So I am walking to class todat and one of the Admissions folk of the other state school in my state calls me. What she was wanting to know was if I would be interested in taking a full time job with a Doctor in the city I currently live in. She said this doc just likes to give back and hires a pre-med every year. She said the position is very hands on (he’s an alergist.) I told her to give him my number as I would be interested in it.
Here’s the catch. Taking the full time job would totally blow up my glide year. Histology is only given during the day at my school, so that would be out. I would also have to cut back on my volunteering hours.
I asked the admissions person what the school thought of someone working in contrast to volunteering, and she was kind of non-committal.
So the doctor hasn’t even called yet so it may be moot, but I would like some early input. I have always heard that med-school like volunteering more than paid. But with a full time job that would be like 2080 clinical hours compared to the 600 or so volunteer hours I would get over the next year. I would also not be taking Histo or BioChem.
I am also going to email a prof at my school for his opinion and speak to the admissions person at my local med school.
I would be interested to know exactly what you would be doing - is it paperwork, for example, or filing, or answering phones? She said it’s hands-on work, but what exactly does that mean? You should find out details, if the doc does indeed call you.
Personally, I think it sounds like a really cool opportunity (if indeed it is hands-on work of some kind).
On the other hand … I don’t know what your CV looks like to date in terms of volunteering or upper-division bio courses, but of course that is a consideration. If you’ve already done some other upper-div courses, not taking histo or biochem might not be such an issue.
There is, of course, also the money factor. What would this job pay, and would it be worth it in terms of the money? I don’t know where that question factors in, but it is one to consider.
Sorry for the ramble; I think I’m over-caffeinated. 
P.S. LOVE your post title! It totally got my attention.
As far as upper level classes go the only two Bio that I have not taken are Histo and BioChem, so I have plenty of upper level bio, it is just that every medschool is “take histo, take biochem”.
Volunteer experices I have had are pretty good outside to the clinical volunteering. Did a lot of stuff with church, (taking communiion to elderly), even some volunteering “leadership”, working with dog rescues. Those alone are like 600 - 700 hours over my service time. Really have only gotten my clinical stuff in this past year and next.
My volunteer job morphed into a job as a patient care tech in the same place in the hospital (PACU). I had far fewer volunteer hours before taking that job. I don’t think it hurt me at all. I thought it was a natural progression.
However, I agree that you should make sure it s hands on patient care though.
Good luck!
Tara
I agree with the above with respect to finding out the details of the job. If it’s actual patient contact, then I think you’ll be ahead of the game and it will actually look very good on your CV in addition to giving you more to discuss while on interviews.
It sounds like you’ve got plenty of upper division bio courses (the point of which is to show you can handle more difficult courses and still maintain high GPA in such). Don’t sweat histo and biochem, especially histo. Would they be helpful in med school, probably. Will they be impossible without having previous course work in them, doubtfully. I know of a number of classmates who didn’t have biochem and ended up doing well in the course (which is notably probably the most difficult course at the school from which I graduated). I don’t think I know of anyone who actually took histo prior to medical school.
Another thing to keep in mind is time you will need off to attend interviews.
Best wishes with glide year!!
Okay so the Doctor called me and left a message (I was in Target at the time, rule #1 never take a “bussiness” phone call when not in “business” mode). Basically, he called the position a clerkship. He described it as I would be learning things like taking histories, seeing exam and some pharmacology. I am gonna call him back tomorrow to get even more info.
This thing is really freaking me out.
It sounds like a great opportunity, from what he describes!
Bailey
I think that based on your quick description I would go for the job.
If understand the courses you take won’t be part of the evaluation for admission (as I hope that you will find a seat this year).
I wouldn’t sweat the upper div courses too much and pass on this opportunity that sounds very good to me. I would probably take the job (assuming you don’t have to just make coffee and copies). Taking exams and being in the midst of medicine practice sounds very cool to me.
Oh heavens, this just keeps getting more crazy. I spoke with him and the conversation went really well and the position sounds pretty cool. BUT So I googled said doctor again and things started getting a bit wierd. This doctor is pretty politically active, and his big issue is with gay rights, he is evidently pretty fearvently against them. Like to the point of setting up PACs and stuff. Now what does everyone think about this new twist.
That depends on your ability to work for someone who’s views you don’t agree with. Unless he expects you to get active in his movement, I would think its mostly a non-issue, but that depends on your tolerance for bullshit too, I suppose.
My worry is that there is a good possibility that ADCOMS will know who this person is and there is guilt by association there. I found this information about him from the DailyKos, so I mean he is pretty nationally known.
Bailey
I don’t mean to play the bad ass here. But what does this have to do with medicine or your end goal. I agree with nightgod, if you can avoid political discussions and focus on the task at hand, then I would say it doesn’t matter.
Now yes this may be brought up during your interview, but frankly I doubt that an interviewer would venture on this territory. It is clear lack of professionalism (however, during an interview, almost everything is fair game, even your age).
And even if he has a position on various political issues, does this mean he is a bad doctor? Or that you can’t learn from him?
I would just say, if the job sounds cool, just take it. The worst that can happen is an atmosphere that would be too extreme for you to bear, in which case, you can always leave.
Good luck, whatever your choice might be.
Bailey, I would say trust your gut feeling. If something doesn’t feel right, then avoid the situation. In theory, his civil rights views shouldn’t have any bearing on medicine or medical education, but we’re experienced enough to know that reality does not always follow theory.
I think ultimately, the question is: Is it worth choosing to work with someone who makes you feel uncomfortable when there are other alternatives?
So I think I am going to pass on this. Thank you all for your input in helping me sort this out. I think it wouold have been a pretty good experience, but there were other “negatives” that just outweigh the experience. I think I can go with the volunteering that I already have and get just as much exposure (especially at the free clinic.)
And even though his politics should not be the focus of my time with him, my gut tells me that in an intreview I would be wasting time explaining him when I could be excentuating the positives of my free clinic experience. I look at it this way: I have worked at a few crappy places in my accounting career. None that have been doing anything illegal, but they have a reputation as being a bad place to work. In a city as big as Phoenix, people knew about this place. Well every intreview I went on, I got asked about what it was like at that place. So I had to spend 10 mins talking about a horrible work experience rather than trying to sell myself as a good canidate for a job. The last thing I want to waste time in a 30 min med-school intreview is having to answer for someone elses poor judgement. I have enough of my own problem to explain than to add his onto mine.
Also with LBGT rights such a big issue in the news right now the last thing I want to be around is a guy who was likend to Fred Phelps.
- BaileyPup Said:
If you don't want to work for (or with) someone who holds political or social opinions you don't like, that's perfectly fine. If you really feel morally offended working with someone whose opinions differ from yours in some area, then it's the right and decent thing to do. But to refuse to work for someone because you're afraid that prejudice against him might rub off onto you...that's cowardice.
Working against so-called "LGBT rights" does not immediately make one a Fred Phelps, any more than working against affirmative action makes one a neo-Nazi. Don't buy into the intolerance and hatred coming from the anti-anti-gay-lobby crowd any more than you accept it from the other side.
You can call me a coward if you want to. My reasons were many fold for not wanting to work with him, but yes a big one is that I don’t want to be associated with him when it comes to how other view me professionally. Kind of like the old mantra “He who lies down with dogs gets fleas.” I don’t want this guys fleas. The fact is that when you apply for a job or medical school you should put your best foot forward. So there are many things that I don’t say or do so as to tarnish my professional image. Most of us on here have some sort of baggage that med-schools probably unfairly target as reasons for us not getting in, the last thing I need to do is add one more reason to the top of the stack.
Secondly, I did not personally liken him to Fred Phelps, this was the correlation that was made in many article about this person.
Thirdly, by working agaist LBGT rights this person has said things like “There are hundreds of children in America who are dying of AIDS because they were sexually abused by homosexuals.” So, the Phelps tag kind of fits and it would be more like a person against afirmative action saying “The only reason for affimitive action is so stupid minorities can get into medical school.”
So after saying all of that am I still a coward, should I stand firmly behind this guys even if it is a detriment to me professionally? Maybe I should join other contervisial groups and list them on my application (the KKK, or NAMBLA, or the New Black Panthers.)
Bailey, I don’t think you are a coward. You have to do what’s best for you and your interests. Courage is not defined by ignoring valid concerns and working with someone who you believe could be a liability.
Besides, life is too short to associate with people like that physician (even shorter for us OPM’ers). When given the choice, surround yourself with positive people in medicine. Mark 12:31.
You can call me a coward if you want to.
But of course, I did not. I made no value judgment against you personally at all. I simply noted that refusing to work with someone because you have a principled objection to his personal life and feel wrong about it is acceptable, but refusing to work with him because you’re afraid that the prejudice of others will rub off onto you is cowardice. It is no different from a man 50 years ago refusing to work with a black guy because he was afraid that others might hold him in lesser esteem.
My reasons were many fold for not wanting to work with him, but yes a big one is that I don’t want to be associated with him when it comes to how other view me professionally. Kind of like the old mantra “He who lies down with dogs gets fleas.” I don’t want this guys fleas. The fact is that when you apply for a job or medical school you should put your best foot forward. So there are many things that I don’t say or do so as to tarnish my professional image. Most of us on here have some sort of baggage that med-schools probably unfairly target as reasons for us not getting in, the last thing I need to do is add one more reason to the top of the stack.
Assuming you were “pro-choice”, would you also avoid working for Planned Parenthood for fear that their pro-abortion-rights mantra would tarnish your professional image?
I can respect someone who refuses to work for Planned Parenthood because they abhor elective abortion and refuse to support an organization that champions that cause – even if the PP job would not have involved abortions at all. That’s taking a principled stand. I admire that. I have much less respect for a person who doesn’t object to PP, but who avoids working at a good and relevant job there for fear of being associated with an organization that others might not like.
Similarly, I can respect someone who supports the LGBT agenda and refuses to work for a doctor who champions “marriage sanctity” and openly works toward that end, even if it’s a good job and even if the job has nothing directly to do with homosexuality. That’s taking a principled stand. But if someone doesn’t particularly object to the doctor’s outside efforts, yet refuses to work for him because they’re afraid of what others might think…no, I don’t find that admirable.
I understand that, as an old premed, someone in your position needs to put his/her best foot forward. But I don’t think that buckling under to bigotry is ever the right answer, no matter which side that bigotry comes from.
Secondly, I did not personally liken him to Fred Phelps, this was the correlation that was made in many article about this person.
Sure, I understood that. In fact, that was my point. The guy is being savaged by other people who don’t like his agenda. If you agree and also don’t like his agenda, that’s one thing. If you are simply afraid of what others might think of you by “lying down with the dog”, that’s another thing altogether.
Thirdly, by working agaist LBGT rights this person has said things like “There are hundreds of children in America who are dying of AIDS because they were sexually abused by homosexuals.” So, the Phelps tag kind of fits
How so? Do you think he is factually incorrect?
and it would be more like a person against afirmative action saying “The only reason for affimitive action is so stupid minorities can get into medical school.”
Perhaps. I have no opinion on the matter; I don’t know the guy. What I object to is the idea that we must avoid any associations with “the wrong element”, for fear that the opinion-makers will cast the evil eye at us.
So after saying all of that am I still a coward, should I stand firmly behind this guys even if it is a detriment to me professionally?
I will not judge whether you are a coward; that’s for you to decide. As for standing with the guy even if it’s a professional detriment, I would say that integrity demands that we do the right thing, not merely the expedient thing.
Maybe I should join other contervisial groups and list them on my application (the KKK, or NAMBLA, or the New Black Panthers.)
I don’t understand. How does this address the situation at hand? Is this doctor, engaged in legitimate research, equivalent to openly racist groups like the KKK or BP, or sexually abusive groups like NAMBLA? Or are you saying that all those who support “marriage integrity” laws are morally equivalent to racists and child molesters?
I am saying that the manner in which he is supporting these laws is what I don’t personally agree with and what I don’t want to be professionally associated with. Most of what he is doing and saying comes across as more not a promotion of “marriage sanctity” but more like “God hates f–s”. Like many on both sides of issues this guy does nothing constructive to get his point across, thus demeaning the issue. I’m done trying to explain the situation, and am sorry that I have hit a nerve with you.
- BaileyPup Said:
What makes you think you hit a nerve with me? You asked for feedback, I gave you feedback. I hope people act with integrity rather than out of expediency.