, well this thread would be a moot point as I would be able to pay for all my expenses and all of yours.

As to the larger thread at hand the way I see it, Med Schools need to pick the people more likely to be the best doctors. It is ridiculously unfair, I agree for the reasons OP stated. However med schools dont have a duty to make it fair to everyone. That is where the governments should step in. And for the most part I think they do a good job but state governments should make state schools more affordable and test prep should be optional courses included in tuition. Thankfully the main advantage the wealthy have(superior guidance) is going away with the rise of sites like SDN.

But the most distressful thing is the conflict and hate I see from both sides in this thread, and it is only going to get worse as wealth continues to be concentrated at the top and opportunity for those without connections decline.