The truth is, academia, in general, leans left, and even the most conservative individual needs to have the social awareness of that fact and be able to adapt to it for the duration of training. Another point is that part of being a good physician is the ability to navigate the diversity of patients even when the patient repulses you.
@skeptastic and I had a convo one night on the phone that if some guy comes in using the N word up and down and he is the only person who can treat him, he said that he would see it as an opportunity to provide the best care for the patient because it was a chance for him to change the patient's perspective of African Americans. We both know that it likely wouldn't, but that is an approach that makes him the winner regardless of the outcome.
At a root level, we have a sacred duty to provide healthcare to everyone. I've provided healthcare to everyone from decorated active-duty members to incarcerated child molesters and murderers. If I were interviewing someone, I would want to know that they have the social awareness to navigate the uncomfortable environment that is created when someone needs your help regardless of their personal beliefs.
Personally, as an "old white guy" I was asked questions on both sides of the spectrum and I am reasonably sure that all of them were baited questions. I was also asked patently ageist questions, which I also believe were baited questions. The adcoms aren't trying to see if you agree with a political ideology, they are trying to see if you are able to steer a conversation back to a comfortable neutral position or whether you instead will engage in a rant either for or against the topic. At the end of the day, my personal view is that they are testing equanimity, which is a critical component of a good physician's toolkit. I would be readily prepared to give thoughtful, considerate answers to all hot button issues for the foreseeable future.
@skeptastic and I had a convo one night on the phone that if some guy comes in using the N word up and down and he is the only person who can treat him, he said that he would see it as an opportunity to provide the best care for the patient because it was a chance for him to change the patient's perspective of African Americans. We both know that it likely wouldn't, but that is an approach that makes him the winner regardless of the outcome.
At a root level, we have a sacred duty to provide healthcare to everyone. I've provided healthcare to everyone from decorated active-duty members to incarcerated child molesters and murderers. If I were interviewing someone, I would want to know that they have the social awareness to navigate the uncomfortable environment that is created when someone needs your help regardless of their personal beliefs.
Personally, as an "old white guy" I was asked questions on both sides of the spectrum and I am reasonably sure that all of them were baited questions. I was also asked patently ageist questions, which I also believe were baited questions. The adcoms aren't trying to see if you agree with a political ideology, they are trying to see if you are able to steer a conversation back to a comfortable neutral position or whether you instead will engage in a rant either for or against the topic. At the end of the day, my personal view is that they are testing equanimity, which is a critical component of a good physician's toolkit. I would be readily prepared to give thoughtful, considerate answers to all hot button issues for the foreseeable future.