Why the emphasis on volunteering?

[Trismegistus4]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I pretty much agree with the OP. It's a nice feeling to know you've helped someone, but a pure desire to "help people" isn't the primary reason I'm going into medicine--I have reasons for becoming a doctor instead of a social worker or an inner city schoolteacher. And I think it's pretty funny that everyone pretends they want nothing more than to serve poor homeless AIDS victims in order to get into med school, yet we still have plenty of people going into fields like radiology and pathology specifically because of the income and lifestyle. (Med school interview: "Oh, I can't wait to practice primary care in an underserved area!" Day of matriculation in med school: "Now, how can I get into a dermatology residency, and in which area of the country are incomes the highest?")

I agree it's dumb that so many students jump through all these hoops to get into med school (and into college), supposedly proving their altruism, when really they're just doing it because they know schools expect to see it. You shouldn't have to have been in the Peace Corps to become a doctor. And it's nice to know that there are people who agree, since I got chewed out for saying this exact thing on OldPreMeds.com last year.

I think it definitely is a recent development in med school admissions. It's difficult to get useful advice from currently practicing doctors; when I mention to them all of this shadowing and volunteering I believe I need to do, they look at me like I just said I was from Mars. "You want to be a doctor? Just take the science classes and MCAT, and apply. That's what I did."

 

[TwoLegacies]

Ok then. All the people here who are saying that it's lame to expect pre-meds to volunteer, don't do any volunteering yourself. You'll save yourself some time to eat Fruit Loops, and you won't be a hypocrite. If you go out and volunteer just for the sake of looking good, then you've become part of the "problem" you complain about, in which volunteering is expected of applicants.

For the record, when I was in Circle K (aka college version of Kiwanis), most of the people who were actively involved weren't pre-med, including myself at the time. This is at UCSD, where pre-meds are a dime a dozen. I'm not naive, I think a lot of pre-meds volunteer because they think they have to. But it's also silly to assume that people who actually care are the exception to the rule.

 

[vmc303]

I think it definitely is a recent development in med school admissions. It's difficult to get useful advice from currently practicing doctors; when I mention to them all of this shadowing and volunteering I believe I need to do, they look at me like I just said I was from Mars. "You want to be a doctor? Just take the science classes and MCAT, and apply. That's what I did."

Yes, and the ironic thing is, there's emerging evidence that the current education system is actually turning out *worse* doctors than it was back in the day when all you had to do was have good science grades and a solid MCAT. They're no less technically proficient, but they're increasingly less willing to work 80 hour weeks and truly devote themselves to a career. The huge interest in "lifestyle" specialties attests to this. This is what happens when the med schools start looking for people with rafts of extracurricular activities and deemphasizing sheer competency. Clearly, whatever good the schools think they're doing by screening for altruists and humanitarians (or more likely, just people who know how to work the system) isn't translating into better medical professionals.

 

[Bap2qwrq7]

Ok then. All the people here who are saying that it's lame to expect pre-meds to volunteer, don't do any volunteering yourself. You'll save yourself some time to eat Fruit Loops, and you won't be a hypocrite. If you go out and volunteer just for the sake of looking good, then you've become part of the "problem" you complain about, in which volunteering is expected of applicants.

I'd rather play the game and get accepted somewhere then try to make a stand and get lost in the crowd and basically screw up my future.

 

[vmc303]

Ok then. All the people here who are saying that it's lame to expect pre-meds to volunteer, don't do any volunteering yourself. You'll save yourself some time to eat Fruit Loops, and you won't be a hypocrite. If you go out and volunteer just for the sake of looking good, then you've become part of the "problem" you complain about, in which volunteering is expected of applicants.

For the record, when I was in Circle K (aka college version of Kiwanis), most of the people who were actively involved weren't pre-med, including myself at the time. This is at UCSD, where pre-meds are a dime a dozen. I'm not naive, I think a lot of pre-meds volunteer because they think they have to. But it's also silly to assume that people who actually care are the exception to the rule.

Nobody's being hypocritical. Everyone knows you have to volunteer to get into medical school, so they do what they have to do. Volunteering, in this instance, is no more hypocritical than taking organic chemistry, another requirement for medical school that few people who complete if they didn't have to.

The problem is not the students, but the admissions committees. At some point there was a general census among the college and medical school adcoms across the country that philanthropy was an essential component of being a good person. This may well be true, but it shouldn't be their mission to inculcate this spirit or to screen for it, and that they're doing so is what's creating the problem. I'd go so far as to say it's actually counterproductive -- forced volunteering often is enough to kill off whatever inchoate philanthropic drive someone might've had. "Volunteering" should be just that; it shouldn't be a de facto requirement for anything.

 

[TwoLegacies]

Yes, and the ironic thing is, there's emerging evidence that the current education system is actually turning out *worse* doctors than it was back in the day when all you had to do was have good science grades and a solid MCAT. They're no less technically proficient, but they're increasingly less willing to work 80 hour weeks and truly devote themselves to a career. The huge interest in "lifestyle" specialties attests to this. This is what happens when the med schools start looking for people with rafts of extracurricular activities and deemphasizing sheer competency. Clearly, whatever good the schools think they're doing by screening for altruists and humanitarians (or more likely, just people who know how to work the system) isn't translating into better medical professionals.

Clearly, people who can volunteer/have extracurriculars AND manage stellar grades are going to be poor doctors.

Am I wrong, or has med school admissions gotten more competitive with regards to numbers? That's why adcoms have to look elsewhere in your application for a distinction. With seas of qualified applicants, they're forced to look beyond grades/MCAT.

 

[TwoLegacies]

Nobody's being hypocritical. Everyone knows you have to volunteer to get into medical school, so they do what they have to do. Volunteering, in this instance, is no more hypocritical than taking organic chemistry, another requirement for medical school that few people who complete if they didn't have to.

The problem is not the students, but the admissions committees. At some point there was a general census among the college and medical school adcoms across the country that philanthropy was an essential component of being a good person. This may well be true, but it shouldn't be their mission to inculcate this spirit or to screen for it, and that they're doing so is what's creating the problem. I'd go so far as to say it's actually counterproductive -- forced volunteering often is enough to kill off whatever inchoate philanthropic drive someone might've had. "Volunteering" should be just that; it shouldn't be a de facto requirement for anything.

I maintain my stance-- If you don't want to do it, don't do it. Nobody's forcing you; you seem to be forcing yourself.
Put the effort into other parts of your application. It isn't a requirement. I have friends who have gotten into med school with little to no volunteer experience, but high MCAT scores.

 

[vmc303]

Clearly, people who can volunteer/have extracurriculars AND manage stellar grades are going to be poor doctors.

That's not what I said, but it does seem that's what's happening. My point was just that for all the tinkering the adcoms are doing, supposedly trying to obtain an ever more qualified class of students, they aren't producing better doctors than they were under the older, simpler admissions system. Changes always have unintended consequences, and perhaps this is one of the consequences of stressing things other than academics, even if the connection isn't really clear.

 

[TwoLegacies]

That's not what I said, but it does seem that's what's happening. My point was just that for all the tinkering the adcoms are doing, supposedly trying to obtain an ever more qualified class of students, they aren't producing better doctors than they were under the older, simpler admissions system. Changes always have unintended consequences, and perhaps this is one of the consequences of stressing things other than academics, even if the connection isn't really clear.

But don't assume that a connection implies causation. If doctors are supposedly "getting worse", it could be due to a number of other factors.

Meanwhile, I think the increasing number of applications is to blame for the process becoming more selective, rather than adcoms somehow deciding to become more selective. It's not like they said, "Say, let's admit fewer students this year in order to weed out the stragglers". Population increase = more applicants = more criteria needed to judge fitness for med school. You can see the same thing happening with undergrad -- the average GPA for incoming freshman at UCSD last year was above a 4.0 on the weighed system.
But that's just my theory.

 

[vmc303]

But don't assume that a connection implies causation. If doctors are supposedly "getting worse", it could be due to a number of other factors.

Meanwhile, I think the increasing number of applications is to blame for the process becoming more selective, rather than adcoms somehow deciding to become more selective. It's not like they said, "Say, let's admit fewer students this year in order to weed out the stragglers". Population increase = more applicants = more criteria needed to judge fitness for med school. You can see the same thing happening with undergrad -- the average GPA for incoming freshman at UCSD last year was above a 4.0 on the weighed system.
But that's just my theory.

But choosing a set of criteria is always making a value judgment -- "What sorts of things do we want to screen for in order to turn out the best doctors? How are we going to weigh those factors against each other?" Why not just be more selective with respect to MCAT and GPA? Just because they need more and/or stricter criteria due to the boost in applicants, it doesn't follow that one of the criteria has to be public service. I could rattle off a dozen other factors that they currently don't screen for which seemingly are more important for becoming a good doctor. Hand eye coordination? Ability to function while sleep deprived? Short term memory? Logical thinking ability? But why public service?

 

[TwoLegacies]

But choosing a set of criteria is always making a value judgment -- "What sorts of things do we want to screen for in order to turn out the best doctors? How are we going to weigh those factors against each other?" Why not just be more selective with respect to MCAT and GPA? Just because they need more and/or stricter criteria due to the boost in applicants, it doesn't follow that one of the criteria has to be public service. I could rattle off a dozen other factors that they currently don't screen for which seemingly are more important for becoming a good doctor. Hand eye coordination? Ability to function while sleep deprived? Short term memory? Logical thinking ability? But why public service?

It's easy to screen for. I guess they could set up a test for, er, hand-eye coordination, but that'd be a lot of effort and time that they probably don't have.

Personally, I think scoring a few more points on the MCAT doesn't mean you will be a better doctor. Scoring well/having experience with any of these criteria doesn't mean you will be a better doctor. But they have to choose SOME kind of predictor.

Perhaps they'd rather work with people who are compassionate enough to get up at the crack of dawn to volunteer? I mean, why have interviews if you are not going to base some part of admissions on personality? This isn't to say that people who don't want to volunteer are bad people; most of us have some amount of compassion. The difference between those who want to volunteer and those who don't is motivation to ACT on your beliefs. Maybe the adcoms want people who are doers as well as being thinkers.

It's all fine and good to feel sorry for the disadvantaged, but it's another thing entirely to help them out in some way.

 

[velo]

I'm interested in becoming a doctor for a lot of different reasons, but frankly, helping people doesn't number too high among them. It's an intellectually challenging career, and I know I'd be good at it, and if people benefit from what I do, that's simply wonderful, but I don't have the burning passon to heal the sick and elevate the oppressed that seems to be a requirement for gaining entrance to med school these days.

I'm not not sure why the schools stress this aspect of medicine so much. Many of the best doctors, it seems, are technically proficient without being overly caring or solicitous toward their patients, and this works out just fine. You don't need to have a humanitarian personality to be a great surgeon or pathologist or radiologist. You just need to be good at what you do. So why do med schools want to see endless hours of volunteering at AIDS clinics or refugee camps as a demonstration of your committment to medicine?

It seems like only a small subset of specialties really need to have that caring, philanthropic personality, yet med schools place disproportianate weight on it when choosing whom to admit. If your neurosurgeon is damn good at what he does, why would you care about his committment to helping people? A lot of students, I'm led to believe, fake it: they volunteer places because they know that's what they have to do, not out of any altruistic committment to healing. Then, once they get into med school, they abandon these pursuits and nevertheless go on to become fine doctors.

Anyone have a good explanation for this? I get the feeling that it hasn't always been this way. Once upon a time, ambition and a powerful intellect were all that were really required. God knows not all doctors in their 40's and 50's today are wonderful people. More importantly, does anyone have any advice for someone who knows he isn't like this, yet is still interested in medicine? Can research experience substitute for volunteering in clinics and whatnot?

wow, a good post in pre-allo! You hit the nail on the head with most of this i think. But don't fret, I did quite well in the application process with no volunteering but strong numbers, research experience, and some modest clinical exposure. Furthermore I didn't say I wanted to go into medicine "to help people" in a single interview...there are plenty of ways that you can "help people", I always said I wanted to go into medicine because I think I'd be good at it, and as a bonus its useful work that helps people.

 

[gerido]

That's not what I said, but it does seem that's what's happening. My point was just that for all the tinkering the adcoms are doing, supposedly trying to obtain an ever more qualified class of students, they aren't producing better doctors than they were under the older, simpler admissions system. Changes always have unintended consequences, and perhaps this is one of the consequences of stressing things other than academics, even if the connection isn't really clear.

stop pulling stuff out of your as$ to make a point. Maybe the adcoms does a better job of screening people out than you think. With so many people rejected and so few accepted, maybe they are letting in the best of the best.. to their definition of best... Maybe that's why there are so many people come on here to whine and b!tch to justify the reason they're rejected.

 

[velo]

While there are some pathologists/radiologists who never see patients the great majority of physicians deal directly with patients in one way or another.While you dont have to ge a great humanitarian to be good physician if you are not a "caring' individual the likelihood you will end up a good doctor in almost any specialty is debatable.Psychological and interpersonal issues are often at the core of many medical problems.While its true that there are top surgeons with terrible "people skills" the best of them are indeed humanitarians.In the past medicine was a very different field.Now a high priority is placed on communication and empathy.The public wants physicians to have these skills. Not only in relating to patients but in relating to peers,nurses,ancillary personel.If you are not into "helping people" there are perhaps other more suitable careers as you will have a tough go in med school and beyond..

well don't get humanitarian desire confused with the ability to have a good report with patients. Building a strong and comfortable doctor-patient relationship is another skill required in most fields of medicine. Wiser men than me have always said a good doctor should be affable, available, and able...in that order. Still, I don't see how volunteering one's time as an undergrad, many times simply for the purpose of med school admissions, means that that person has stronger interpersonal skills than someone who does not...

 

[gerido]

well don't get humanitarian desire confused with the ability to have a good report with patients. Building a strong and comfortable doctor-patient relationship is another skill required in most fields of medicine. Wiser men than me have always said a good doctor should be affable, available, and able...in that order. Still, I don't see how volunteering one's time as an undergrad, many times simply for the purpose of med school admissions, means that that person has stronger interpersonal skills than someone who does not...

I think part of the reason volunteer is so highly recommended is because they want to expose the students to real world problems. Lets face it, while there are some who struggle through college, many go through college with their room, board, tuition, icecream money paid for by their mommy and daddy. By the time they enter medical school, many might have no exposure to real world working condition. Not only that, people learn about issues in their class, but never actually get real exposure in person. Trust me, the knowledge from reading about the underserved/poor is hardly close to the knowledge from working with the underserved/poor.

It is for this reason that I think all med student should travel the world. See what is outside of their relm and actually see real poor people. I think the medical profession will be even more rewarding when you are expose to these conditions.

There is no rule that say you have to volunteer to enter med school. In fact, I know people who work through college and never actually had volunteer experience. But their work expose them to problems in medicine as well as the clinical setting and help the understand what potential they have as a medical provider. As far as I know, that was enough for the medical school to admit them.

 

[LizzyM]

I think that this started because grades and MCATs being equal, the better candidate appears to be the person who got up early on Saturday morning and helped someone somewhere with something than the applicant who slept in and ate Fruit Loops at Noon. So the volunteer got the interview. Next thing you know, eveyone is volunteering because it "looks good on the application".

Being a volunteer is one of many ways to show your time management skills. Being a volunteer is one way to demonstrate leadership skills (when you organize other volunteers, for example).
Being a volunteer is one way to show that you've been up close with patients.
Being a volunteer is one way to show that you've gone beyond your middle-class cocoon and learned first hand about the life-style of the poor and downtrodden (they will be your patients some day, even if only during residency).
Being a volunteer is one way to show that you are willing to give up being comfortable for someone else's well-being.

This isn't to say that there aren't other ways, including paid work, but opportunities to volunteer are available to everyone.

One other thing, in instances where an applicant has had to work while in school, the volunteer thing tends to be minimized by the adcomm.

 

[tigress]

Yes, and the ironic thing is, there's emerging evidence that the current education system is actually turning out *worse* doctors than it was back in the day when all you had to do was have good science grades and a solid MCAT. They're no less technically proficient, but they're increasingly less willing to work 80 hour weeks and truly devote themselves to a career. The huge interest in "lifestyle" specialties attests to this. This is what happens when the med schools start looking for people with rafts of extracurricular activities and deemphasizing sheer competency. Clearly, whatever good the schools think they're doing by screening for altruists and humanitarians (or more likely, just people who know how to work the system) isn't translating into better medical professionals.

Do you really think doctors are worse because they aren't willing to work 80 hour weeks? The entire culture has changed, and it's different, yes, but I for one would not say it's worse. You yourself say that the doctors are no less technically proficient, and from talking to older people I would suggest that modern doctors actually tend to be more compassionate towards their patients. As I said, the culture of modern medicine has changed quite a bit in the past 30 or 40 years. The problem with 80-hour work weeks is that most people can't sustain that for any long period of time, and end up becoming overworked and unhappy, burning out, maybe even sharp with their patients or quitting medicine altogether. There is still room for people who want to work this much, but those of us who wouldn't be able to can now become doctors as well, and in my opinion this is overall beneficial to the profession.

Coming back to volunteering, I noticed a few people mentioned the apparant contradiction in being forced to volunteer, or volunteering for ulterior motives. From a purely practical position, however, it doesn't really matter why people volunteer. Volunteer service is needed in many ways, so whatever the actual motives it is helpful. It can be argued that almost everybody who volunteers does so for motives other than actually "helping people." It has been suggested by social theorists that people tend to give to charity because it makes them feel good about themselves. I'm not sure if that's true, but practically it doesn't matter because the end result is the same.

That said, I also know of situations in which volunteer positions are created simply to meet the needs of people who want to volunteer, meaning that extra resources are used just to allow more people to volunteer. So the way I see it, giving your time to a needy cause is worth your time regardless of your motives for doing so. Personally I have volunteered a lot in things that are personally important to me, such as political campaigns, bone marrow drives, as an advisor and mentor to families dealing with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, etc. None of my volunteer work is actually clinical.

I said it in a previous post and I"ll say it again: clinical experience is vital to an application, and volunteer work is not. Sure it can help, but so can many other things that aren't required. I have mentioned a few times in this forum that my best friend was accepted to all of her top choice schools with no volunteer work, but with clinical experience (shadowing), some research, and a stellar GPA but a sub-par MCAT (and LORs that probably said she was God's gift to man). You will find people who are accepted both with and without volunteering. I don't think volunteer work magically proves that you are a compassionate person, which gets back to the original point of this thread. An intellectual desire to pursue medicine is really important, and seems an appropriate reason to go into the field.

okay so this is sort of long and rambling...sorry

 

[Psycho Doctor]

I think that this started because grades and MCATs being equal, the better candidate appears to be the person who got up early on Saturday morning and helped someone somewhere with something than the applicant who slept in and ate Fruit Loops at Noon. So the volunteer got the interview. Next thing you know, eveyone is volunteering because it "looks good on the application".

Being a volunteer is one of many ways to show your time management skills. Being a volunteer is one way to demonstrate leadership skills (when you organize other volunteers, for example).
Being a volunteer is one way to show that you've been up close with patients.
Being a volunteer is one way to show that you've gone beyond your middle-class cocoon and learned first hand about the life-style of the poor and downtrodden (they will be your patients some day, even if only during residency).
Being a volunteer is one way to show that you are willing to give up being comfortable for someone else's well-being.

This isn't to say that there aren't other ways, including paid work, but opportunities to volunteer are available to everyone.

One other thing, in instances where an applicant has had to work while in school, the volunteer thing tends to be minimized by the adcomm.

this is all very true. Let's not forget that 4.0 GPA 42 MCAT are a dime a dozen; therefore there has to be something that makes a person stand out. Someone who can balance their academics while doing volunteer work shows another side of a person. Don't forget they are evaluating the whole person and they want to see what you are bringing to their med school.

 

[ElKapitan]

I hate research, why is it seen as being important (to medical schools) to conduct research, when you can certainly understand papers without conducting the research yourself. What if I want to be a general practicioner? How does my past experience expressing liters of IgG in E. coli, help my patients?

I have two years worth of research, and it is my present opinion that it is going to be less beneficial than my volunteer experiences.

 

[Psycho Doctor]

I hate research, why is it seen as being important (to medical schools) to conduct research, when you can certainly understand papers without conducting the research yourself. What if I want to be a general practicioner? How does my past experience expressing liters of IgG in E. coli, help my patients?

I have two years worth of research, and it is my present opinion that it is going to be less beneficial than my volunteer experiences.

for me that's true too. I think if you are interested in doing research, that should be part of your volunteer/work experience. If you are focusing on clinical patient care, that is where you need exposure.

 

[Shredder]

Go OP let's start a revolution to ironically go back to the good old days. Gather up some stats and put out a paper, "The Decline of Modern Medicine". I want co-authorship!

 

[LizzyM]

Some schools think that having done research prior to medical school is a good predictor of doing research as a career (how many people who don't do any research in college end up in research careers?)

Some of these schools think that they are more likely to produce the 2035 Nobel laureate in Medicine if they admit only students who have had research experience.

There is also something to be said for being discovered as someone who has "good hands", who is patient, not worn down by adversity or negative results, who works cooperatively with others, willing to go the extra mile to help when needed, who is creative, persistent, cheerful. These traits are sometimes described in LOR and they don't hurt whether or not the applicant wants a career in research.

 

[45408]

this is all very true. Let's not forget that 4.0 GPA 42 MCAT are a dime a dozen;

o rly?

 

[Psycho Doctor]

o rly?

well there are enough intelligent high scorers, especially at the top schools...you got my point 😀

 

[Trismegistus4]

this is all very true. Let's not forget that 4.0 GPA 42 MCAT are a dime a dozen;

That's quite an exaggeration. According to the stats on this AAMC page, those numbers are both significantly greater than 1 standard deviation above the mean for successful applicants. I would think that anyone with numbers like those is virtually guaranteed to get in somewhere.

 

[clc8503]

You don't have to be a humanitarian to be a doctor. However, you need to really care about your patients. Would you want a doctor examining you that looked at you as if you were just another sack water, enclosed by membranes and tissue? I think not. Keep in mind that many people are scared when they see the doctor. They see you for a reason and that reason has bothered them enough to allow the patient take action by seeing you (the physician). If you do not have a deep desire to help out your fellow man, you will be miserable the entire time you are a physician. Espeacially on those long weeks when you have to work 50 to 60 hours catering to your patients needs. I think being a physician means more than just facing daily challenges. It's about impacting the lives of others on several different levels.

I think it is very important that pre meds shadow a physician at least once before applying to med school. I do it every Friday. I have the privilege of shadowing both a Cardiologist and an Internal medicine physician. I am pleased to say that they both really care about their patients. The Cardiologist even has everyone share in a short prayer every morning before he inserts heart stents through corinary arteries. I alternate between the two physicians every other week. If you never shadow or volunteer, how will you truly know if being a physician is for you? Please, do not base it on what have seen on television. I don't care if you watch the real thing on the discovery channel! It is different in person. Television could never capture what it's really like. It either portrays it as too draumatic (ER) or carelessly (Nip/Tuc).

After the Internal med that I shadow was though examining one his patients she asked who I was and Dr Mor*** introduced us. She looked at me and said, "If you are have the doctor that this man is, you will be a darn good one". I found that inspiring. You will find a lot of inspiration by shadowing a local doc. Their inspiration can really help you get through those long nights of studying. Then again, they might inspire you to run away from medicine as fast you considered it. Thats why shadowing/volunteering is important. Not to mention, it looks great on applications and is an interesting topic during your interview. I believe if you are looking for a challenge, pursue a PhD, if you want to impact and save lives become an MD.

Thanks for reading this all the way though.

Yours,
Caraway

 

[SocialistMD]

Frankly, my time is worth something and I'm not willing to freely give it away for little benefit to either party.

While I don't necessarily agree with the fact that volunteering is an application booster because it shows you are a compassionate person, I do think you've hit on an important idea that has gone unnoticed. You have no idea of how much time you must "freely" give away as a physician. Being intellectually stimulated by medicine does not a good physician make. You have to love it and you have to care about your patients. It doesn't matter how interesting the pathology, unless you care you will not be willing to get up at 3:00am from your warm bed to go to the cold hospital for your patient and remove his/her appendix, stent his/her LAD or give tPA for his/her stroke. That is why it is important to care about the person rather than the disease; it is the person you are treating, not the disease.

 

[Psycho Doctor]

That's quite an exaggeration. According to the stats on this AAMC page, those numbers are both significantly greater than 1 standard deviation above the mean for successful applicants. I would think that anyone with numbers like those is virtually guaranteed to get in somewhere.

i clarified to say "top" schools, and I used it to emphasize that volunteering is what makes people stand apart from the "intellectual" students, whch everyone pretty much has to be to get into and thru med school.

 

[velo]

to lizzy and gerido: I don't mean to say that volunteering experiences can't be valuable, but its what you make of it, and all of the benifits you've listed can be said of any number of other experiences. For every one person I've met who has had a worthwhile experience I've met another 20 who did some busy work just because a premed advisor told them med schools want you to "volunteer." There's nothing about volunteering that is requisit to your career as a physician.

 

[velo]

I hate research, why is it seen as being important (to medical schools) to conduct research, when you can certainly understand papers without conducting the research yourself. What if I want to be a general practicioner? How does my past experience expressing liters of IgG in E. coli, help my patients?

I have two years worth of research, and it is my present opinion that it is going to be less beneficial than my volunteer experiences.

If you don't plan on applying to a competitive residency and just want to do family practice you're right, stop worrying about research, you'll be perfectly happy and do perfectly well not doing any more research. Schools that produce a lot of primary care docs won't care nearly as much about undergrad research experience.

If you want to go to a more competitive residency program, do surgery, do a subspecialty, work at a larger academic medical center, etc then they care about you having an interest in research because you're going to be doing plenty of it.

 

[QofQuimica]

I hate research, why is it seen as being important (to medical schools) to conduct research, when you can certainly understand papers without conducting the research yourself. What if I want to be a general practicioner? How does my past experience expressing liters of IgG in E. coli, help my patients?

I have two years worth of research, and it is my present opinion that it is going to be less beneficial than my volunteer experiences.

If nothing else, doing some research yourself can give you an appreciation for the fact that research is often tedious, time-consuming, unglamorous, full of dead-ends that lead nowhere, and greatly delays personal gratification, if any is ever even forthcoming. Plus, there is the bonus pleasure for us of dealing with pre-meds who don't really care about advancing science, and who are "volunteering" in the lab so that they can list "research experience" on their medical school applications. 🙄 Do you plan to practice medicine in the United States? I suppose I don't have to tell you then that all of these wonderful life-saving devices and drugs that you'd probably like to use in your clinical practice didn't just spring out of the head of Zeus fully formed. They had to be invented or discovered by someone who did research.

 

[vmc303]

I don't especially care if my doctor treats me like his own son or a broken down car. I'm only concerned about how well he does his job. I have family, friends, and if I were religious, I'd have a minister to go to for comfort and support. I don't need my physician for these functions.

Think about this. Computers are getting better and better at performing many of the functions that at one time only doctors could do. Already they're capable of diagnosing some conditions much more accurately then even the best physicians. Computers, of course, are about as lifeless and unhumanitarian as you can get, but does this mean you'd object to being "treated" by a computer if it meant your illness could be handled more effectively by one? This will be the reality in another 20 years. Humanity and compassion are becoming less important in medicine than ever before.

You don't have to be a humanitarian to be a doctor. However, you need to really care about your patients. Would you want a doctor examining you that looked at you as if you were just another sack water, enclosed by membranes and tissue? I think not. Keep in mind that many people are scared when they see the doctor. They see you for a reason and that reason has bothered them enough to allow the patient take action by seeing you (the physician). If you do not have a deep desire to help out your fellow man, you will be miserable the entire time you are a physician. Espeacially on those long weeks when you have to work 50 to 60 hours catering to your patients needs. I think being a physician means more than just facing daily challenges. It's about impacting the lives of others on several different levels.

I think it is very important that pre meds shadow a physician at least once before applying to med school. I do it every Friday. I have the privilege of shadowing both a Cardiologist and an Internal medicine physician. I am pleased to say that they both really care about their patients. The Cardiologist even has everyone share in a short prayer every morning before he inserts heart stents through corinary arteries. I alternate between the two physicians every other week. If you never shadow or volunteer, how will you truly know if being a physician is for you? Please, do not base it on what have seen on television. I don't care if you watch the real thing on the discovery channel! It is different in person. Television could never capture what it's really like. It either portrays it as too draumatic (ER) or carelessly (Nip/Tuc).

After the Internal med that I shadow was though examining one his patients she asked who I was and Dr Mor*** introduced us. She looked at me and said, "If you are have the doctor that this man is, you will be a darn good one". I found that inspiring. You will find a lot of inspiration by shadowing a local doc. Their inspiration can really help you get through those long nights of studying. Then again, they might inspire you to run away from medicine as fast you considered it. Thats why shadowing/volunteering is important. Not to mention, it looks great on applications and is an interesting topic during your interview. I believe if you are looking for a challenge, pursue a PhD, if you want to impact and save lives become an MD.

Thanks for reading this all the way though.

Yours,
Caraway

 

[Psycho Doctor]

I don't especially care if my doctor treats me like his own son or a broken down car. I'm only concerned about how well he does his job. I have family, friends, and if I were religious, I'd have a minister to go to for comfort and support. I don't need my physician for these functions.

Think about this. Computers are getting better and better at performing many of the functions that at one time only doctors could do. Already they're capable of diagnosing some conditions much more accurately then even the best physicians. Computers, of course, are about as lifeless and unhumanitarian as you can get, but does this mean you'd object to being "treated" by a computer if it meant your illness could be handled more effectively by one? This will be the reality in another 20 years. Humanity and compassion are becoming less important in medicine than ever before.

that is just plain sad. when medicine really gets to this point, it's time to get computers to monitor patients and we all might as well become machines with no humanity attached to us whatsoever.

i think people like you would benefit most by courses in humanity, compassion and dealing with ill patients.

 

[vmc303]

that is just plain sad. when medicine really gets to this point, it's time to get computers to monitor patients and we all might as well become machines with no humanity attached to us whatsoever.

i think people like you would benefit most by courses in humanity, compassion and dealing with ill patients.

And I think you need a reality check. Wait until you have kids and one of them needs emergency surgery at some point. I can guarantee you'll care much more about how *good* the surgeon is than whether he's a nice guy or a good reader of bedtime stories. The biggest prick in the hospital can also be the best doctor in the hospital (and this is actually the case more than you'd expect) if his rotten personality doesn't interfere with his ability to fix patients' problems.

 

[QofQuimica]

i think people like you would benefit most by courses in humanity, compassion and dealing with ill patients.

Frankly, this thread is enough to bring out the misanthrope in anyone. I don't know what sickens me more: people who think that medicine or even research is merely an intellectually interesting career, or people who think that being an effective doctor means devoting one's entire life to serving others. 🙄 Can't we have some balance here?

 

[velo]

And I think you need a reality check. Wait until you have kids and one of them needs emergency surgery at some point. I can guarantee you'll care much more about how *good* the surgeon is than whether he's a nice guy or a good reader of bedtime stories. The biggest prick in the hospital can also be the best doctor in the hospital (and this is actually the case more than you'd expect) if his rotten personality doesn't interfere with his ability to fix patients' problems.

careful now, this debate has forced you into an extreme position. You can be a proficient physician and be a prick but its better to be a "nice guy" if for no other reason than self preservation. #1 you'll get sued less. Studies have actually been conducted that show that patients are less litigeous if they "like" their doctor (ie dont think he's a prick). Lets say you're a competent surgeon, but your case has a complication and you lose the patient. Regardless of whether you're actually at fault you don't want a lawsuit, and trust me the family is MUCH more likely to sue if they feel like you were a prick, didn't give them enough information, were curt with them, whatever.

Furthermore, you'll hang on to more patients and get more referals if you're "nice." This "I'm a prick but I'm good" think only works if you're the only game in town. If you're the only neurosurgeon in the county and you're a huge dingus you can get away with it (but why do you want to be a dick?) any other situation, they'll find someone who is as good, or close to as good, but treats them better. Again, I trust the older docs who tell me the most important qualities in a physician are affability, availability, and ability...in that order. If you #1 have a strong doctor-patient relationship #2 are able to see them in a timely fashion and #3 are a competent clinician you will do well. For patients, #1>#2>#3.

 

[velo]

Frankly, this thread is enough to bring out the misanthrope in anyone. I don't know what sickens me more: people who think that medicine or even research is merely an intellectually interesting career, or people who think that being an effective doctor means devoting one's entire life to serving others. 🙄 Can't we have some balance here?

here here

 

[vmc303]

careful now, this debate has forced you into an extreme position. You can be a proficient physician and be a prick but its better to be a "nice guy" if for no other reason than self preservation. #1 you'll get sued less. Studies have actually been conducted that show that patients are less litigeous if they "like" their doctor (ie dont think he's a prick). Lets say you're a competent surgeon, but your case has a complication and you lose the patient. Regardless of whether you're actually at fault you don't want a lawsuit, and trust me the family is MUCH more likely to sue if they feel like you were a prick, didn't give them enough information, were curt with them, whatever.

Furthermore, you'll hang on to more patients and get more referals if you're "nice." This "I'm a prick but I'm good" think only works if you're the only game in town. If you're the only neurosurgeon in the county and you're a huge dingus you can get away with it (but why do you want to be a dick?) any other situation, they'll find someone who is as good, or close to as good, but treats them better. Again, I trust the older docs who tell me the most important qualities in a physician are affability, availability, and ability...in that order. If you #1 have a strong doctor-patient relationship #2 are able to see them in a timely fashion and #3 are a competent clinician you will do well. For patients, #1>#2>#3.

Very good, pragmatic advice. I agree with everything you say. I wasn't advocating being a prick, or even trying to devalue compassion. All things being equal, it's better to be compassionate than not. But it's certainly not the most important trait for a doctor to have, or even *one* of the most, and one can be a perfectly fine doctor withot being such a great guy. I'm objecting to the amount of weight admissions committees put on outward displays of it.

 

[TwoLegacies]

I don't especially care if my doctor treats me like his own son or a broken down car. I'm only concerned about how well he does his job.

Clearly you've never had a gyno exam. 😀 Personally I appreciate the "Now, you're going to feel a little discomfort..." (I'm assuming you're a guy.)

Well, that's fine that you don't care personally, but I think a lot of people DO care whether or not their doctor treats them like a person. Same goes with patients' families. If you have a dying patient, I doubt the family will be too happy with you treating that patient like a broken car.
Not only that, but I still don't see how being compassionate and giving ******s one's ability to do his/her job well as a doctor.

 

[masterMood]

eh stop wasting your time with this thread, the general consensus is that the human race is a bunch of selfish bastards that do things for their own benefit. Even altruism is self-beneficiary (philosophically speaking now) because you do it because you get pleasure and satisfaction out of doing it.

 

[beep]

I don't especially care if my doctor treats me like his own son or a broken down car.

Just out of curiousity, have you ever been seriously sick or injured?

 

[Perrin]

And I think you need a reality check. Wait until you have kids and one of them needs emergency surgery at some point. I can guarantee you'll care much more about how *good* the surgeon is than whether he's a nice guy or a good reader of bedtime stories. The biggest prick in the hospital can also be the best doctor in the hospital (and this is actually the case more than you'd expect) if his rotten personality doesn't interfere with his ability to fix patients' problems.

I had a lumbar laminectomy about a year ago. My mom works at the city hospital and knows most of the surgeons. The neurosurgeon that we picked was known for being curt and a prick. But guess what, he was the best damn neurosurgeon in the hospital with the lowest infection rate. Pre and post op he was rather cold to talk to. However, he wasn't going to "talk" my herniated disk back into place.

That being said, if you are not a people person, rude, or inconsiderate towards others, you better be damn good at what you do to make up for it.

 

[Perrin]

For pre-meds, volunteering is as much about helping others as it is helping yourself. I learned how to talk to an inner-city 7th grader about our lives. It's not as easy as it sounds. I didn't have much in common with him, but I was able to convince him to stay in school and tought him how to play first base in the little league. One day he will play baseball for my alma mater and they'll take the college world series.

I volunteered at the free clinic in my hometown during the summers. The techs taught me how to draw blood, perform tests, and how the tests work. I gained experience taking patient histories, taking vitals, and what meds are typically used for various conditions.

My med school interviewers weren't interested in the fact that I had volunteered. They wanted to know what I had gained from volunteering. Did I take the initiative to do more than just file records or read books to children? Did I just stand there and watch the physician check a patients glucose?

In the end, you can volunteer all you want, the real test is, what did you learn from the experience.

 

[masterMood]

i don't get how you can get a 7th grader to not quit form school. DOn't you have to be 16 in order to drop out of high school?

 

[Perrin]

i don't get how you can get a 7th grader to not quit form school. DOn't you have to be 16 in order to drop out of high school?

Not exactly the point of that paragraph, but...

Legally you have to be 16, but this wasn't an area of town that truancy officers frequented. Besides, he had been held back 3 times and was 15. His mother had been killed and his father was bedridden. Social services could make him go to school, but only for a few months until he was 16.

 

[clc8503]

I don't especially care if my doctor treats me like his own son or a broken down car. I'm only concerned about how well he does his job. I have family, friends, and if I were religious, I'd have a minister to go to for comfort and support. I don't need my physician for these functions.

Think about this. Computers are getting better and better at performing many of the functions that at one time only doctors could do. Already they're capable of diagnosing some conditions much more accurately then even the best physicians. Computers, of course, are about as lifeless and unhumanitarian as you can get, but does this mean you'd object to being "treated" by a computer if it meant your illness could be handled more effectively by one? This will be the reality in another 20 years. Humanity and compassion are becoming less important in medicine than ever before.

What in the hell makes you think that that a computer can make a life saving, spur of the moment decision concerning someone’s life. Computers go on statistics and calculations. That is it. Nothing more nothing less. I do believe technology will get better. However, you sound plain sill running around talking about how computers will one day take over the field of medicine a replace talented physicians. Honestly, do you want the life of your child in the hands of stupid computer or a competent physician? Have you ever seen that movie I-Robot with Will Smith. In the movie he had a chip on his shoulder towards the robots because they made a poor decision based on calculations and probability and in return saved his life over a little girls because he statistically had a higher probability of survival. I know this is a corny example but I think it makes sense.

You also need to realize that we are humans, we are not God. You need to also realize that everything is inevitably in Gods hands. It's not in the hands of the talented physicians, the nurses, and certainly not some damn computer. How dare you criticize a doctor praying in a moment when he is responsible for someone's life and actually has the time to do it. We usually do it before they even role the patient in. When you have successfully dealt with a situation in which someone's life is in you hands then you can judge a doctor for realizing that he can only do his best and sometimes that's not enough. For your information, He is one of the best cardiologists in the South. I've seen him in at least three health promotion magazines. He's not a quack, just in case you were wondering.

Yours,
Caraway

 

[TwoLegacies]

You need to also realize that everything is inevitably in Gods hands.

I think you need to realize that not everyone believes in a god. Basing your arguments on religion won't get you anywhere with a lot of people. Just a tip.

 

[Blue Scrub]

I think you need to realize that not everyone believes in a god. Basing your arguments on religion won't get you anywhere with a lot of people. Just a tip.

True, it could also work both ways as well though....it may get you far with a lot of people...

 

[clc8503]

I think you need to realize that not everyone believes in a god. Basing your arguments on religion won't get you anywhere with a lot of people. Just a tip.

I do not care how far I get with anyone. My argument was not based strictly on religion. I am not a Christian Scientist philosopher. However, I do thank God for what I have (and yes I do take it for granted sometimes).

That ***** criticized my post and was completly out of line with his comments. I merely said what my shadowing/volunteering experience has been like for me and he has to throw in his 2 cents. Furthermore, Do you guys think it is impossible for someone to believe in God and still be a physician? I do. I know we as pre-meds take a lot of sciences, but that just means we know a lot about science. It does not mean that you have all the answers in the universe.

Yours,
Caraway

 

[trinitrotoluene]

I think that this started because grades and MCATs being equal, the better candidate appears to be the person who got up early on Saturday morning and helped someone somewhere with something than the applicant who slept in and ate Fruit Loops at Noon.

But there are so many other things one can do other than eat high-sugar content cereal or volunteer that have value. Unfortunately, adcoms only care about three: research, volunteerism, and shadowing. Everything else falls in between the cracks.