The ethical question of legacy acceptances

[Visible Ghost]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

There are students who get accepted into certain medical schools due to one of their relatives working there (a parent, uncle, or aunt). This also extends to residencies.

I know for a fact that one of the top ten schools is notorious for this. I will not name the school, but it is a publicly funded university. I got into medical school after working very hard to improve my grades and perform well on the MCAT which I had to take a few times. There was a lot of sweat and tears involved, and multiple rejections many of which without interviews.

I find it extremely unfair that certain students not only get into medical schools where a relative is a doctor/professor, but also secure residencies at the same school where their relative was the head of the department. Again, I will not name the place.

In my opinion this is unethical beyond measure and sets a school up to graduate undeserving and lackluster physicians.

Is there a process to address this with LCME and the AAMC?

 

[NITRAS]

Get a life.

 

[OrthoTraumaMD]

There are students who get accepted into certain medical schools due to one of their relatives working there (a parent, uncle, or aunt). This also extends to residencies.

I know for a fact that one of the top ten schools is notorious for this. I will not name the school, but it is a publicly funded university. I got into medical school after working very hard to improve my grades and perform well on the MCAT which I had to take a few times. There was a lot of sweat and tears involved, and multiple rejections many of which without interviews.

I find it extremely unfair that certain students not only get into medical schools where a relative is a doctor/professor, but also secure residencies at the same school where their relative was the head of the department. Again, I will not name the place.

In my opinion this is unethical beyond measure and sets a school up to graduate undeserving and lackluster physicians.

Is there a process to address this with LCME and the AAMC?

For better or worse, that’s how the rest of the world works. It’s not limited to medicine, not by a long shot. Everyone wants to help their own relatives, and open doors for their sons and daughters. Human nature.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Lawpy]

There are students who get accepted into certain medical schools due to one of their relatives working there (a parent, uncle, or aunt). This also extends to residencies.

I know for a fact that one of the top ten schools is notorious for this. I will not name the school, but it is a publicly funded university. I got into medical school after working very hard to improve my grades and perform well on the MCAT which I had to take a few times. There was a lot of sweat and tears involved, and multiple rejections many of which without interviews.

I find it extremely unfair that certain students not only get into medical schools where a relative is a doctor/professor, but also secure residencies at the same school where their relative was the head of the department. Again, I will not name the place.

In my opinion this is unethical beyond measure and sets a school up to graduate undeserving and lackluster physicians.

Is there a process to address this with LCME and the AAMC?

@Goro may be pleased to learn that someone is finally complaining about legacies

 

[gonnif]

Schools have wide latitude in deciding which applicants to interview and to accept within their published and accredited admission policies. If the school decides that giving priority or consideration to qualified individuals who have alumni links to the institution, they are free to do so. AAMC and LCME would have no mechanism to address this issue. Nor would the courts. For public institutions, this would be approached at a political level. That could via legislative process, executive educational functions, state university administration or trusteee of the school. With legacy connection a long standing practice in schools, this may be a difficult issue to impact unless gross abuse has occurred.

 

[trobinsonmd]

One of my friends studied finance, but is not the sharpest tool in the shed. I love this guy, but he is really incompetent when it comes to numbers. His dad is a portfolio manager of a big hedge fund in Greenwich, landed him a job there... my friend lost millions of dollars in his first quarter due to some poor trades and not only did not get fired, he got promoted! nepotism spreads far beyond the realm of medicine... it is even more apparent in the business world if you ask me. There is no way to prove anything or substantiate your claims with evidence... at my school, at least 10 of the kids had parents affiliated with the school, but no one cares or has the energy to care... everyone is busy with other things and this is not really a huge issue, even if someone does not belong, they will get railed by step and probably have a really tough time matching into a residency and becoming board certified

 

[deleted480308]

I don’t like legacy admissions

But unlike some adcoms, the usmle doesn’t care about your daddy

 

[Robin-jay]

If the school decides that giving priority or consideration to qualified individuals who have alumni links to the institution, they are free to do so.

The problem is that they aren't always "qualified" individuals. More so unqualified.

But I agree, life is unfair and I certainly don't lose any sleep over it.

 

[Robin-jay]

For better or worse, that’s how the rest of the world works. It’s not limited to medicine, not by a long shot. Everyone wants to help their own relatives, and open doors for their sons and daughters. Human nature.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

worse.

 

[gonnif]

The problem is that they aren't always "qualified" individuals. More so unqualified.

But I agree, life is unfair and I certainly don't lose any sleep over it.

The issue is that “qualified” is sole discretion of adcom

 

[Visible Ghost]

Schools have wide latitude in deciding which applicants to interview and to accept within their published and accredited admission policies. If the school decides that giving priority or consideration to qualified individuals who have alumni links to the institution, they are free to do so. AAMC and LCME would have no mechanism to address this issue. Nor would the courts. For public institutions, this would be approached at a political level. That could via legislative process, executive educational functions, state university administration or trusteee of the school. With legacy connection a long standing practice in schools, this may be a difficult issue to impact unless gross abuse has occurred.

Trump administration seeks to open Harvard admissions files

I do believe the Justice Department has the power and ability to examine this issue irrespective of whether the school is private or public. I want to know if LCME does.

Many qualified medical school applicants don't get accepted into medical school each year. A legacy applicant of either similar or lower qualifications getting an acceptance is no light issue especially if a pattern exists. At the school I referenced it has extended to residency. An Uncle Head of such and such department getting his nephew a top residency spot. This matters.

 

[Robin-jay]

The issue is that “qualified” is sole discretion of adcom

Exactly, which is why "unqualified" candidates get the "un-" dropped off for ridiculous reasons like legacy nonsense. Just because the definition can change in the ADCOMs hands, doesn't mean its ethical.

But I digress, the whole world is like that. No point in losing sleep over it.

 

[Visible Ghost]

Get a life.

I am looking for a girlfriend. Thanks for the advice!

 

[Rajaredhilu]

They are completely allowed to do this. But i think the question you are asking is if it is ethical for them to pick legacy students because of their relations. The short answer is no, nepotism and this idea of "legacy" applicants is completely unethical. In my opinion nepotism is just racism but even more narrow of a view.

 

[getdown]

They are completely allowed to do this. But i think the question you are asking is if it is ethical for them to pick legacy students because of their relations. The short answer is no, nepotism and this idea of "legacy" applicants is completely unethical. In my opinion nepotism is just racism but even more narrow of a view.

Really? You're equating the idea of not getting a preferential treatment due to lack of connections as THE SAME as being beaten, killed, dehumanized, denied equal rights because of your skin color/ethnicity? That's probably up there in terms of the most ignorant and disrespectful things I've heard. You not getting into medical school does not mean your rights as a human being have been violated or that you fear for your life.

 

[Visible Ghost]

Really? You're equating the idea of not getting a preferential treatment due to lack of connections as THE SAME as being beaten, killed, dehumanized, denied equal rights because of your skin color/ethnicity? That's probably up there in terms of the most ignorant and disrespectful things I've heard. You not getting into medical school does not mean your rights as a human being have been violated or that you fear for your life.

This is not a wild claim. There can be a question of racism if the "legacy connections" put other ethnic/racial groups at a disadvantage.

Harvard's admissions policy is an example.

Justice Department Threatens To Sue Harvard In Admissions Probe

 

[gonnif]

Trump administration seeks to open Harvard admissions files

I do believe the Justice Department has the power and ability to examine this issue irrespective of whether the school is private or public. I want to know if LCME does.

Many qualified medical school applicants don't get accepted into medical school each year. A legacy applicant of either similar or lower qualifications getting an acceptance is no light issue especially if a pattern exists. At the school I referenced it has extended to residency. An Uncle Head of such and such department getting his nephew a top residency spot. This matters.

Yes, the LCME has the ability to look at all files and do audits as part of re-accreditation. However, you are missing these salient points:
1) legacy as a priority in admissions is perfectly legal and accepted practice
2) each medical school has the almost unlimited and unfettered authority to decide who is qualified
3) LCME would not involved itself in the issue such as legacy. If the admissions committee approved them, with whatever GPA and MCAT they had, its legal
4) Unless there was direct bribery that can be shown or that direct threats of some kind can be shown, influence upon an adcom via LOR, phone call, from faculty, alumni, donors, political figures is perfectly fine.

 

[dodo2k]

Yes, the LCME has the ability to look at all files and do audits as part of re-accreditation. However, you are missing these salient points:
1) legacy as a priority in admissions is perfectly legal and accepted practice
2) each medical school has the almost unlimited and unfettered authority to decide who is qualified
3) LCME would not involved itself in the issue such as legacy. If the admissions committee approved them, with whatever GPA and MCAT they had, its legal
4) Unless there was direct bribery that can be shown or that direct threats of some kind can be shown, influence upon an adcom via LOR, phone call, from faculty, alumni, donors, political figures is perfectly fine.

There are students who get accepted into certain medical schools due to one of their relatives working there (a parent, uncle, or aunt). This also extends to residencies.
....

===========

I know of Caribbean graduates who get into decent residencies through family connections ...

People have mentioned that these people will get "found" by the USMLE etc.

However, there is a wide variety of people who fall in some intermediate region and are able to manage.

 

[Rajaredhilu]

Really? You're equating the idea of not getting a preferential treatment due to lack of connections as THE SAME as being beaten, killed, dehumanized, denied equal rights because of your skin color/ethnicity? That's probably up there in terms of the most ignorant and disrespectful things I've heard. You not getting into medical school does not mean your rights as a human being have been violated or that you fear for your life.

Yeah all those are very severe forms of racism but when i equated nepotism to racism. I was saying choosing one person over another because of how related to you they are is a commonality found among both nepotists and racists. In both cases people choose those who are most like them and ostracise the other people.

 

[Goro]

Yeah all those are very severe forms of racism but when i equated nepotism to racism. I was saying choosing one person over another because of how related to you they are is a commonality found among both nepotists and racists. In both cases people choose those who are most like them and ostracise the other people.

What are you talking about?
Nepotism is simply favoring someone over everybody, due to connections.

Racism is deliberately singling out somebody in a negative way due to ethnicity.

It's not racist to give a faculty job to my sister.

It IS racist to deny a black person/Asian/Jew a job simply because s/he's black/Asian/Jewish.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I find it extremely unfair that certain students not only get into medical schools where a relative is a doctor/professor, but also secure residencies at the same school where their relative was the head of the department. Again, I will not name the place.

Guess what? Life isn't fair. Medical schools don't owe you jack for getting a good MCAT and GPA. If they decide that Jon is better qualified than you, even though he has a 3.5/503, because he has a personal connection with a prominent faculty head then so be it. That's life.

he problem is that they aren't always "qualified" individuals. More so unqualified.

Rarely are we talking about a 2.0/490 applicant here. We're talking like a 3.5/505 applicant getting into a top 20. Guess what? They actually are plenty qualified and most of the time go through medical school without a hiccup and once you pass USMLE and graduate then you're just as qualified as anyone else to be a doctor.

 

[Rajaredhilu]

What are you talking about?
Nepotism is simply favoring someone over everybody, due to connections.

Racism is deliberately singling out somebody in a negative way due to ethnicity.

It's not racist to give a faculty job to my sister.

It IS racist to deny a black person/Asian/Jew a job simply because s/he's black/Asian/Jewish.

in my mind racism is in part caused by prefering certain people who are more similar to you. That is the same case with nepotism.

Racism doesnt always have to be this active gesture such as singling someone out or attacking someone for their race. It can also be done passively by choosing certain people based on their race* first and thus leaving other people out.
(*substitute the phrase "relation to you" for nepotism)

 

[Robin-jay]

Rarely are we talking about a 2.0/490 applicant here. We're talking like a 3.5/505 applicant getting into a top 20. Guess what? They actually are plenty qualified and most of the time go through medical school without a hiccup and once you pass USMLE and graduate then you're just as qualified as anyone else to be a doctor.

3.5/505 is not qualified for that top 20 position. No one is saying they don't have a good chance to get through medical school, but it isn't fair (not saying I am very caring on whether its fair or not).

It doesn't influence me right now in the slightest.

 

[getdown]

Yeah all those are very severe forms of racism but when i equated nepotism to racism. I was saying choosing one person over another because of how related to you they are is a commonality found among both nepotists and racists. In both cases people choose those who are most like them and ostracise the other people.

You are entitled to your opinion and you can define things as you want but to me that makes no sense. Showing preference alone does not make one racist. Everyone has a preference. Do you consider it racist to prefer friends with the same socioeconomic background as yourself because it's easier to relate to them? Is it racist to prefer to date someone of the same cultural/ethnic background because there's a lot of shared commonality? Your overly broad definition of what can be constituted or at the very least associated with racism is ridiculous.

As Goro pointed out the TARGET or FOCUS of nepotism and racism are completely different. Nepotism focuses on someone you know and favoring them (the beneficiary) vs racism is targeting someone because they are different (the victim). Furthermore, the INTENT behind nepotism and racism are different. The intent behind nepotism is to help a person you know vs the intent behind racism is to hurt someone who is different. I've never heard a racist say they hate black/white/asians/etc because they want to help improve the lives of their friends and family.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

3.5/505 is not qualified for that top 20 position.

And exactly how are they not qualified?

 

[Rajaredhilu]

Omfg... please take your SJWism elsewhere. The entire world works to get to high places so that they can make life easier for their children and help them so that they’re not starting from the ground up all over again. It’s present across every culture and race. It’s the normal function of “family connections.”


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

call it whatever you like. I am just highlighting the similarity between nepotism and racism. Both treat people based on things other than their own merits. Whether something is deemed a "normal function" or not is irrelevent. On a practical sense nepotism isnt a very big issue at all but regardless I still believe it is unethical.

 

[Rajaredhilu]

You are entitled to your opinion and you can define things as you want but to me that makes no sense. Showing preference alone does not make one racist. Everyone has a preference. Do you consider it racist to prefer friends with the same socioeconomic background as yourself because it's easier to relate to them? Is it racist to prefer to date someone of the same cultural/ethnic background because there's a lot of shared commonality? Your overly broad definition of what can be constituted or at the very least associated with racism is ridiculous.

As Goro pointed out the TARGET or FOCUS of nepotism and racism are completely different. Nepotism focuses on someone you know and favoring them (the beneficiary) vs racism is targeting someone because they are different (the victim). Furthermore, the INTENT behind nepotism and racism are different. The intent behind nepotism is to help a person you know vs the intent behind racism is to hurt someone who is different. I've never heard a racist say they hate black/white/asians/etc because they want to help improve the lives of their friends and family.

All those things arnt racist, thats not what im saying. All i am saying is that their motivations overlap.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I am just highlighting the similarity between nepotism and racism. Both treat people based on things other than their own merits

Dude what? I can find similarities between a frog and a tiger but that doesn't mean they get coupled together because of that similarity, or even belong in the same discussion. You can find similarities between pretty much anything.

 

[Robin-jay]

And exactly how are they not qualified?

Lower stats than typical matriculate.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

Lower stats than typical matriculate.

Again, how does that make them unqualified?

 

[altblue]

It does get to me, especially when the parent hands the white coat to the kid at white coat cermonies, but it's something I've come to expect. Certain people have privilege from the day they're born, and this is reflected in legacy admissions.

If it makes you feel any better, I don't think 3.6's/509's are getting into schools like WashU just because they're legacies.

 

[Rajaredhilu]

Dude what? I can find similarities between a frog and a tiger but that doesn't mean they get coupled together because of that similarity, or even belong in the same discussion. You can find similarities between pretty much anything.

Yeah thats true, i suppose my comparision was somewhat missplaced, but i just wanted to highlight that nepotism is based in prejudice.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

nepotism is based in prejudice.

But it's not....

 

[Rajaredhilu]

But it's not....

"Jim is an employer who is known to be prejudiced toward members of his own family"

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

"Jim is an employer who is known to be prejudiced toward members of his own family"

That’s not the definition of prejudice dude

 

[Rajaredhilu]

That’s not the definition of prejudice dude

I disagree with you.
when i use the word prejudice it is meant as biased towards or partial.

 

[Robin-jay]

Again, how does that make them unqualified?

Because they aren't the best people for the position.

 

[Goro]

3.5/505 is not qualified for that top 20 position. .

AND you know this how?

 

[Robin-jay]

AND you know this how?

Statistics of those accepted to top 20's.

 

[Goro]

Statistics of those accepted to top 20's.

median stats are not the same as requirements. Go to Yale or Harvard admissions page and tell us what are the minimum GPA and MCAT scores for admission.

 

[Goro]

Because they aren't the best people for the position.

AND you know that how???

 

[Robin-jay]

median stats are not the same as requirements. Go to Yale or Harvard admissions page and tell us what are the minimum GPA and MCAT scores for admission.

AND you know that how???

Ya, the minimum GPA and MCAT exist so legacies, etc. can get in regardless of their qualifications.

I think we are stuck on the semantics of the word "qualified". The OP is clearly stating that it's not fair legacies get preference over people with higher stats (which ADCOMs do consider in "qualified").

The real issues is that its not "fair". And again, I don't really care, but to not acknowledge its an "unfair" process is denial.

 

[DrDumbDrum]

Certain people have privilege from the day they're born

This. I'm sure we can all think of many ways in which the systems in place can be considered unfair. Legacy admissions are just one of many unfortunate realities about which we can't do anything (likely ever). The application process is stressful enough without worrying about things we can't control.

 

[Nikj]

Ya, the minimum GPA and MCAT exist so legacies, etc. can get in regardless of their qualifications.

I think we are stuck on the semantics of the word "qualified". The OP is clearly stating that it's not fair legacies get preference over people with higher stats (which ADCOMs do consider in "qualified").

The real issues is that its not "fair". And again, I don't really care, but to not acknowledge its an "unfair" process is denial.

Wait wait wait, so are you suggesting the only factors that should play into a candidates chances should be MCAT/GPA?

 

[getdown]

Yeah thats true, i suppose my comparision was somewhat missplaced, but i just wanted to highlight that nepotism is based in prejudice.

"Jim is an employer who is known to be prejudiced toward members of his own family"

I disagree with you.
when i use the word prejudice it is meant as biased towards or partial.

noun: prejudice; plural noun: prejudices

1. 
   preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
   "English prejudice against foreigners"
   synonyms: preconceived idea, preconception, prejudgment
   "male prejudices about women"
   • dislike, hostility, or unjust behavior deriving from unfounded opinions.
     "accusations of racial prejudice"
     synonyms: bigotry, bias, partisanship, partiality, intolerance, discrimination, unfairness, inequality;
     racism, casteism
     "they are motivated by prejudice"
2. LAW
   harm or injury that results or may result from some action or judgment.
   "prejudice resulting from delay in the institution of the proceedings"
   synonyms: detriment, harm, damage, injury, hurt, loss
   "without prejudice to the interests of others"

It's irrelevant how YOU use the word. It matters what the widely accepted meaning behind the word is. You can't just use words, make up your own definition of the word and then argue with other people that your definition is correct. That's not how this world works.

I'm not sure if you're trying to use these large words with complex meanings to bolster your arguments because you've heard them on TV and feel like it somehow supports your point but it just makes you look immature and ignorant.

Someone hiring their unqualified family member/friends to a position doesn't show prejudice towards the people he didn't hire. Fair? No. Prejudiced? No

 

[Robin-jay]

Wait wait wait, so are you suggesting the only factors that should play into a candidates chances should be MCAT/GPA?

No.

You should also play into account what family they were born in to.😉

 

[altblue]

This. I'm sure we can all think of many ways in which the systems in place can be considered unfair. Legacy admissions are just one of many unfortunate realities about which we can't do anything (likely ever). The application process is stressful enough without worrying about things we can't control.

It's also that there are other injustices more worth worrying about.

We're in an insular world where many of us are at least someone competitive to med school, and sometimes we're not aware there are problems a lot grander. Back in undergrad, the grade deflation and privilege of others who were groomed to do well to get good grades would annoy the hell out of me. But looking back, isn't it more fundamentally problematic that some low-income children would do badly in elementary school and get little out of it, while the richer did better there too? So, I don't think legacy students swiping a few seats at each school is that big of deal. Doesn't mean it should happen, but why worry?

 

[Nikj]

No.

You should also play into account what family they were born in to.

You understand how hypocritical that is right? You talk about fairness like there is a reasonable way to look at a persons life and determine if they deserve something(There isn't). What about illness, have you accounted for that? Or unseen family circumstances?

Also I know someone else mentioned the 3.6/505 number, but do you have any actual statistics on these students getting accepted?

And no offense, but if someones Dad or Mom works/attended for one of these schools, they most likely also have contributed to the University either in small, or large part, and that alone makes their child have more of a right to attend, all things equal, or slightly unequal.

 

[Robin-jay]

You understand how hypocritical that is right? You talk about fairness like there is a reasonable way to look at a persons life and determine if the deserve something. What about illness, have you accounted for that? Or unseen family circumstances?

Even people that have undergone those issues still prove themselves capable to enter medical school. They still have a good GPA/MCAT or have done extra steps to ensure their acceptance (SMP, etc.).

Also I know someone else mentioned the 3.6/505 number, but do you have any actual statistics on these students getting accepted?

Top 20 schools publish their average GPA/MCATs.

And no offense, but if someones Dad or Mom works/attended for one of these schools, they most likely also have contributed to the University either in small, or large part, and that alone makes their child have more of a right to attend, all things equal, or slightly unequal.

That doesn't make it "fair".

 

[altblue]

And no offense, but if someones Dad or Mom works/attended for one of these schools, they most likely also have contributed to the University either in small, or large part, and that alone makes their child have more of a right to attend, all things equal, or slightly unequal.

Not really.