So I was arrested... for feeding the homeless

[beaute'fatale]

If they were lazy, they wouldn't be wandering over town dodging relatives to make a few bucks an hour. They'd be making more with less effort at pretty much any job.

Hmmm you will be surprised how much these homeless make, people are very generous, I used to give $50, $100 all the time.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[mehc012]

What about those that fake homelessness?? don't fall for what you see, i ve seen many people beg on the street but who own better houses that you could ever own; trust me, they travel long distances sometimes go out of state so they won't be recognized by close families, i'm not saying true homeless don't exist but I'm saying many people that claim to be homeless are just lazy people faking. I used to take the metro to school and i always saw this lady asking for change, she would go from metro stop to metro stop on all the lines of the metro to ask for change, really I have seen so many that unless someone is really physically disabled i usually don't buy in their homelessness stories.

Also, the story you told didn't even support your claim (that many homeless people are really well-off)...you just described someone begging in multiple places on the metro. It's nice that you've managed to rationalize your distaste for beggars, but you mostly just sound full of crap.

 

[mehc012]

Hmmm you will be surprised how much these homeless make, people are very generous, I used to give $50, $100 all the time.

Wow, you are truly delusional.

 

[beaute'fatale]

And what if a patient comes in complaining of pain you can't diagnose? Are you going to turn them away?

Most likely yes, many people call the cops for no reason, go to the doctor's for no reason, fake problems at home with their cable or internet to get a technician over, some people just need attention in many cases.

 

[beaute'fatale]

Also, the story you told didn't even support your claim (that many homeless people are really well-off)...you just described someone begging in multiple places on the metro. It's nice that you've managed to rationalize your distaste for beggars, but you mostly just sound full of crap.

That lady on the metro was not homeless, she was dressed in a business suit, making it look like she didn't have change, in order to avoid asking change to the same people, she will go to different metro stations, telling everyone i have a $20 bill do you have change? I don't distate beggars, many people just fake that s all, I used to help until i realized many of these people who claim to be homeless are not homeless but just lazy people.

 

[DokterMom]

That lady on the metro was not homeless, she was dressed in a business suit, making it look like she didn't have change, in order to avoid asking change to the same people, she will go to different metro stations, telling everyone i have a $20 bill do you have change? I don't distate beggars, many people just fake that s all, I used to help until i realized many of these people who claim to be homeless are not homeless but just lazy people.

That's a con artist or grifter -- not a homeless person.

 

[beaute'fatale]

That's a con artist or grifter -- not a homeless person.

How do you verify homelessness? I never claimed she was homeless, I just gave an example of people faking. And trust me when I say people are generous, I'm not the only person that used to give so much money to these homeless/beggars whatsoever they pretend to be. There are many charities, associations like the one OP mentioned that care for these people, yet they still claim to be homeless. In any regard, I only help those that are physically handicapped. Mental handicap can't really be verified and even if it is verified not all of them are debilitating to the point where the individual is 100% dysfunctional. And if they don't have a job because they are high whose fault is it?

 

[blackroses]

People do what they need to do in order to survive. If all someone needs to do is sit at a street corner and beg for food, and that is what they're used to, then that's what they're gonna do and nothing more. It's much more difficult to try to work your way back into society, and when someone is already feeling helpless, they might not want to put in the effort to try and do so (and there's always the possibility of failure, which I'm sure deters plenty of people). So yes, helping someone survive on the street by giving them a short term fix (food or money) is absolutely perpetuating their behavior, and your basically giving the person no reason to change the way they live.

This assumes that most people find living in a sleeping bag under an overpass and dumpster diving for food a more enjoyable way to live than in an apartment with plenty of food to eat. Sure, this attitude does exist, but I'd bet just about everything I own that it's not the prevalent way of thinking among those who are homeless.

Edit: in fact, here's the conclusion of a study regarding the causes of homelessness later in life: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15860792 Based on their findings, I think it's fair to conclude that laziness was not the main issue.

 

[gettheleadout]

Hmmm you will be surprised how much these homeless make, people are very generous, I used to give $50, $100 all the time.

wat


Sent from my neural implant using SDN Mobile

 

[blackroses]

Most likely yes, many people call the cops for no reason, go to the doctor's for no reason, fake problems at home with their cable or internet to get a technician over, some people just need attention in many cases.

In that case, I sincerely hope that you never do become a doctor. As someone who was told for two years by doctors that I was faking my pain, I have an extreme distaste for doctors who decide that just because they can't immediately see a problem, their patient is just faking it and wasting their time.

 

[stickshifthonda]

Uhh, yeah. And then a lot of the resources are religiously affiliated as well and some shelters are not available to them. This is not an unknown phenomenon.

Keep up the work advocating for them and everything...but what is with the 'tude?

No attitude here from that comment. It just boggles my mind the biases people have toward those who are homeless! Again, the face of homelessness in America is perceived to be dirty people sitting on streets and living under bridges begging other for food and money. That's not entirely false, but folks who are homeless live in shelter, housing programs, with friends couch surfing, etc. and are clean, have normal clothes, go to work but don't have a place of their own.

Helping others shows humanism, plain and simple, and the fact that society can so quickly turn helping others into a political debate drives me nuts. We're all in this boat for the same reason, right? Becoming a physician is about dedicating your life to service of others, helping people who are in need of support get that support, and healing through medicine, caring attitudes, and a team that focuses on culturally competent integrated care.

 

[beaute'fatale]

In that case, I sincerely hope that you never do become a doctor. As someone who was told for two years by doctors that I was faking my pain, I have an extreme distaste for doctors who decide that just because they can't immediately see a problem, their patient is just faking it and wasting their time.

And I respect your opinion, but just because you were not faking your pain doesn't mean others weren't either. There are many people who go to the doctor just for attention.

 

[beaute'fatale]

No attitude here from that comment. It just boggles my mind the biases people have toward those who are homeless! Again, the face of homelessness in America is perceived to be dirty people sitting on streets and living under bridges begging other for food and money. That's not entirely false, but folks who are homeless live in shelter, housing programs, with friends couch surfing, etc. and are clean, have normal clothes, go to work but don't have a place of their own.

Helping others shows humanism, plain and simple, and the fact that society can so quickly turn helping others into a political debate drives me nuts. We're all in this boat for the same reason, right? Becoming a physician is about dedicating your life to service of others, helping people who are in need of support get that support, and healing through medicine, caring attitudes, and a team that focuses on culturally competent integrated care.

Helping others that are truly in pain or truly in need, not people who are faking being in need or in pain, there is a thin line.

 

[beaute'fatale]

wat


Sent from my neural implant using SDN Mobile

Yes I used to be very compassionate but i found out many were faking and I stopped. Now I only help the physically handicapped homeless.

 

[stickshifthonda]

Helping others that are truly in pain or truly in need, not people who are faking being in need or in pain, there is a thin line.

You seem to have made some friends on here in your 1 day as a member.

 

[stickshifthonda]

Yes I used to be very compassionate but i found out many were faking and I stopped. Now I only help the physically handicapped homeless.

You're really closed-minded. Bye.

 

[blackroses]

And I respect your opinion, but just because you were not faking your pain doesn't mean others weren't either. There are many people who go to the doctor just for attention.

Except the problem lies here: how do you decide who is faking it and who isn't? It really isn't as simple as you make it out to be. And one of the worst things a doctor can do is turn away a patient who needs help because they think they're "faking it".

 

[beaute'fatale]

You're really closed-minded. Bye.

Only those who are losing on a debate become personal.

 

[beaute'fatale]

You seem to have made some friends on here in your 1 day as a member.

Insanity is usually a good friend of popularity.

 

[stickshifthonda]

Only those who are losing on a debate become personal.

Life isn't about winning or losing.

The fact is that you've already made up your mind that only people who are physically handicapped and are experiencing homelessness are worthy of your help (I won't call it compassion).

 

[beaute'fatale]

Except the problem lies here: how do you decide who is faking it and who isn't? It really isn't as simple as you make it out to be. And one of the worst things a doctor can do is turn away a patient who needs help because they think they're "faking it".

I agree with you, You can't really differentiate which is which. But in the homeless case, I would rather fight for those that are physically handicapped, at least I'm sure I'm excluding all those that may be faking homelessness or those that are just being lazy. And yes, it would be bad to reject a patient just because you couldn't see anything wrong with them, but that is just me, that is just what I would do, and we can disagree on our different opinions.

 

[beaute'fatale]

Life isn't about winning or losing.

The fact is that you've already made up your mind that only people who are physically handicapped and are experiencing homelessness are worthy of your help (I won't call it compassion).

I can help anyone, but I hate when people fake, when people are very well off and pretend to suffer to take advantage of the system.

 

[blackroses]

I agree with you, You can't really differentiate which is which. But in the homeless case, I would rather fight for those that are physically handicapped, at least I'm sure I'm excluding all those that may be faking homelessness or those that are just being lazy. And yes, it would be bad to reject a patient just because you couldn't see anything wrong with them, but that is just me, that is just what I would do, and we can disagree on our different opinions.

So in your opinion it's worth the risk to not help someone who needs it rather than risk helping someone who doesn't need it?

In other words, it's more important to not help someone who doesn't need it than to help someone who does.

 

[beaute'fatale]

So in your opinion it's worth the risk to not help someone who needs it rather than risk helping someone who doesn't need it?

In other words, it's more important to not help someone who doesn't need it than to help someone who does.

That is hard to answer, you got me on that one. I don't really know, I just want to help those who need help, I don't want to help those who are trying to take advantage. Which one is riskier ? I don't know. In essence you are asking me if I feel more strongly not helping the ones who are faking or helping the ones who are in need. Great question, very great question, I like the way you asked the question.

 

[AppsHurtMoreThanStones]

Perhaps it's how I was personally taught, but I always grew up learning that it didn't matter whether or not the individual you are helping is faking it or not - you're the one that has choice to help them. They could be standing out there and conning the world, which if they're standing out there to do so, then that'll be on them some day. However, you as a person, and I would hope as a future physician, should never feel the need to question whether or not an individual needs assistance.

 

[ThisCouldBeYou]

http://aattp.org/33-u-s-cities-ban-sharing-food-with-the-homeless/

Apparently being homeless can be attributed to one of three things: not being able to get a job, having a mental illness, and/or substance addiction. I always try to say hello to homeless people and sometimes strike up a conversation w them. What I've noticed is that probably about half of them have a mental illness of some kind-and the other half actually seem totally w it. Family issues (or no family at all they have claimed), and circumstances in which they lost their job awhile back and then had difficulty getting back up on their feet seem to be a reoccurring issue.

Many homeless have a police record of some sort. Of course, that's practically one quarter of everyone in the US. Once a police record, regardless of why, that person will absolutely struggle to get a job. Nowadays, with most jobs listings online and the applications include a question about "previous record", you get a record, you won't get hired. Are they deserving of food? Handouts? Jobs? You bet. OP, you did the right thing by trying to help, but I can't imagine all food distribution sites are closed. Ask around and you may find several sites, like churches, that prepare food for the homeless.

 

[mehc012]

No attitude here from that comment. It just boggles my mind the biases people have toward those who are homeless! Again, the face of homelessness in America is perceived to be dirty people sitting on streets and living under bridges begging other for food and money. That's not entirely false, but folks who are homeless live in shelter, housing programs, with friends couch surfing, etc. and are clean, have normal clothes, go to work but don't have a place of their own.

Helping others shows humanism, plain and simple, and the fact that society can so quickly turn helping others into a political debate drives me nuts. We're all in this boat for the same reason, right? Becoming a physician is about dedicating your life to service of others, helping people who are in need of support get that support, and healing through medicine, caring attitudes, and a team that focuses on culturally competent integrated care.

Ah. See, I read it as "Betcha didn't think of that, did you?!?" Seemed rather aggressive.
As I said, I like the info. The tone of the post rubbed me wrong, so I stated as much, that's all. No biggie either way.

 

[bc65]

OP: As you can see, this issue generates a lot of heat, if not so much light.

What I recommend that you do is: 1. Don't get arrested again. ( Once will generate an interesting interview conversation, at worst. Two will be a real red flag....see below) 2. Read all the articles that posters referenced here. 3. Read up extensively on the causes of homelesness and incidence of drug addiction, etc. 4. Read up on the laws in your jurisdiction on feeding the homeless, and on the background for the law against feeding the homeless, and why that law, and similar ones were passed.

As I read this discussion, I keep thinking that this would be a typical MMI question: There's a homeless person begging for food, but there's a law against giving them food or money. What will you do? The correct answer is never: "Don't feed them." nor is it "Feed them and give them money". The correct answer would be: I will talk with them, find out what their problem is, and direct them to the appropriate services. I will feed them if it's appropriate in this case. And I know that there are reasons not to feed them: because then they will not get help for their underlying problem, whether it's a mental illness, drug addiction, alcohol, etc.

Here I have listed some reasons not to feed the homeless. Please note, I am not suggesting that these reasons apply to all the homeless, or to most, but it may be the experience or belief of your interviewer or the person screening your application: They congregate in certain neighborhoods, sleep on the sidewalk in front of people's homes, defecate in public and on the sidewalk, are threatening, panhandle aggressively. In some areas there are large encampments of homeless child molesters living together (because they are restricted from living in so many places- yes this is true). When you feed these people, it keeps them living out in front of someone elses home, someone who has to run a gauntlet of these aggressive panhandlers with several toddlers in tow, dodging piles of human excrement. Be aware that certain cities, especially in California, have big populations of homeless people who migrate there for better weather and benefits.

In your case, you know will be asked about this, so you have the opportunity to research this issue in advance. But I can tell you what you can say to make sure that you are rejected from medical school (at least if I were interviewing you ) . Don't say, "I don't care about the law. I care about the homeless and will keep feeding them no matter what because it's the right thing to do" That's a red flag. No one wants a student or colleague who will do what they want and break the rules if they feel like it. You could say, "I understand why the law was passed. I still think that feeding them is the right thing to do, but I can accomplish more by working within the system. My legal fees alone could have fed 10 people for 3 months". Or you could say, " It was a misunderstanding. I would not intentionally break the law. And I understand why the law was passed, and the issues that it addresses".

Keep in mind that most physicians probably have extensive personal experience in dealing with homeless people as they come through the ER. I suspect that many physicians will find your feelings on this topic hopelessly naive. You might be jaded too after the same addict who agreed to go to the rehab program social services found for him comes back next week with a new abscess. So you don't want to appear too self righteous.
In any case, you need to show that you are a mature person who will do the right thing for the right reason. And the issues that I raised above will apply equally to anyone working with the homeless, not just someone who is arrested. If I were interviewing someone who worked with the homeless, I would be asking all of the above issues, and I would hope and expect that they would be able to discuss them.

 

[crossfit4lyfe]

I have a disorderly conduct, and an assault charge from 5 and 6 years ago (both misdemeanors). I am also 4 and a half years sober and my arrests were all when I was under the influence. I was very honest with all of the schools. I have had one acceptance already, and should be hearing my post-interview decision from my first choice school today! I am not sure how such a recent arrest will look, the cause is admirable but it was stupid, you should have stopped when the cop told you to. When applying and interviewing as long as you express remorse (not for helping the homeless, but for-) refusing to stop, and show that you realized it wasn't the best decision and could be handled differently, you should be fine. They mainly want to make sure that you have grown from the mistake and won't do it again.

 

[Doug Underhill]

I read about this story. I think there will be schools that will share your viewpoint on the matter. You will have to explain the law and the ethics behind your decision to bypass it, however.

 

[Mad Jack]

What about those that fake homelessness?? don't fall for what you see, i ve seen many people beg on the street but who own better houses that you could ever own; trust me, they travel long distances sometimes go out of state so they won't be recognized by close families, i'm not saying true homeless don't exist but I'm saying many people that claim to be homeless are just lazy people faking. I used to take the metro to school and i always saw this lady asking for change, she would go from metro stop to metro stop on all the lines of the metro to ask for change, really I have seen so many that unless someone is really physically disabled i usually don't buy in their homelessness stories.

These people are relatively rare. Making them sound common is quite disingenuous.

 

[TheBatman]

1. Expired food > no food. Most food in the supermarket is processed to death so that it doesn't go bad anyways. I don't take people who hand food to the homeless as the type to purposely inflict harm on others by giving them expired food.
2. People who aren't homeless have allergic reactions to food as well. That doesn't mean we stop feeding them, we just find something different to feed them. There's no reason to have a law against passing out food to the homeless due to "possible allergies." Ultimately it's up to the consumer's knowledge of their allergies to decide whether they can eat said food or not. You can't possibly blame the distributor in this case.

Also, you do not know what kind of "group" OP was in, therefore you should not make a judgmental claim about his efforts.

Sheesh man, have a little faith in humanity.

Hey numb nuts I don't make the rules. Anyone saying this will probably increase his chances of getting accepted aren't seeing the bigger picture. This is a Law in place to ensure all parties are protected. You are told to do a certain task and if you don't there can be consequences for both parties.. If you were a doctor and had a patient who might have an allergy to a much needed medication, would you still administer it? Lets say you do and it turns out the next 100 patients don't have an allergic reaction. Everything is dandy until patient 101 has a severe allergic reaction. I feed the homeless by visiting local firehouses and dropping off perishable goods. Inspectors inspect the food thoroughly before it is ever even dispersed. I'm sure if OP went to his local fire house he could have donated all the food he wanted but instead was reckless and ill informed. FYI if you're homeless and don't have access to fluids and your health is likely already poor because of malnutrition food poisoning can be deadly. I just used the allergic reaction as an example how is definitely not the only possible health consequence.

 

[Hospitalized]

Hey numb nuts I don't make the rules. Anyone saying this will probably increase his chances of getting accepted aren't seeing the bigger picture. This is a Law in place to ensure all parties are protected. You are told to do a certain task and if you don't there can be consequences for both parties.. If you were a doctor and had a patient who might have an allergy to a much needed medication, would you still administer it? Lets say you do and it turns out the next 100 patients don't have an allergic reaction. Everything is dandy until patient 101 has a severe allergic reaction. I feed the homeless by visiting local firehouses and dropping off perishable goods. Inspectors inspect the food thoroughly before it is ever even dispersed. I'm sure if OP went to his local fire house he could have donated all the food he wanted but instead was reckless and ill informed. FYI if you're homeless and don't have access to fluids and your health is likely already poor because of malnutrition food poisoning can be deadly. I just used the allergic reaction as an example how is definitely not the only possible health consequence.

Yikes man... people have allergies that aren't discovered until they have an allergic reaction.

I think we can agree that it's difficult to find a solution for helping the homeless in general. It's a unfortunate situation, that's why we consult CRC.

And please, my nuts are quite sensitive.

 

[TheBatman]

Oh no, some people have peanut allergies, let's let them all starve! <- wonderful demonstration of the reason liability is a stupid-ass priority.

Typical ignorant pre med. Let me educate you and anyone else reading this post. OP is serving meals to the homeless which is great. However he is cooking meals with "high quality ingredients" (what does he even mean by this anyways?) without a licence to operate. According to him Why would he need a licence it's his right to feed whoever he pleases. Of course, that's correct but would you want to eat at a restaurant that hasn't been inspected by the health department? I'd like to think you wouldn't because that would be risky. You have options and therefore can choose to eat where ever you please. The homeless don't get to choose where their meals come from. So they'll take OP's food with open arms. Hunger is way more complex than just throw food at someone who is famished. In poor countries one of the biggest problem is water contamination. It's very deadly, you want to know why? They are so malnourished that even food poisoning becomes incredibly dangerous. While OP was preparing his meal what if someone forgot to wash their hands? What if he cooked on a contaminated counter? If the homeless ate his contaminated food and thus got food poisoning what would they do? He would obviously go to his local grocery store and pick up some soup, Gatorade, and fresh fruits. I'd like to think he wasn't homeless if he could do that. He'd likely suffer after becoming severely dehydrated and quite possibly suffer from kidney failure. Not to mention most of the homeless are drug abusers and alcoholics. We all know alcohol keeps you hydrated throughout the day. Just because you think critically on a test doesn't mean you can think critically in life. Almost everyone in this thread jumped to a conclusion without thinking critically. I bet OP is the type to throw water on a stove fire.

 

[Law2Doc]

These people are relatively rare. Making them sound common is quite disingenuous.

"Homeless" is a politically loaded term designed to generate an image of someone down on their luck, but who but for a bad decision or two would be a productive member of society. In fact this is what's quite quite rare, even rarer than the con men. Most of those labeled homeless are drug abusers and psych patients. Like 99.9% fit into one of these two categories, often both. No amount of help or money will ever get them off the streets. Giving a dollar here or there won't improve their life but might get them closer to their next fix or maybe a pack of cigarettes. starvation is an infrequent problem for them - although we see vitamin deficiency/malnutrition issues, we rarely see starvation issues involving the homeless in hospitals. Finding food jyst isn't their problem. Wait until you guys work in the ED and you will probably start to rethink the word "homeless". It's a problem, but not one that can be addressed through more soup kitchens. In the long list of problems they have, not having a home or a warm meal is probably their least significant. You could just as easily call them "car less".

 

[Law2Doc]

I think that THIS is the one red flag that would actually get you accepted!

Explain it exactly as you did here, and it will make for some interesting interviews.

I actually disagree. Medicine (and in particular medical training) is a very hierarchical field, a lot like being in the army in some ways. Hospitals are full of hundred of rules that don't make sense, but you still have to follow them. A track record of ignoring the rules because you "believe it infringes on your freedoms" is exactly what you don't want to hear from your intern. Part of the reason applicants from military backgrounds tend to do so well in the med school and residency applucation process is precisely because they are experienced at problem solving WITHIN the bounds of strict rules and regulations.

 

[deleted480308]

I actually disagree. Medicine (and in particular medical training) is a very hierarchical field, a lot like being in the army in some ways. Hospitals are full of hundred of rules that don't make sense, but you still have to follow them. A track record of ignoring the rules because you "believe it infringes on your freedoms" is exactly what you don't want to hear from your intern. Part of the reason applicants from military backgrounds tend to do so well in the med school and residency applucation process is precisely because they are experienced at problem solving WITHIN the bounds of strict rules and regulations.

It makes for a good discussion but I haven't heard a story of a med school's rules being broken and them applauding the student for their convictions. Schools demand obedience and wouldn't accept being disobeyed any more than that officer did. Right and wrong has very little to do with the reality of repurcussions. The protestors in selma being right didn't erase dig bites, heal clubbing wounds or turn off the fire hoses.

I applaud civil disobedience but don't think that will play well in the medical profession if you rebel against them too

 

[Mad Jack]

"Homeless" is a politically loaded term designed to generate an image of someone down on their luck, but who but for a bad decision or two would be a productive member of society. In fact this is what's quite quite rare, even rarer than the con men. Most of those labeled homeless are drug abusers and psych patients. Like 99.9% fit into one of these two categories, often both. No amount of help or money will ever get them off the streets. Giving a dollar here or there won't improve their life but might get them closer to their next fix or maybe a pack of cigarettes. starvation is an infrequent problem for them - although we see vitamin deficiency/malnutrition issues, we rarely see starvation issues involving the homeless in hospitals. Finding food jyst isn't their problem. Wait until you guys work in the ED and you will probably start to rethink the word "homeless". It's a problem, but not one that can be addressed through more soup kitchens. In the long list of problems they have, not having a home or a warm meal is probably their least significant. You could just as easily call them "car less".

I'm aware of what the homeless usually are. You forgot veterans and ex convicts though. I spent over a year working as a tech in the ED, I knew or homeless population pretty well. They probably would have shanked a faker on principle lol, as they knew each other very well.

They were almost exclusively alcoholics though, with some psych issues thrown into the mix. Not many hard drug users, and the ones that were were usually the prostitutes that would take what they could get for sex- if that happened to be drugs, they weren't complaining. Hunger was never a problem, since they'd just lay on the ground looking extra miserable until someone called an ambulance if they needed a meal bad enough or a safe place to sleep.

I've heard the idea that there's all these rich homeless guys out there far too often- that sort of thing can really only fly in certain districts of certain cities. Most homeless people are actually homeless. They're not usually down on their luck- nah, usually is people that are incapable of functioning in regular society, or people that can't get any job because of their criminal history (nobody is hiring a guy that is a convicted rapist- and it just do happened that one of the guys asking for change outside of it hospital was just such a guy). Now, I'm not saying these people are or are not worthy of pity. That's up to each individual to decide.

 

[Mad Jack]

It makes for a good discussion but I haven't heard a story of a med school's rules being broken and them applauding the student for their convictions. Schools demand obedience and wouldn't accept being disobeyed any more than that officer did. Right and wrong has very little to do with the reality of repurcussions. The protestors in selma being right didn't erase dig bites, heal clubbing wounds or turn off the fire hoses.

I applaud civil disobedience but don't think that will play well in the medical profession if you rebel against them too

Which is a real pity. People wonder why leadership is lacking in medicine and we're getting slaughtered by the hospital and nursing lobbies. The answer should be obvious- they hand-select people that are groomed to be brilliant followers, the sort of people who gladly ask how high when you tell them to jump. The love of conformity, security, and predictability at the expense of innovation, outspokenness, and individuality will be the end of medicine, mark my words. Particularly when coupled with infighting between different specialties, ugh.

 

[Goro]

This is one of those rare times I'll have to disagree with my learned colleague, as it makes me recall the line from Oliver Twist:

When Mr. Bumble, the unhappy spouse of a domineering wife, is told in court that "...the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction", replies:

"If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is a ass - a idiot".

I actually disagree. Medicine (and in particular medical training) is a very hierarchical field, a lot like being in the army in some ways. Hospitals are full of hundred of rules that don't make sense, but you still have to follow them. A track record of ignoring the rules because you "believe it infringes on your freedoms" is exactly what you don't want to hear from your intern. Part of the reason applicants from military backgrounds tend to do so well in the med school and residency applucation process is precisely because they are experienced at problem solving WITHIN the bounds of strict rules and regulations.

 

[mehc012]

Typical ignorant pre med. Let me educate you and anyone else reading this post. OP is serving meals to the homeless which is great. However he is cooking meals with "high quality ingredients" (what does he even mean by this anyways?) without a licence to operate. According to him Why would he need a licence it's his right to feed whoever he pleases. Of course, that's correct but would you want to eat at a restaurant that hasn't been inspected by the health department? I'd like to think you wouldn't because that would be risky. You have options and therefore can choose to eat where ever you please. The homeless don't get to choose where their meals come from. So they'll take OP's food with open arms. Hunger is way more complex than just throw food at someone who is famished. In poor countries one of the biggest problem is water contamination. It's very deadly, you want to know why? They are so malnourished that even food poisoning becomes incredibly dangerous. While OP was preparing his meal what if someone forgot to wash their hands? What if he cooked on a contaminated counter? If the homeless ate his contaminated food and thus got food poisoning what would they do? He would obviously go to his local grocery store and pick up some soup, Gatorade, and fresh fruits. I'd like to think he wasn't homeless if he could do that. He'd likely suffer after becoming severely dehydrated and quite possibly suffer from kidney failure. Not to mention most of the homeless are drug abusers and alcoholics. We all know alcohol keeps you hydrated throughout the day. Just because you think critically on a test doesn't mean you can think critically in life. Almost everyone in this thread jumped to a conclusion without thinking critically. I bet OP is the type to throw water on a stove fire.

He's not charging, it's not a business, there's not guarantee or expectation of quality. He is giving something away. Where do you draw the line on who he is allowed to gift food to?

Nobody said that OP was solving the homeless problem (though OP did give a nice anecdote about how his contributions helped someone dig their way out). They said the law was ridiculous. And it is. As I said, it's a way of dodging all responsibility/liability because 'OMG he might give them food poisoning or an allergic reaction' even though the odds are small (and hey, you know what we have in this country that we don't have in poor countries? Emergency rooms who will take in and rehydrate someone puking their guts out, even if they cannot pay. They typically won't feed them if they're hungry though). The end result is that all of those city officials get to not worry about the homeless as long as they keep them miserable enough to encourage them to move on.

I understand the dangers of food poisoning and allergies. I have seen them, and yeah, I know what severe dehydration can do to a person. I think they are acceptable risks when you need food, period.

And yes, I have eaten from restaurants not approved by the health department. It's called travelling to another country and eating the local food. Guess what? You do that when you are travelling and would be hungry if you didn't eat what was offered. Not if you'd starve to death, most people will end up eating 'uninspected' food as soon as they get peckish. As for expired products - as I said, most expiration dates are bullcrap and I eat expired foods all the time.

If the government had a good, sustainable way of offering food to those who need it, then it would be reasonable for them to put strict quality control in place. They don't, so it's not exactly a choice between 'inspected food' and 'random food,' it is more often 'random food' vs 'no food'.

Finally, chill the condescension, bro. Just because I disagree with you and don't find your points as important as you clearly do doesn't mean that I am incapable of thinking of them. It means that we have different opinions and came to different conclusions. You would get farther in these discussions if you would have a them without throwing around 'numbnuts' (great opener, that one), 'ignorant premed' (way to use premed as an insult while being one), and what amounts to 'you are stupid, you cannot think critically in life, let me educate you because I am smarter than you.'

 

[looncat]

Hey numb nuts I don't make the rules. Anyone saying this will probably increase his chances of getting accepted aren't seeing the bigger picture. This is a Law in place to ensure all parties are protected. You are told to do a certain task and if you don't there can be consequences for both parties.. If you were a doctor and had a patient who might have an allergy to a much needed medication, would you still administer it? Lets say you do and it turns out the next 100 patients don't have an allergic reaction. Everything is dandy until patient 101 has a severe allergic reaction. I feed the homeless by visiting local firehouses and dropping off perishable goods. Inspectors inspect the food thoroughly before it is ever even dispersed. I'm sure if OP went to his local fire house he could have donated all the food he wanted but instead was reckless and ill informed. FYI if you're homeless and don't have access to fluids and your health is likely already poor because of malnutrition food poisoning can be deadly. I just used the allergic reaction as an example how is definitely not the only possible health consequence.

Do you honestly and truly believe that? This law and laws like it are only there to make sure of one thing: that the homeless leave their town so it can be "prettier". Saying it's because of health reasons is their way of not sounding like gigantic dinguses because a law that states "don't feed the homeless so they can leave our city like we'd treat a squirrel infestation" is not going to pass. And even laws worded this "nice" way wouldn't pass if it weren't for the people who a) actually believe this bs and b) people who try to spread this bs because they don't like dealing with homeless either.

OP, I applaud you for doing this, if I were an admissions officer this would be a giant plus for you in my book. You're not just dropping off cans at your local fire station and since you're doing this while it's against the law, it shows it's not just for resume padding and that you actually care, good for you.

 

[deleted480308]

I agree with looncat that the law is crap and is really about getting the homeless out of the business district. it's a bad law and should be disobeyed

I just also think that everyone should remember the, "I do what I want if I think it's right" attitude won't fly in med school if the med school doesn't agree with you

 

[Law2Doc]

I agree with looncat that the law is crap and is really about getting the homeless out of the business district. it's a bad law and should be disobeyed

I just also think that everyone should remember the, "I do what I want if I think it's right" attitude won't fly in med school if the med school doesn't agree with you

Exactly. The law being a bad law (or an ass) is irrelevant. Schools want people who play by their rules.

 

[intangible]

The logic in the premise is faulty. You knowingly broke a law. The morality behind homelessness as a societal malaise is completely irrelevant.

This entire rationalization that somehow makes breaking a law desirable or permissible is ridiculous.

 

[Boolean]

The logic in the premise is faulty. You knowingly broke a law. The morality behind homelessness as a societal malaise is completely irrelevant.

This entire rationalization that somehow makes breaking a law desirable or permissible is ridiculous.

Concur with this, and I believe that this is the same point @Law2Doc is making.

 

[medicalmnt]

I guess it makes for a good interview question. I'd answer it accordingly with the school's mission statement and pretty much just hope you're telling them what they want to hear.

 

[intangible]

I guess it makes for a good interview question. I'd answer it accordingly with the school's mission statement and pretty much just hope you're telling them what they want to hear.

I think the point is that you likely won't make it to interviews with a recent criminal record. You probably won't have the chance to explain yourself.

Given the chance, you're still put at a disadvantage. If I were an adcom, why would I choose the candidate with a criminal record over someone who doesn't have one with similar stats?

 

[Law2Doc]

I think the point is that you likely won't make it to interviews with a recent criminal record. You probably won't have the chance to explain yourself.

Given the chance, you're still put at a disadvantage. If I were an adcom, why would I choose the candidate with a criminal record over someone who doesn't have one with similar stats?

I don't know that he wouldn't have the opportunity to explain himself (at least in a PS). I just think saying that you intentionally committed civil disobedience isn't going to fly as well with adcoms as it is on this thread. Medicine isn't a field which loves it's members to do things outside of the rules. They want problem solvers who figure out how to get things done within the confines of strict rules. There's a difference.

 

[mehc012]

I don't know that he wouldn't have the opportunity to explain himself (at least in a PS). I just think saying that you intentionally committed civil disobedience isn't going to fly as well with adcoms as it is on this thread. Medicine isn't a field which loves it's members to do things outside of the rules. They want problem solvers who figure out how to get things done within the confines of strict rules. There's a difference.

At least one of the participants in this thread IS an adcom.
I would figure that, given the response here, the safest bet would be that this is somewhat of a grey area (at least far more so than other infractions) and that the response by adcoms and others will be varied.