Question about getting licensed and criminal background

[wrestler445]

I've done quite a bit of reading about the background checks and I got a lot of information I needed but am still a little confused.

I am currently 18 and my situation is I have a dropped MIP (minor in possession of alcohol) charge. I am in the process of getting this charge expunged from my record. I was not convicted. I have read that medical schools don't ask for charges, only convictions. I have also read that secondaries do ask for charges, but I do not know what a secondary is, so if someone could shed some light on this, it would be appreciated.

Now onto getting licensed. I have read that THIS background check is very, very in-depth. This concerns me because of my expunged misdemeanor charge (MIP). Will this show up on a background check performed by the NRMP? If so, how much can this affect me getting my license? Thinking ahead, I won't graduate from medical school until I am at least 26; six years is a long time to mature into a responsible adult.

If anyone could help fill me in here I would really appreciate it. I'm stressing out about this and feel scared I might end up wasting 8 years of my life to only find out I can't become licensed.

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Smurfette]

If it gets expunged, you will likely not have to disclose it...but confirm this with an attorney. Lying on a disclosure form will give you BIG problems.

However, an alcohol underage possession charge is not likely to prevent you from getting licensed as long as 1. it's an isolated incident with no other drug/alcohol related things on your record 2. it's not recent 3. it wasn't paired with another crime (like DUI or assault, or whatever else). You are not the first person on SDN to worry about this, so it's not unheard of or something that licensing boards and med schools haven't seen before.

The main thing that causes problems is anything involving potential harm to others---so DUI, drug charges, a pattern of drug/alcohol related charges that may be indicative of chemical dependence, assault, etc. While the best case scenario is to get an underage ticket expunged, if that is the ONLY thing in your record, it shouldn't cause any severe issues---just possibly a request for an explanation and a bit more red tape where you can say you did it a long time ago, it was stupid and you learned your lesson and kept your nose clean since. It depends on who is conducting the background check and what their threshhold is....an isolated underage possession charge may be no problem whatsoever in some hospitals/states and require explanations for others. Also, read the disclosure forms carefully. If it asks only about convictions, then no worries as your answer would be truthfully 'no'. Just don't lie on the form. Some background checks are more extensive, so it's hard to know what they will find. Most background checks don't care about speeding tickets, but I've seen forms that wanted those listed too.....

 

[nitemagi]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=795255

Actively being discussed right now. Here's the worst case scenario...

 

[wrestler445]

If it gets expunged, you will likely not have to disclose it...but confirm this with an attorney. Lying on a disclosure form will give you BIG problems.

However, an alcohol underage possession charge is not likely to prevent you from getting licensed as long as 1. it's an isolated incident with no other drug/alcohol related things on your record 2. it's not recent 3. it wasn't paired with another crime (like DUI or assault, or whatever else). You are not the first person on SDN to worry about this, so it's not unheard of or something that licensing boards and med schools haven't seen before.

The main thing that causes problems is anything involving potential harm to others---so DUI, drug charges, a pattern of drug/alcohol related charges that may be indicative of chemical dependence, assault, etc. While the best case scenario is to get an underage ticket expunged, if that is the ONLY thing in your record, it shouldn't cause any severe issues---just possibly a request for an explanation and a bit more red tape where you can say you did it a long time ago, it was stupid and you learned your lesson and kept your nose clean since. It depends on who is conducting the background check and what their threshhold is....an isolated underage possession charge may be no problem whatsoever in some hospitals/states and require explanations for others. Also, read the disclosure forms carefully. If it asks only about convictions, then no worries as your answer would be truthfully 'no'. Just don't lie on the form. Some background checks are more extensive, so it's hard to know what they will find. Most background checks don't care about speeding tickets, but I've seen forms that wanted those listed too.....

Thank you very much! Your response is golden!

My MIP was couple with an infraction for "reasonable suspicion" of driving under the influence with a blood alcohol level of .01 or less. Obviously a .01 is not even half buzzed (which is the reasoning behind it only being an infraction-for adults 21 and over it is .08). The DMV treats this as DUI but the court doesn't. It is only a traffic ticket. Or so I assume haha, I will need to speak about this with my attorney. Nevertheless I plan to get this infraction expunged as well, as I was not convicted of this charge either.

Nitemagi- Thank you for pointing that thread out! After reading it through it appears that it is unlawful to ask about dismissed charges. Therefore I would presume it is legal to answer "No". Another question for my attorney...

 

[dpmd]

California specifically states you must report everything even if it was dismissed, set aside, expunged, and all sorts of other things people usually use to believe they don't need to report it. Not to say that you won't get a license if you report it, but that if you are caught you will be in for some serious trouble. I'm sure other states have similar rules. That is why some schools are going to ask about charges. They know people like to get technical about the terms when they have a past. Asking have you ever been charged is pretty clearly asking you to report what you told us about (and then they may decide it doesn't matter and let you in anyway). Electing not to and then being found out may again cause a lot of problems. Just be honest (not relying on convoluted word play) and hope for the best.

 

[wrestler445]

Thank you dpmd. I did not know about that California law. Even though the AMCAS says I do not have to report it, because I was charged in California I still have to?

Also, how much more difficult will admitting the charges make getting into a residency? It seems like a waste of time to go through medical school only to find there is a .01% chance of a residency looking past a charge from ~8 years ago.

Thanks

 

[Smurfette]

Thank you dpmd. I did not know about that California law. Even though the AMCAS says I do not have to report it, because I was charged in California I still have to?

Also, how much more difficult will admitting the charges make getting into a residency? It seems like a waste of time to go through medical school only to find there is a .01% chance of a residency looking past a charge from ~8 years ago.

Thanks

No, he means that in California, the forms specifically want to know about all charges.
Some states specifically ask for convictions, and then ask further if you've ever been charged with (insert certain crimes here, usually involving assault, abuse, DUI, etc.). Same for malpractice forms and privilege applications....states and individuals companys/hospitals vary in how they phrase the question.

What it means for you is that you need to read the form carefully to make sure that you check the right box depending on how they ask the question. If it's phrased in a vague matter, err on the side of caution and disclose it. If it clearly says 'conviction' you can say no.

Med schools will do a background check on you as well....keep in mind they want to make sure you can practice as well and do not want to invest in students who are ultimately unemployable when they have long waiting lists and could otherwise give your spot to someone else. Something that would cause you to be permanently unlicensable would be discovered very early on and they would not let you continue as you still need to be able to pass hospital background checks and be covered under their student malpractice during your clinical years (unless you do something AFTER they do your background check...).

Once again, if this is an isolated charge and the 3 points I made in my prior post are taken care of, it should not cause further problems i.e. it should not prevent you from getting a license or a job altogether...but it could require an explanation and give you an extra hoop to jump through depending on the agency involved. I don't understand what you meant by a secondary DUI charge that didn't meet criteria...if you were charged with a DUI, this will be something that will almost always need to be disclosed and would cause more problems for you.

 

[wrestler445]

I don't understand what you meant by a secondary DUI charge that didn't meet criteria...if you were charged with a DUI, this will be something that will almost always need to be disclosed and would cause more problems for you.

I meant I was charged with an infraction under the terms of suspicion of driving under the influence. This isn't DUI (it was a .01 blood alcohol level), but a ticket to nip people under 21 in the butt.

 

[dpmd]

An infraction would also be reportable if you apply for a california license.

The reason to be forthcoming about it now is to avoid the scenario where you have gone through training then find out it is a major problem. Part of the reason schools ask (besides the fact that they may not want pedophiles or rapists at their institution) is because they know that some things are going to cause a license problem (and others are not). Just like you don't want to get trained if you can't practice, they don't want to put the time into someone who can't match. If you are open with them and explain how it turned your life around/helped you mature/made you be a role model for other youngster so they avoid the path you went down (and are an otherwise desirable candidate) you may still end up with a spot. If you don't (and don't have a marginal MCAT or grades) then maybe it is a bigger deal than you realize.

 

[JaggerPlate]

An infraction would also be reportable if you apply for a california license.

The reason to be forthcoming about it now is to avoid the scenario where you have gone through training then find out it is a major problem. Part of the reason schools ask (besides the fact that they may not want pedophiles or rapists at their institution) is because they know that some things are going to cause a license problem (and others are not). Just like you don't want to get trained if you can't practice, they don't want to put the time into someone who can't match. If you are open with them and explain how it turned your life around/helped you mature/made you be a role model for other youngster so they avoid the path you went down (and are an otherwise desirable candidate) you may still end up with a spot. If you don't (and don't have a marginal MCAT or grades) then maybe it is a bigger deal than you realize.

I've read a few of these types of threads in the last few days and I'm started to get confused and a bit frustrated ...

First, is there any real reason whatsoever to believe a medical board would deny someone a license because of an infraction?? Parking tickets are classified as infractions.

Furthermore, I'm still confused about how the whole disclosure process works for things like dismissed misdemeanors, infractions, etc:

1. ERAS asks about felony convictions - obviously not an issue for someone like the OP

2. Do individuals programs then ask specific questions about criminal history? I know that in the other 'I'm a match violator' thread, the individual in question got in trouble because he was asked this question on some form during the morning of his residency interview, but from what I understand, it's not a common issue and no one else in the thread (residents) had heard of that question being asked.

3. Do you then just openly share everything with the medical board and assume drinking charges from college, infractions, etc, aren't going to make a difference as long as you're honest? This doesn't seem like the type of 'crime' they are trying to catch and prevent from treating patients.

4. Do you have to go through background checks for rotations, residency, and license application. Do all stages of the medical progression (student to resident to license application) see these reports?

I apologize, but I've never even seen this question brought up before until recently and it seems like there have been a number of threads about it lately. I can't even count on 2 hands the number of individuals in school, residency, etc, that I know with these little blunders and the thought of it coming back and preventing practice 10 years down the road makes no sense to me.

Thanks.

 

[gutonc]

2. Do individuals programs then ask specific questions about criminal history? I know that in the other 'I'm a match violator' thread, the individual in question got in trouble because he was asked this question on some form during the morning of his residency interview, but from what I understand, it's not a common issue and no one else in the thread (residents) had heard of that question being asked.

Some do (although it tends to be in paperwork, not an interview). And as noted above, it's primarily in states where the medical board asks similar questions. They want to know up front what, if any, issues you may have getting licensed in that state. Some states (CA) require a full unrestricted license prior to beginning PGY3 so if you can't get a license at that point, the program just wasted $200+K on you.

3. Do you then just openly share everything with the medical board and assume drinking charges from college, infractions, etc, aren't going to make a difference as long as you're honest? This doesn't seem like the type of 'crime' they are trying to catch and prevent from treating patients.

Yes...you just offer it up. Anything other than a speeding/parking ticket should be disclosed if the question comes up. True, they're not trying to catch somebody who got busted at a frat party during their freshman year of college. But somebody who repeatedly got busted for MIP over the course of high school/college and then managed to get out of 2 DUI charges in med school because his dad was golfing buddies with the DA is somebody that they're trying to catch because that's a concerning pattern of behavior if not addressed proactively.

As I pointed out in the other thread, medicine is not one of the areas where it's "better to seek forgiveness than to ask permission." Err on the side of over-reporting. Nobody is going to keep you out of residency or keep you from getting a medical license for an MIP or two 5-15y before you apply. But if you don't disclose them if asked, and they find out, that's more than enough reason to deny you a spot or a license...then you're hosed, potentially permanently.

4. Do you have to go through background checks for rotations, residency, and license application. Do all stages of the medical progression (student to resident to license application) see these reports?

For any rotation involving a VA hospital, yes. I've been fingerprinted 5 or 6 times by the VA during the course of med school, residency and fellowship (one more coming up soon). Most programs will do some sort of background check post-Match. Any program with a VA will do a very thorough, FBI/DHS background check. Likewise, pretty much every state licensing board will do the same (most/all require an FBI fingerprint check). Also the DEA. Also hospital credentialing boards, etc.

I apologize, but I've never even seen this question brought up before until recently and it seems like there have been a number of threads about it lately.

Actually, there have been 2. Hakim100's thread and this one (which should have been merged into that one).

I can't even count on 2 hands the number of individuals in school, residency, etc, that I know with these little blunders and the thought of it coming back and preventing practice 10 years down the road makes no sense to me.

Where the hell did you all go to school? I can count on 1 finger the number of people I know who have EtOH-related charges/convictions and that dude got caught going 75 in a 25 zone in an Acura NSX past the police station swigging a beer as he went past. Oh...did I mention no driver's license or insurance?

The fact that I went to college in MO where Anheuser-Busch appears to have written the alcohol-related laws and med/grad school in NYC where you can pretty much get away with doing lines of coke off the hood of a cop car as long as you're not brown or in a sketchy neighborhood may have something to do with my sample size.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Some do (although it tends to be in paperwork, not an interview). And as noted above, it's primarily in states where the medical board asks similar questions. They want to know up front what, if any, issues you may have getting licensed in that state. Some states (CA) require a full unrestricted license prior to beginning PGY3 so if you can't get a license at that point, the program just wasted $200+K on you.

So, just to clarify, this isn't normally something they ask in an interview for a residency position, meaning they would hold it 'against' you or something during the selection process? Hakim100 made it sound like if he would have disclosed it, he wouldn't have been ranked.

Granted, this isn't something I'm losing sleep over, but I've never heard issues like this before these two threads and it's odd trying to find concrete answers after reading a situation like Hakim's where it seems very odd.

Also, I've heard rumors that CA is a bit nuts when it comes to granting a license ... does your '10 year ago MIP freshman year' mindset still hold up in this case?

Yes...you just offer it up. Anything other than a speeding/parking ticket should be disclosed if the question comes up. True, they're not trying to catch somebody who got busted at a frat party during their freshman year of college. But somebody who repeatedly got busted for MIP over the course of high school/college and then managed to get out of 2 DUI charges in med school because his dad was golfing buddies with the DA is somebody that they're trying to catch because that's a concerning pattern of behavior if not addressed proactively.

Yeah, I'm really not worried about any sort of patten of behavior or anything like that, and I always personally side with caution because, like you said, it's better to explain than ask forgiveness.

Nobody is going to keep you out of residency or keep you from getting a medical license for an MIP or two 5-15y before you apply. But if you don't disclose them if asked, and they find out, that's more than enough reason to deny you a spot or a license...then you're hosed, potentially permanently.

Thank you for clarifying ... this is essentially what I was trying to get at. Just using common sense, I was fairly certain that getting busted drinking a beer in the college dorms at 19 or getting a parking ticket wouldn't be a big deal, but I kept reading conflicting information (though I found Hakim's situation/thread difficult to wrap my head around in the first place)

Where the hell did you all go to school? I can count on 1 finger the number of people I know who have EtOH-related charges/convictions and that dude got caught going 75 in a 25 zone in an Acura NSX past the police station swigging a beer as he went past. Oh...did I mention no driver's license or insurance?

The fact that I went to college in MO where Anheuser-Busch appears to have written the alcohol-related laws and med/grad school in NYC where you can pretty much get away with doing lines of coke off the hood of a cop car as long as you're not brown or in a sketchy neighborhood may have something to do with my sample size.

In the state I went to school, the police force around college towns essentially have a business of writing alcohol tickets. I'm not talking about DUIs, people with a series of charges, a history of substance abuse, etc, but situations where police will break up a party and ticket every person leaving under 21 etc. No joke, I have a friend in a frat who during a 'freshman/newbie' sort of thing had to go on a beer run with an older brother, was helping to carry a case of beer out of a store (middle of the afternoon on a weekday, totally sober), was greeted by a police officer when he walked out the door, asked for ID, and given an MIP without explanation. These counties all conveniently also have the famous 'deferment' programs where you pay an extra grand, go to a class on a Saturday, and the charges are dropped.

I wasn't kidding when I said I can't even count the number of people I know with these types of ticket (even those in med school). Again, these people aren't crazy, party people, etc, but just did what every other 18-20 year old does on Friday nights and happened to get caught.

Thank you for taking the time to clarify.

 

[dpmd]

No joke, I have a friend in a frat who during a 'freshman/newbie' sort of thing had to go on a beer run with an older brother, was helping to carry a case of beer out of a store (middle of the afternoon on a weekday, totally sober), was greeted by a police officer when he walked out the door, asked for ID, and given an MIP without explanation.

Why would they need to give an explanation? He was too young to drink (minor) and he was carrying (in possession) of a case of beer. Not saying it is a fair law, just that he was indefensibly in violation of it.

I had to do background checks when I started residency, when I applied for my license, and when I went on an away rotation to a county hospital (not counting when I was in the Army). Except for the license application they didn't ask me about charges or convictions (and it came up clear even though I have had parking tickets and a speeding ticket in the past).

Here is what California has to say about the issue:

Conviction - How it Might Affect a License / PTAL Application

The Board frequently receives questions about criminal convictions and how they could affect an application for a physician's and surgeon's license and/or an application for a Postgraduate Training Authorization Letter (PTAL).

The Board is unable to provide legal advice. Every situation is different and is addresed on an individual basis. The Board reviews every conviction based not only on the conviction itself in relation to the statutes, but also on the underlying issues which led to the conviction. The laws do not differentiate between a felony and a misdemeanor conviction.

The Board does receive information regarding actions which have been expunged, and the application forms advise applicants to disclose all prior convictions including those that have been dismissed or expunged. In addition, pending charges must be reported by an applicant immediately upon notification of the charge. The Board will learn of these actions through the fingerprint criminal history check.

A conviction that does not, at first glance, appear to be substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a physician, may, under closer scrutiny, be revealed otherwise (e.g; reckless driving, DUI's, and sex crimes). All information related to an applicant's criminal history is considered. The specific conviction; when it occurred; the circumstances surrounding the conviction; the number of convictions; compliance with the court's terms and conditions; and rehabilitation are factors considered when determining an applicant's eligibility for licensure. In addition, one of the more important criteria is disclosure of the conviction. Failure to disclose a conviction is considered to be dishonest, and therefore an egregious breach of ethics and unprofessional conduct.

The Board has three options relative to PTALs or licensure: issue a PTAL or license; deny a PTAL or license; or place a license on probation. These actions must be substantiated by appropriate evidence. The primary statutes relating to denial or probation of a PTAL or license are California Business and Professions Code Sections 480, 820, 2234, 2239, and 2305.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Why would they need to give an explanation? He was too young to drink (minor) and he was carrying (in possession) of a case of beer. Not saying it is a fair law, just that he was indefensibly in violation of it.

You're right, but I think it's hard to argue that the situation wasn't a bit severe and helps answer guc's question.

Here is what California has to say about the issue:

Conviction - How it Might Affect a License / PTAL Application

The Board frequently receives questions about criminal convictions and how they could affect an application for a physician's and surgeon's license and/or an application for a Postgraduate Training Authorization Letter (PTAL).

The Board is unable to provide legal advice. Every situation is different and is addresed on an individual basis. The Board reviews every conviction based not only on the conviction itself in relation to the statutes, but also on the underlying issues which led to the conviction. The laws do not differentiate between a felony and a misdemeanor conviction.

The Board does receive information regarding actions which have been expunged, and the application forms advise applicants to disclose all prior convictions including those that have been dismissed or expunged. In addition, pending charges must be reported by an applicant immediately upon notification of the charge. The Board will learn of these actions through the fingerprint criminal history check.

A conviction that does not, at first glance, appear to be substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a physician, may, under closer scrutiny, be revealed otherwise (e.g; reckless driving, DUI's, and sex crimes). All information related to an applicant's criminal history is considered. The specific conviction; when it occurred; the circumstances surrounding the conviction; the number of convictions; compliance with the court's terms and conditions; and rehabilitation are factors considered when determining an applicant's eligibility for licensure. In addition, one of the more important criteria is disclosure of the conviction. Failure to disclose a conviction is considered to be dishonest, and therefore an egregious breach of ethics and unprofessional conduct.

The Board has three options relative to PTALs or licensure: issue a PTAL or license; deny a PTAL or license; or place a license on probation. These actions must be substantiated by appropriate evidence. The primary statutes relating to denial or probation of a PTAL or license are California Business and Professions Code Sections 480, 820, 2234, 2239, and 2305.

Yeah ... it essentially just sounds like they want you to be completely open and honest, even with little things (that probably shouldn't affect you in the long run).

 

[Smurfette]

The background checks and disclosure forms are ubiquitous in medicine. Essentially every hospital, state licensing board, medicare, DEA, insurance company will ask questions about convictions and run background checks (sometimes it's a separate form, and sometimes the small print of the application states that you consent to background checks, among other things). Of the mountain of paperwork you need to fill out for licensure and for privileging (when an attending), the background check is the least complex, least time-consuming part. It's other stupid things that will hold things up (like needing transcripts from undergrad or getting a hold of your current state licensing board to send a given form with certain information directly to another state board, etc. etc.).

I personally have never been fingerprinted for my job so far....2 state licenses, completed med school (5-6 hospitals, including a very short stint at a VA), residency (with 3 different hospitals) and a permanent position (yet another hospital) and none have requested it. Depends on where you are practicing.

 

[JaggerPlate]

The background checks and disclosure forms are ubiquitous in medicine. Essentially every hospital, state licensing board, medicare, DEA, insurance company will ask questions about convictions and run background checks (sometimes it's a separate form, and sometimes the small print of the application states that you consent to background checks, among other things). Of the mountain of paperwork you need to fill out for licensure and for privileging (when an attending), the background check is the least complex, least time-consuming part. It's other stupid things that will hold things up (like needing transcripts from undergrad or getting a hold of your current state licensing board to send a given form with certain information directly to another state board, etc. etc.).

I personally have never been fingerprinted for my job so far....2 state licenses, completed med school (5-6 hospitals, including a very short stint at a VA), residency (with 3 different hospitals) and a permanent position (yet another hospital) and none have requested it. Depends on where you are practicing.

Thanks. I guess my biggest question now is whether or not a lot of specific residency 'applications' or any sort of paperwork you'd have to fill out BEFORE an interview/selection process (i.e. could it theoretically be used as a reason not to rank an applicant) would ask the 'charged with anything ... including everything' type of questions? Or is this too state dependent?

I definitely get residencies not wanting to waste their time and resources training a doc who won't be able to obtain a license, but it just makes me wonder if it's common to have to explain the little things that a board may ask for, but not deny you for, before even interviewing a candidate. Or would they just assume the ERAS questions would take care of the big red flags.

 

[Smurfette]

Thanks. I guess my biggest question now is whether or not a lot of specific residency 'applications' or any sort of paperwork you'd have to fill out BEFORE an interview/selection process (i.e. could it theoretically be used as a reason not to rank an applicant) would ask the 'charged with anything ... including everything' type of questions? Or is this too state dependent?

I definitely get residencies not wanting to waste their time and resources training a doc who won't be able to obtain a license, but it just makes me wonder if it's common to have to explain the little things that a board may ask for, but not deny you for, before even interviewing a candidate. Or would they just assume the ERAS questions would take care of the big red flags.

Most programs just use ERAS. There are a few places that may ask you to fill out a secondary app prior to an interview, but that is not typical and they are usually asking about other things, not criminal backgrounds. They don't ask at your interview for this information (I suppose they might if it appears in your ERAS app). Also, the med school background check will weed out most things that make you unlicensable before you ever even get close to residency (unless you get charged with something after the med school background check is completed). Once you match, then you get the paperwork for your residency program and state licensing board.

The reason to explain things up front for licensure etc. is to speed things up (licenses etc. take a while to process...often a few months). If you explain it up front when requested, they can review your explanation and either move on or request further info. But when you don't explain it up front, then it may be a few weeks before they contact you wanting an explanation, and then it may take a few more weeks for them to get back to your file and review the explanation and so forth. In other words, it's a way to try to minimize the bureaucracy if you have an anomaly in your application.

 

[wrestler445]

Wow thanks so much to everyone in this thread. I feel a lot better.

 

[Roofie]

It seems that different states have slightly different meanings for words like dismissed, expunged, etc.

An adjudication in one state that gives the convict rights to privacy might not be respected by another state like California. This implicates serious issues of conflicts of laws between states. I don't think California can ask about an expunged criminal past from a different state that does not permit the record to be revealed. But California can certainly request expunged records of its own adjudications if that's what its state law permits.

However there is a problem in that criminal records may have been recorded by private information companies that sell this information nationwide. There have been suits against these companies for "negligently forgetting to update" juvenile records. It would be an interesting case if California gets its hands on these records and uses it against a convict exercising rights granted him by the state that adjudicated his offense. The tragic chain of events could embroil multiple parties in litigation.

Serious criminal history could affect your admissions decisions. Revealing unnecessary information could result in discrimination. Yet not revealing required information could result in a deceit charge. You will have to balance your privacy rights with disclosures that may violate those rights.

If you want to exercise your rights, I think your best option would be to consult an attorney experienced in juvenile adjudications prior to applying.

It is good that you are taking care of this problem now. It will allow you to maximize your opportunities when you graduate and guide where you would like to practice.

 

[Doctor4Life1769]

Any issues with a wreckless driving ticket? No alcohol involved, it was for speeding.

 

[JackADeli]

...dishonest, and therefore an egregious breach of ethics and unprofessional conduct...

This is one of the more important points inthis issue. I remember in interviewing for residency, the point about "never lie" was always, always a major emphasis. I think the saying went something like, "stupidity can be forgiven but dishonesty is a capital offense in medicine". The extension is, if you would lie about your failures as a resident to a senior or attending to save your hide.... you would likely lie to avoid a malpract loss and probably lie to hide continued incompetence. So, if you lie to get a medical license....

It seems that different states have slightly different meanings for words like dismissed, expunged, etc.

An adjudication in one state that gives the convict rights to privacy might not be respected by another state like California. This implicates serious issues of conflicts of laws between states. I don't think California can ask about an expunged criminal past from a different state that does not permit the record to be revealed. But California can certainly request expunged records of its own adjudications if that's what its state law permits...

This is what I think folks are misunderstanding. The promise of one state to "expunge" a charge and/or conviction is a protection/guarantee exclusive within that state. If you leave that state and seek to practice under the laws of another, you must abide by the new states laws and disclose what they ask. The new state has made no promise or agreement to hide your past deeds.

Can the state learn about past deeds from the original state? who knows. In theory, if your original state honors their "promise" they won't inform California or where ever. But, California has no obligation to honor a protection guaranteed... while you resided within another state. Your contract/agreement with Cali or other is disclosure to their expectations. Your choice is to not go to that state if you do not want to disclose.

Also, yes, I have had to give an explanation for speeding tickets for medical licenses. Some states even ask you to report all moving traffice violations.

Final note, it was staed earlier, please, if you have a past issue, please see an attorney and don't go by what we say on a forum.

 

[Infusioner]

Found this thread a little late, but I wanted to share the following in case it eases any minds. I can't stress enough though, this is only my experience; seek appropriate legal advice:

I got an MIP about 8 years ago in a state other than where I went to undergrad/go to medical school/will do residency (if the details of the states matter, shoot me a message. It's none of the previously mentioned). It was later sealed (or expunged...I'm not a lawyer) due to my not breaking any more laws. I did report it on AMCAS and was subjected to a background check (like everyone else) before medical school. No issue was made then, nor have they ever.

With regard to residency apps, I believe they only asked about felonies, therefore, I did not have to report it then. Not sure how this all plays into licensure, however, I will find out eventually. Some second hand info on residency/licensure: I have heard from a classmate who matched into a very prestigious surgery program that (her program) told her that her MIP would not count against her (hers was not expunged) with regard to being in the program or for licensure in that state.

Yeah, yeah, people may have heard this before, but to be honest, when I was in a similar position 8 years ago, every positive story or sign helped. I just wanted to share it for the OP and anyone that was nervous about this preventing their chances of getting into medical school or residency. To my knowledge, it never changed my chance for acceptance into any programs (including "unranked" state schools and "top 5" med schools).

Just keep your nose clean for the next few years, explain it when you have to, hope for the best, and enjoy life. If you have specific questions, shoot me a message. Also, sorry about the spelling/grammar. I'm terrible at both.

 

[MKE2STL]

It's important to understand whether or not your violation is a criminal offense and what type of criminal offense it is (misdemeanor or felony). In some states, an MIP is not a criminal offense, in other states, it is a misdemeanor.

Some background checks or application only ask for criminal offenses or crimes (misdemeanors and felonies). Others ask for all violations of the law.

 

[JustTheFacts]

This may help some folks. The link contains a state by state summary of the "Consideration of Criminal Record in Licensing and Employment." It is a good start, but given that it was compiled a few years ago, some states have since revised their laws to include automatic bars to licensing in a few circumstances (Texas & Florida are two that I know of...) So, it's worth doing a little research on your own.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/File/Collateral Consequences/table6.pdf

I have done quite a lot of work on this because I have an expunged misdemeanor conviction for a "crime of moral turpitude." Understand that in most states, this is ANYTHING dishonest, from writing a hot check to shoplifting. Likewise, in some states, such a conviction - - even when a misdemeanor and even if expunged - - means no license. It seems a bit harsh for an incident that occurred just after my 18th birthday, especially since I was too naive to know that what I was doing was illegal. (Wrong, yes - - against the law, no.) Nonetheless, I have to own up to the situation and have had this indiscretion haunt me throughout this process.

Because of the expunction, I had no trouble getting a job, getting into medical school, etc. - - in fact, it doesn't show up on a standard background check. However, I've since learned that in most states expunged doesn't really mean the history of that conviction is gone. They keep most stuff accessible to law enforcement and ... wait for it ... licensing boards. Each board is free to choose how they will treat such convictions and most (I've checked) ask about dismissed and expunged convictions. Thus, in some states I can be licensed and in some I can't because they impose an automatic bar based on my past history.

While it really is upsetting that this will preclude me from being licensed in my home state, ironically, I should be able to get a license in CA, so long as I am honest. I'd recommend anyone in a similar situation check the attached, and then your state's medical board. You don't want to spend a ton of money to find out that you can't get a license there. The same is true of even selecting a residency program. Why start where you might not be able to finish?

That brings me to a final note. The reason you don't see the level of depth with schools or residency programs is that they are NOT privy to the same level of detail as the boards. So, indeed, an expunged conviction will not show up on their records.

In my case, I was always honest - - stated the conviction, year, and circumstances - - and that it was expunged, and up until now, no issues.

I hope that helps. It sucks to have something like this hanging over your head.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

The reason you don't see the level of depth with schools or residency programs is that they are NOT privy to the same level of detail as the boards.

Small correction on this.

Any residency program with a VA will require a background check via the VA. They use the FBI. The FBI knows all, everything will show up.

 

[JustTheFacts]

Small correction on this.

Any residency program with a VA will require a background check via the VA. They use the FBI. The FBI knows all, everything will show up.

Indeed, I should have mentioned that. DC also does the full FBI check. More and more states are using fingerprints though apparently there are issues with the information. The Justice Department said that about 40% of the records contains some type of error.

 

[MightyMoose]

This may help some folks. The link contains a state by state summary of the "Consideration of Criminal Record in Licensing and Employment." It is a good start, but given that it was compiled a few years ago, some states have since revised their laws to include automatic bars to licensing in a few circumstances (Texas & Florida are two that I know of...) So, it's worth doing a little research on your own.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/File/Collateral Consequences/table6.pdf

I have done quite a lot of work on this because I have an expunged misdemeanor conviction for a "crime of moral turpitude." Understand that in most states, this is ANYTHING dishonest, from writing a hot check to shoplifting. Likewise, in some states, such a conviction - - even when a misdemeanor and even if expunged - - means no license. It seems a bit harsh for an incident that occurred just after my 18th birthday, especially since I was too naive to know that what I was doing was illegal. (Wrong, yes - - against the law, no.) Nonetheless, I have to own up to the situation and have had this indiscretion haunt me throughout this process.

Because of the expunction, I had no trouble getting a job, getting into medical school, etc. - - in fact, it doesn't show up on a standard background check. However, I've since learned that in most states expunged doesn't really mean the history of that conviction is gone. They keep most stuff accessible to law enforcement and ... wait for it ... licensing boards. Each board is free to choose how they will treat such convictions and most (I've checked) ask about dismissed and expunged convictions. Thus, in some states I can be licensed and in some I can't because they impose an automatic bar based on my past history.

While it really is upsetting that this will preclude me from being licensed in my home state, ironically, I should be able to get a license in CA, so long as I am honest. I'd recommend anyone in a similar situation check the attached, and then your state's medical board. You don't want to spend a ton of money to find out that you can't get a license there. The same is true of even selecting a residency program. Why start where you might not be able to finish?

That brings me to a final note. The reason you don't see the level of depth with schools or residency programs is that they are NOT privy to the same level of detail as the boards. So, indeed, an expunged conviction will not show up on their records.

In my case, I was always honest - - stated the conviction, year, and circumstances - - and that it was expunged, and up until now, no issues.

I hope that helps. It sucks to have something like this hanging over your head.

That really sucks, man. So, if you had been 17, the crime would not have been against moral turpitude? Also, isn't there a specific clause on crimes against moral turpitude that it doesn't include crimes where you where not aware it was a crime? It seems like moral turpitude crimes have a "with" and "without" awareness clause.

 

[Shoushu]

just out of curiosity, can the background checks at Residency and state board levels really reveal everything, including things long ago, or outside of US?

 

[gutonc]

just out of curiosity, can the background checks at Residency and state board levels really reveal everything, including things long ago, or outside of US?

Depends on how extensive a check they do and who they use to do it. As mentioned by me and aPD below, a program that includes VA rotations will have a VA background check done which is performed by FBI/DHS. I can't comment on foreign infractions, but I would assume anything bigger than a traffic violation is going to show up on an FBI background check.

 

[WeepingJacaranda]

I'm wanting to go to school for pharmacy tech, but I've been arrested with a charge of Marijuana. I live in the state of Florida, does anyone know if this charge will prevent me from getting a job?

 

[gutonc]

I'm wanting to go to school for pharmacy tech, but I've been arrested with a charge of Marijuana. I live in the state of Florida, does anyone know if this charge will prevent me from getting a job?

Yes...lawyers in Florida will know the answer to this. None of them are here.

 

[TeddyBoomBoom]

Dude....

NOBODY will care about a minor thing that happenned years ago. I know multiple medical students with past arrests for dui's, small pot possessions, reckless driving, etc. If it's an isolated thing, then you're fine.

However, if an applicant is caught lying about it then they are toast.

You'll be ok!

 

[TeddyBoomBoom]

double post sorry

 

[Giic]

I've done quite a bit of reading about the background checks and I got a lot of information I needed but am still a little confused.

I am currently 18 and my situation is I have a dropped MIP (minor in possession of alcohol) charge. I am in the process of getting this charge expunged from my record. I was not convicted. I have read that medical schools don't ask for charges, only convictions. I have also read that secondaries do ask for charges, but I do not know what a secondary is, so if someone could shed some light on this, it would be appreciated.

Now onto getting licensed. I have read that THIS background check is very, very in-depth. This concerns me because of my expunged misdemeanor charge (MIP). Will this show up on a background check performed by the NRMP? If so, how much can this affect me getting my license? Thinking ahead, I won't graduate from medical school until I am at least 26; six years is a long time to mature into a responsible adult.

If anyone could help fill me in here I would really appreciate it. I'm stressing out about this and feel scared I might end up wasting 8 years of my life to only find out I can't become licensed.

Thanks!

I personally would not penalize someone just because they got an alcohol charge at age 18.
(a) It's a really young age.
(b) It was before medical school.

Therefore, even if it does come up in your background checks, you will be asked to write a letter of explanation. And most people would accept the explanation. Especially because it is a non-violent offence.
I am posting 5 years later, so you probably have heard this a hundred times over.

 

[JustTheFacts]

I know that this is a really old thread, but I thought I'd mention that despite my youthful indiscretion, I had no trouble obtaining a full Florida licence, As I'd like to return to TX, I discussed the prior conviction and dismissal with an attorney and they do not believe I will need their services to obtain a license. We will see. Just applied. Hopefully, I did not just waste > $800. I'll update just in case there are others with the need to know.