This post has expired.
Last edited:
Want to leave Pathology residency really bad
- Thread starter MD1001
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2007
- Messages
- 1,575
- Reaction score
- 1,170
It's certainly a risky situation, but in no way insurmountable.
What was your original specialty, and what would you consider as an alternative destination now?
You'll run into all the same problems you ran in to before in terms of funding, determining how much credit you get for prior work and so on. As you probably realize, you'll need to lower your expectations in terms of caliber of program in whatever field you choose.
Alternatively and with less risk, finishing out the last year of your Path training, and then heading towards the match for a new position at least removes the red flag of switching twice before completing training.
Less risky still, is to pick a fellowship that's tolerable. Make it something that tangentially relates to your "new" desired field and spin it as a way to be some sort of "super" user. It'd be brutal in terms of length, but doing something like Path->Peds Path-> Pediatrics -> Peds Heme/Onc would strike at least a few people in the right way. Given that the pediatric subspecialty job market pushes nearly everyone towards academics, I think pediatrics would be more amenable, even at higher tier programs, towards such a convoluted path and development of a super niche sort of practice (you can just tell people that's the goal, even if you have no intent on utilizing your path training - people change their minds all the time).
But it does make you an eternal trainee. Going IM might save you a year in fellowship length, but probably wouldn't generate the same level of intrigue the pediatrics residencies/fellowships/job market might show you.
What was your original specialty, and what would you consider as an alternative destination now?
You'll run into all the same problems you ran in to before in terms of funding, determining how much credit you get for prior work and so on. As you probably realize, you'll need to lower your expectations in terms of caliber of program in whatever field you choose.
Alternatively and with less risk, finishing out the last year of your Path training, and then heading towards the match for a new position at least removes the red flag of switching twice before completing training.
Less risky still, is to pick a fellowship that's tolerable. Make it something that tangentially relates to your "new" desired field and spin it as a way to be some sort of "super" user. It'd be brutal in terms of length, but doing something like Path->Peds Path-> Pediatrics -> Peds Heme/Onc would strike at least a few people in the right way. Given that the pediatric subspecialty job market pushes nearly everyone towards academics, I think pediatrics would be more amenable, even at higher tier programs, towards such a convoluted path and development of a super niche sort of practice (you can just tell people that's the goal, even if you have no intent on utilizing your path training - people change their minds all the time).
But it does make you an eternal trainee. Going IM might save you a year in fellowship length, but probably wouldn't generate the same level of intrigue the pediatrics residencies/fellowships/job market might show you.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2004
- Messages
- 6,008
- Reaction score
- 6,714
Sorry but you are delusional to think you can work in an UC as a pathology resident. You have little to no clinical medicine experience...what on earth makes you think you can do UC ?
You know nothing about my experience. So, go get your anger out onto someone else.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2004
- Messages
- 6,008
- Reaction score
- 6,714
I don’t need to know it...you left one resident and got another residency ...and now you want to leave this one..and you somehow think you can get an unrestricted license and that some one will credential you...a pathology resident...to see live patients. And that someome is going to give you med mal to do so...right.
The guys who are looking for residents to do health evals will take anyone except pathology residents...they will take anyone...
Again, you know nothing about me or my circumstances. But you obviously have anger issues. Get some help.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2004
- Messages
- 6,008
- Reaction score
- 6,714
Not sure what you are taking about...just find it amusing that you think it’s so easy to do a job that you have no training for...
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2010
- Messages
- 72,674
- Reaction score
- 115,762
C'mon rokshana, you've been on SDN long enough to recognize the phenotype of "I'm looking for advice, but only what I want to hear, and I'll lash out if I hear otherwise."
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2007
- Messages
- 1,575
- Reaction score
- 1,170
@MD1001
I didn't mean to imply that you had to do Peds - it was meant to be an example first, and the subsequent discussion was more to suggest that you need to consider the individual fields and how they might respond to your prior training. Again, my point is that you can make your pathology training a positive - IF you complete it. Various fields will respond differently to you trying to "sell" your path training as part of a larger goal. I happen to know the most about peds, so that's where I spoke with some footing, but other fields may work out well...or they may not. Again, completing your training and using a path fellowship as a bridge to your next field is just one option, and in my estimation, the one that presents the smallest amount of risk of landing a new position.
Bottom line, you could certainly tell everyone that you have this big grand goal of some sort of super niche field combining field XYZ with pathology...and then just go off and do general medicine or Urgent Care as a career. Again, people change their mind all the time, you have other time pressures that other people don't, your parents or spouse could get critically ill in the interim.
I don't think it hurts to try to see if an Urgent Care will take a flier on you...but I'm with the group in thinking it's not very likely.
I didn't mean to imply that you had to do Peds - it was meant to be an example first, and the subsequent discussion was more to suggest that you need to consider the individual fields and how they might respond to your prior training. Again, my point is that you can make your pathology training a positive - IF you complete it. Various fields will respond differently to you trying to "sell" your path training as part of a larger goal. I happen to know the most about peds, so that's where I spoke with some footing, but other fields may work out well...or they may not. Again, completing your training and using a path fellowship as a bridge to your next field is just one option, and in my estimation, the one that presents the smallest amount of risk of landing a new position.
Bottom line, you could certainly tell everyone that you have this big grand goal of some sort of super niche field combining field XYZ with pathology...and then just go off and do general medicine or Urgent Care as a career. Again, people change their mind all the time, you have other time pressures that other people don't, your parents or spouse could get critically ill in the interim.
I don't think it hurts to try to see if an Urgent Care will take a flier on you...but I'm with the group in thinking it's not very likely.
