Shadowing a doctor in your immediate family?

[ese2]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Is this frowned upon by admissions? I want to shadow my father because it will be so much easier with logistics and all that during breaks. I'm guessing an LOR from him is not a good idea but what about just shadowing?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using SDN mobile

 

[aalamruad]

Is this frowned upon by admissions? I want to shadow my father because it will be so much easier with logistics and all that during breaks. I'm guessing an LOR from him is not a good idea but what about just shadowing?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using SDN mobile

It's probably fine, but you might as well use his connections with other docs to easily set up a bunch of other shadowing gigs too.

 

[Catalystik]

Shadowing family members is fine.

 

[Doc2be20]

As the 'Cat said, shadowing is fine. But letters from physician you shadows generally do not carry much weight by adcoms and by family perhaps even less so.

I disagree. Unless you can speak for every medical school in the country. Several I know specifically look at them, and not just because they want the students to shadow someone.

 

[OchemOficionado]

I disagree. Unless you can speak for every medical school in the country. Several I know specifically look at them, and not just because they want the students to shadow someone.

He said, GENERALLY.

 

[Doc2be20]

He said, GENERALLY.

Yes I know he said GENERALLY. I also say that generally schools like Physician letters, especially if you have a long standing relationship with them. I said specific because these were ones I heard from directly, but in MOST schools they carry weight.

 

[OchemOficionado]

Yes I know he said GENERALLY. I also say that generally schools like Physician letters, especially if you have a long standing relationship with them. I said specific because these were ones I heard from directly, but in MOST schools they carry weight.

MOST? Where are you getting that? If you're saying the previous poster, Gonnif, is completely wrong I'd like to read what you've read.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

Yes I know he said GENERALLY. I also say that generally schools like Physician letters, especially if you have a long standing relationship with them. I said specific because these were ones I heard from directly, but in MOST schools they carry weight.

Multiple adcoms here have said the opposite... I'm going to tend to go with their advice. And also I never believe anything at face value what an admissions office tells me. I've learned that they usually have no more idea than I do about certain processes.

 

[ThoracicGuy]

Yes I know he said GENERALLY. I also say that generally schools like Physician letters, especially if you have a long standing relationship with them. I said specific because these were ones I heard from directly, but in MOST schools they carry weight.

So you know better than someone who worked in med school admissions with a variety of schools with his job???

 

[LizzyM]

I'm going to chime in here... letters from physicians you know solely because you have shadowed them are not given much weight by adcoms (if any weight). letters from family members or long time family friends (who identify themselves as such in the LOR) are given NO weight. YMMV.

It is fine to shadow a family member or family friend, just don't bother asking them to write a LOR. Use that connection to be introduced to other physicians who you can shadow if a school specifies that you need a MD (or DO) LOR.

 

[mimelim]

I disagree. Unless you can speak for every medical school in the country. Several I know specifically look at them, and not just because they want the students to shadow someone.

Yes I know he said GENERALLY. I also say that generally schools like Physician letters, especially if you have a long standing relationship with them. I said specific because these were ones I heard from directly, but in MOST schools they carry weight.

Which schools want a shadowing letter? I've written/co-written 6 LOR in the last 3 months for pre-meds applying this season. I've been involved in medical school admissions in some way for 5+ years. In a couple hundred conversations with adcoms across the country and having sat on one, I've never heard of an MD school that values a letter from someone who a pre-med has only shadowed (no employment, research, etc).

How exactly do you know what "MOST" schools want or their opinions on things? Honestly, if you are giving people with a fair amount of experience in this crap about saying things prefaced with "Generally", you better have a lot of experience in this or a lot of hard data to back you up.

 

[GrapesofRath]

Sometimes you will find a school that asks about having a letter from someone in the medical community so I can see how some might confuse this with thinking some schools value shadowing LORs. The phrasing of what some schools say on their websites about LOR requirements can sometimes lead itself to multiple interpretations.

RFU wants a letter from a medical professional from whom you have worked with. For many this will be shadowing doctors
https://rosalindfranklin.edu/academics/chicago-medical-school/degree-program/common-questions/

Per University of Arizona's web page
"If you have participated in clinical activities or academic research, we'd like to see letters of recommendation from professionals who worked with you."

http://medicine.arizona.edu/admissions/application-process/letters

I can see how someone reading this would think that if they dont have research and their best relationship with someone theyve worked with in a clinical setting is a doctor they shadowed that they should use that shadowing letter. I dont see that as an unreasonable conclusion.

Another example just from perusing this briefly you can take a look at the University of Utah

" 1 letter must be from your direct supervisor for Community/Volunteer Service or Patient Exposure."

https://medicine.utah.edu/students/programs/md/admissions/faqs.php#four

Again I can see how they are inviting themselves here to get alot of shadowing LORs. And while they probably dont necessairly "want" a shadowing letter I can see why some people think it might have value from the outside looking in based off how they phrased what was on their website.

Bottom line the phrasing of websites can sometimes be a bit vague or open to multiple interpretations but like others have said, none of this provides any direct evidence that a shadowing letter is actually coveted in any way. If a school truly wants a shadowing LOR by all means let them have it but they are the exception not the norm

 

[MoDiddy]

I've shadowed (~100 hours) one of my dads partners. I was wondering should I list the hours I've shadowed my father or should I leave it off the app? Easily 200+ hours.

 

[Goro]

No, they don't. Please refrain from the sin of solipsism.

Yes I know he said GENERALLY. I also say that generally schools like Physician letters, especially if you have a long standing relationship with them. I said specific because these were ones I heard from directly, but in MOST schools they carry weight.

 

[gyngyn]

I've never seen a valuable or useful shadowing letter.
Sadly, I've had to read thousands.

 

[OchemOficionado]

Mic Drop.

 

[LizzyM]

Of course include it as part of the shadow EC. If you have some substantive interaction a letter might be of moderate value.

The issue is presentation. While there is nothing that says he/she must identify himself as one of your Dad's partners, my ethical side says he should. Therefore, he/she must express something "While I know applicant X from being in practice with his Father, my evaluation and recommendation here is no different than I would do for any other premed (or medical student or resident for that matter)" @LizzyM is probably a better guide for this than I

I think you are correct. It is best to for the LOR writer to describe how he knows you and the duration of your acquaintance. There is an inherent bias when a LOR comes from someone you know socially or with whom your dad works as a partner.

I would just not bother asking for a LOR from someone you've shadowed. Get a volunteer experience or research experience and get a letter from a doc that way but not a letter from someone who knows you only as a shadow (or as a shadow and a patient!).

 

[gyngyn]

Of course include it as part of the shadow EC. If you have some substantive interaction a letter might be of moderate value.

The issue is presentation. While there is nothing that says he/she must identify himself as one of your Dad's partners, my ethical side says he should. Therefore, he/she must express something "While I know applicant X from being in practice with his Father, my evaluation and recommendation here is no different than I would do for any other premed (or medical student or resident for that matter)" @LizzyM is probably a better guide for this than I

It's remarkable how many of these shadowing letters are from colleagues of parents.
This is another reason that they have become devalued over time.
How likely is it that anything but a glowing, baseless letter is forthcoming?

 

[mimelim]

Sometimes you will find a school that asks about having a letter from someone in the medical community so I can see how some might confuse this with thinking some schools value shadowing LORs. The phrasing of what some schools say on their websites about LOR requirements can sometimes lead itself to multiple interpretations.

RFU wants a letter from a medical professional from whom you have worked with. For many this will be shadowing doctors
https://rosalindfranklin.edu/academics/chicago-medical-school/degree-program/common-questions/

Per University of Arizona's web page
"If you have participated in clinical activities or academic research, we'd like to see letters of recommendation from professionals who worked with you."

http://medicine.arizona.edu/admissions/application-process/letters

I can see how someone reading this would think that if they dont have research and their best relationship with someone theyve worked with in a clinical setting is a doctor they shadowed that they should use that shadowing letter. I dont see that as an unreasonable conclusion.

Another example just from perusing this briefly you can take a look at the University of Utah

" 1 letter must be from your direct supervisor for Community/Volunteer Service or Patient Exposure."

https://medicine.utah.edu/students/programs/md/admissions/faqs.php#four

Again I can see how they are inviting themselves here to get alot of shadowing LORs. And while they probably dont necessairly "want" a shadowing letter I can see why some people think it might have value from the outside looking in based off how they phrased what was on their website.

Bottom line the phrasing of websites can sometimes be a bit vague or open to multiple interpretations but like others have said, none of this provides any direct evidence that a shadowing letter is actually coveted in any way. If a school truly wants a shadowing LOR by all means let them have it but they are the exception not the norm

I don't think any of those are ambiguous or vague and none of them are asking for shadowing letters. I can certainly see how a pre-med who doesn't plan and doesn't look at medical school LOR requirements attempting to stretch their shadowing letter to 'fit', but none of those are asking in any way for a letter from someone you shadowed with. Shadowing is not working with someone. It really is that simple.

 

[mimelim]

I would suggest that when you have over 100 hours, there usually is some in-depth connection and may be worthwhile to expand on it in a letter. Just my 2 cents

I disagree. Having a connection with a writer is only one part of a strong letter. While it may be less offensive to the eyes because the writer at least knows the applicant somewhat, given that the nature of the relationship surrounds an activity with no production, it is hard to imagine them having anything substantive to say about the individual of value to a committee. Are there exceptions, of course. But, the fraction has to be close to negligible. Shadowing is observing. It is a (mostly) one way street of knowledge and understanding. I've seen the experiences that applicants have claimed were bidirectional first hand. It is beyond pathetic.

 

[GrapesofRath]

Shadowing is not working with someone. It really is that simple.

In theory yes, it should be that simple. In reality though, I don think it is here.

Take a look at RFU's phrasing

"We require either three letters of recommendation, one committee letter, or one letter packet containing no more than three letters. Whichever you choose, we would like to see at least one recommendation letter from a medical professional with whom you have worked".

They basically go out of their way to specify they want a medical prof letter. They dont say "If" youve worked with one it's essentially presumed. The problem is this isnt reality for many pre-meds. If your PI is an MD, great. But otherwise, these jobs such as being a PCT, Resp Tech, Scribe etc while common the majority of applicants dont have. What then? Sounds like something might be off to specify you really want a medical professional letter when many dont have working experience with one.

Take a look at Arizona's wording on their site as well from the link above

"Applicants are required to provide, at minimum, one letter of recommendation that collaborates service with a physician and/or clinical experience".

Nothing about working with a physician. Collaborating is a word with multiple potential meanings. I dont think an unreasonable takeaway for an applicant is either a) I can use either a physician letter or a letter someone else in clinical experience. The choice is up to me b) If I dont have a letter I can really use for clinical experience use something with a physican.

I'm not really sure here I would really say a pre-med who's in a position who doesnt have a letter that doesnt fit these qualifications specifically for these select schools planned poorly either. These are all unique and specific requirements.

None of these schools are "asking for a shadowing LOR" specifically and there are ways of fulfilling the requirements in other ways. But what's the alternate if you dont have a letter from a medical professional for RFU whom you worked with or the best you can do for the AZ requirement is a shadowing LOR?

 

[LizzyM]

In theory yes, it should be that simple. In reality though, I don think it is here.

RFU has a class of 190 students and gets over 13,000 applications. It's not like close to all 190 of them worked with an actual clinician. Actual pre-med type jobs in hospitals are common but still out of a class of 190, most pre-meds didnt do something like scribing or being a PCT in college. Many do research but many also are doing research with PhD's not clinicians. So if a school like RFU explicitly says they want a letter from a clinician you've worked with and you either a) Didnt work a job such as scribing b) didnt do research with an MD, where does that leave you? The natural assumption is shadowing. In this case specifically from what Ive heard from people in the past I know whove applied to RFU who had this same question and called them, the school has said they are perfectly fine with a shadowing LOR filling this role.

I'm not really sure here I would really say a pre-med who's in a position who doesnt have a letter that doesnt fit these qualifications specifically for these select schools planned poorly either. These are all unique and specific requirements. While in an ideal world pre-meds 2 years before applying would know the specific requirements for LORs of many schools, that's not particularly feasible and I dont think its reasonable to really hold it against them if they arent trying to find jobs with specific people to fit LOR requirements at individual schools well before applying. I singled out RFU as an example, but these similar types of ideas apply for Utah and Arizona as well.

None of these schools are "asking for a shadowing LOR" specifically and there are ways of fulfilling the requirements in other ways. But what's the alternate if you didnt do research for U of Arizona or didnt work with an MD for either U AZ or RFU? Dont apply? Sounds a bit much. No way am I buying that all 117 people in Arizona's class last year worked with either did research or had a clinical job. That's where it starts getting less clear when you think about it from that perspective.

RFU states, "If you choose to submit three individual letters, we prefer (but do not require) at least one recommendation to come from a medical professional (not necessarily an MD) with whom you have worked. "

That is a "prefer" and the LOR could be from a "medical professional" who is not an MD which opens it up to DOs for certain but perhaps to RNs, PAs, paramedics, EMTs, physical therapists, and so forth. Worked, I think suggests that the school would like to see a letter from a supervisor if one has worked in a medical setting.

 

[GrapesofRath]

RFU states, "If you choose to submit three individual letters, we prefer (but do not require) at least one recommendation to come from a medical professional (not necessarily an MD) with whom you have worked. "

That is a "prefer" and the LOR could be from a "medical professional" who is not an MD which opens it up to DOs for certain but perhaps to RNs, PAs, paramedics, EMTs, physical therapists, and so forth. Worked, I think suggests that the school would like to see a letter from a supervisor if one has worked in a medical setting.

You can get away without having it technically sure. And you are right about the point where it doesnt have to be an MD.

They also however state this right after what you quoted which I think is relevant.

"We require either three letters of recommendation, one committee letter, or one letter packet containing no more than three letters. Whichever you choose, we would like to see at least one recommendation letter from a medical professional with whom you have worked".

Couple take aways from this
1) They dont say "if" you have worked with a medical professional. They just assume this is true. And they go out of their way to specify that letter.
2) If your PI is an MD, great. But if not, the majority of pre-meds even if we expand expand the definition to medical professional still arent going to have jobs with RN, PA, DO, MD etc. Scribes, PCT, Resp Tech type jobs are common but the majority of pre meds dont hold such a job
3) So with these two things being said, that's part of why my conclusion here isnt "only submit if you've worked with a medical professional". They go out of their way to say they want that letter from a medical professional even though many wont form a working relationship with one.
4)) From when I've looked into it in the past out of curiosity both scanning the RFU applicant forum and talking to people who applied there in the past I knew who had this question and called them specifically, they seem perfectly fine with a shadowing letter to fulfill this.

Regardless I think the greater message is this type of wording is potentially open to multiple interpretations. While the vast majority of med schools will place no weight in a shadowing letter, my initial point was more how I can at least how the wording on some schools websites and what they tell applicants in person if they call might occasionally cause some confusion.

 

[GrapesofRath]

We can always call/email RFU and ask. In the meanwhile that can I suggest that applicants to RFU that a "substantive" letter from a medical professional you have worked with is "highly recommended."

I didnt really intend to make this discussion get bogged down into the specifics of the requirements of specific schools. That's not what the OP's post really is about at all. We can all agree shadowing LORs the vast majority of the time have zero value. I think the discussion just got a little off track once the question came up which schools want shadowing LORs and we started getting into the specifics of those schools and it got a little more off topic about "vague" website wordings. Even if those schools were to want shadowing LORs, <10 schools out of the 150 US MD ones are still a distinct minority. Really the only people for whom this truly is of note for are people from Arizona and Utah as those are state schools many of their residents will rely on heavily for admission.

 

[LizzyM]

Schools that put a big emphasis on a LOR from a medical professional may also put a premium on applicants with work experience (not just shadowing or volunteering) in a health care setting. Plenty of college kids work summers in hospitals or clinics. Some do so during the school year too.

 

[Crayola227]

it really depends

my advice to any premed that wants a quality letter, shadow a psych!! try to find one that still does a good deal of psychotherapy
they will have to be willing to ask their patients if a student can sit in, but all psychs were involved in medical training at some point so this isn't an alien concept, some might not be willing to have you shadow. Doesn't hurt to ask.
I was surprised how many patients would let me sit in, although you must be prepared to sit out of quite a few sessions, either at the patient's request or the judgement of the physician

I'll tell you why psych shadowing can lead to a great letter
1) their field is typically very underappreciated, so they are typically not only flattered that you show interest, but also often have the time in their schedule as they don't typically have hordes of premeds trying to shadow them
2) they like to talk in proportion to how much they have to listen, almost by definition they find people fascinating so I find they love to talk with you about patients, and they don't get the chance often, this will increase your education AND give you great chances at bidirectional interaction where they can get to know you (there can be a lot of no shows opening up quite a bit of time to talk with the psychiatrist). In my experience psychiatrists have more time in their busy schedule for this, than say, the surgeon or PCP you might shadow.
3) the nature of the problems that patients will bring, is such that as a medically clueless pre-med you can demonstrate good people skills and basic wisdom to have something potentially intelligent to add to some of the discussions, and a lot of the basic diagnoses and treatment options you can read up on and not be as clueless as you might be in other specialties. Also, patients are more likely to ask you directly your opinion on things in front of the preceptor, so you are able to have direct patient contact in front of them at times (I suggest you be careful tho... this sort of shadowing is not for the psychologically/people-skill clueless. In general you are expected to be quiet during sessions, however, if patient addresses you directly it would be rude not to answer, so in that case it's OK to say something. Just be sure to be diplomatic and pick your words carefully. Read up about therapy!)
4) they are good at making in depth character assessments and writing lengthy notes about it
5) as much as other docs may not appreciate psychs, I like to think if there's anyone's psychological appraisal of another human we're going to subconsciously give weight to, it's a psychiatrist's
6) I still recommend you shadow other fields as many could argue that psychiatry might not be representative of medicine in general, part of shadowing is demonstrating enough exposure to the field to demonstrate you have realistic expectations, as long as you do that however, psych shadowing does allow you to *demonstrate* skills highly prized in any potential physician, like people skills, creating a rapport, active listening skills, intelligent discussion with a physician about a case, empathy, patience, wisdom, all of it together smacking of some serious altruism, so not only does it look good on AMCAS, it can lead to a nice letter

my pre med club set up for me to shadow a psychiatrist for like 20 hours or something, however, I asked them if they had time for me to continue our shadowing schedule beyond that, so I ended up shadowing them for a full or half day (depending on summer or classes in session) for like 2 years!!
the fact that I had shown that much interest, commitment, and initiative, ended up being noted in my letter

I didn't know at the time that this psychiatrist was actually faculty and the course director for one of the rotation sites for psychiatry of one of the medical schools I applied to!
I think their letter was able to carry a lot of weight as they introduced themselves as someone responsible for the education and evaluation of actual medical students, and they were able to compare a lot of my people skills favorably to 3rd year medical students.

I think quality of the letter is going to depend on whether you're a "shadow" or an actual participant with something to add. Part of this will depend on you and your skills, but also the quality of the physician you're "shadowing."

Shadowing, as in, being a doc's shadow, is worthless. Getting to discuss and offer "assessments" on patients as a premed with a physician? Awesome. The business of medicine has made it more difficult for attendings to even have time to teach residents or medical students. More and more medical students are having a hard time getting letters of quality as they get shunted to the sidelines, to where medical school itself is becoming shadowing.

God bless the docs that volunteer to educate, even if the best they can do is a sincere end of day, "any questions" and add to the mountain of non-clinical duties they have, the mountain of paperwork, notes, CME, phone calls, to tack on another 15-60 min talking to pre-med/med students.

 

[Law2Doc]

Ignoring the letter aspects, i would say it won't serve you well shadowing a family member. They will want you to have a good time and see only cool stuff and will do a very good job of sheltering you from a lot of the negatives in this field. Shadowing, however ought to be more neutral -- see the bad with the good. For that you are always better off with people a bit more distant. Shadowing shouldn't be the equivalent of a "take my child to work" day. So yeah, IMHO this is a bad idea. Use the family member for connections for shadowing, not the shadowing itself.

 

[Crayola227]

OK, point of my post:

1st goal of shadowing or scribing re: your app is EXPOSURE to document on AMCAS
2nd goal *might* be a LOR, if you can manage to get a good one

it's fine to shadow a doc in your immediate family as ONE of your shadow experiences
adcoms know that shadow experiences can be hard to come by so no one would fault you using this easy access resource to get your feet wet, and if it's one of many it's even more understandable and looks less like you're just depending on Daddy to get into med school
*however*
get other shadowing experiences in other fields
the more exposure the better

(I am now reading @Law2Doc 's post and I agree. Still, I don't think it's wrong to spend a few hours shadowing a close relative. In fact, they might actually be *more* candid with you about the profession than a stranger. I dunno. But we both seem to agree it *should not* be your primary experience, not by a long shot).

scribing is *not* good experience to get a letter from IMHO, when you are a "shadow" it's understood the whole point is educational, you're not being paid to be useful, therefore intrinsically the interaction between you and the doc is different from the outset, in one case, it's a business arrangement and you are working for the doc and are there to *save* them time, in the case of shadowing, at least in theory if the doc is approaching it correctly they should expect to give you a little bit of time interacting and teaching

however, scribing is still good experience because it is a clinical *job* and depending there could be more or less patient interaction
I just don't think it replaces a good old fashioned shadow experience, especially if it's quality, a longitudinal experience that can go beyond being a silent "shadow"

*some* experiences can yield a great letter

ideas for quality experiences:
some *rural* EDs the night shift can be dead & boring, giving you and the ED doc more time to interact and discuss the stuff that does come through the doors, in my experience ED docs are the sociable type that want to tell you about what it's like *if* they have the time, so this advice only applies to certain circumstances
in addition to psych, neurology is another specialty with longer appts and more downtime, pre-meds tend to show less interest, those docs are brainiacs that often have time to teach, in fact, in my experience they would love to demonstrate interesting findings to you even if you are not allowed to touch patients, and you can get a lot just from observing a neuro exam, compared to other types of exams

if you dig online you can find out if the med school in your state has "satellite" sites and try to find out who are associate professors off campus in the community. If they don't have a med student with them full time, and this can happen often, these are ideal docs to cold-call approach to shadow. They have a true interest in teaching, are used to having students, *and* as noted above, since LORs from docs are so "suspect" having an eval from someone who is already trusted to evaluate students on behalf of a medical school can only add weight to your letter.

Any shadow experience, it isn't unreasonable to ask to discuss expectations from the start, especially if you're hoping for a letter. I wouldn't bring up at a letter at the start, but this discussion can help you in a lot of ways. Some docs will let you know that they can let you be a silent shadow, so you have the valuable exposure of watching them work but that they will have very limited time for interacting or teaching. You can quickly get a sense if this experience is going to be amenable to extending and deepening for obtaining a letter, or not. If not, time to set up another one. Be sure to fulfill all agreed upon obligations for any shadow experience.

This is why ideally you would start shadow experiences years in advance of your actual application, so you can get the most out of it. So you have time for enough hours as well as diversity of experience, *and* time to create the sort of relationship that can lead to a great LOR. It's true the worst shadowing/LORs will be when you are scrambling to "checkbox" this part of your application.