Yesterday, I interviewed at a local state M.D. school. During one of my interviews I ran into a familiar refrain that, at least this time, really got under my skin. The interviewer stated that:
“the old guard at the school does not like to accept nontraditional students because they will not have as much time to practice.” (I.e…because of age)
Naturally, as an attorney, I was shocked by how honest the interviewer was. It was almost as if the person was inviting a court challenge–not that I would bring one. Thankfully, as far as reputation is concerned, the school is behind the moon and I found myself wondering why I was there. Frankly, I reject the notion that older folks cannot be physicians. I replied by stating, among other things, that data suggests older med students trend toward primary care specialties–something that we have a dearth of in my state. (I.e…they are trying to recruit more primary care docs but do not want the people most likely to fill those slots–what morons)
A local physician recently retired at 85. By my count, should I be fortunate to live long enough, that would leave me with 51 years to practice.
What do you think–are these kinds of statements as frustrating for you? Are they truth or fiction?
By Truth or Fiction I did not mean to imply that this did not occur but, simply, whether the statement made by the ADCOM member had some validity from your perspective.
Well, sure, it’s frustrating. But remember that all you need is one acceptance, meaning one committee that thinks you have something to contribute. Once you’re in it doesn’t matter what all these other schools think, and you’ll probably be energized to prove them all wrong.
I got in at 48 and plan to practice for minimum 20 years, and indeed now I’m thinking 25 years. Given that more than a few traditional path docs are burning out after 20-25 years of practice, that puts me within the ballpark.
Perhaps some of these interviewers need to be reminded that today’s 50 is yesterday’s 30, etc. Good luck!
You’re not the first person I’ve heard say this. Heck, you’re not even the 5th. There definitely is some truth to it. From simply a length point of view I agree. However it’s not as if the school is paying you, so what do they care. What does it matter how long you will practice? What about those students who do not go into clinical medicine? I mean if the state was paying for students to attend school I could understand the state and school’s wanting more bang for their buck. However we are paying for the priviledge. We are taking a chance on them as much as they are taking a chance on us.
It frustrates me to no end to hear this kind of crap. Regardless of how long I will or won’t practice the school’s job is to educate. If they cared about length of practice or the community they would offer tuition at a discount to primary care practitioners.
I know a transplant surgeon who was trained in the military and did his fellowship at the NIH. After all those years of training once he completed his payback to the military during his very first civilian operation he was cut and contracted Hep C. No more surgery and as far as he was concerned no more patient care. Not sure if the latter was his decision or not. So how does the school decide with that one? I guess that one is a residency decision…so how do they decide?
If the school said that in their experience nontrads are less likely to complete medical school then that would make a tiny bit more sense. Not completing your med school education is a problem for the school. Not practicing for x number of years is not the school’s concern. They have no control over that and not offering someone a seat because of this is age discrimination…I guess quantity of service is more important than quality. I’m sure it’s better to have less physicians but at least they are practicing longer. 
Without launching into a tirade about the idiotic nature of American medical education, which may be interpreted, perhaps correctly as sour grapes, having been rejected by 5 schools; it is my considered opinion that age discrimination is open and prevalent in medical education. Medical education, like physicians as a profession, have historically been held apart from other forms of education. This must, in my opinion, change. It will not until legal challenges are successful, because our nation is a nation of laws and as such, “nothing gets done until the lawsuit is filed” (can’t remember who said this).
The bizarre thing is the openness with which schools reject older applicants. One school told me that the process was “entirely subjective” and that older students didn’t necessarily “fit” into their ideal candidate profile. Honesty is the best policy, but in this case, it should bring about policy changes in American medical education as it has in post-secondary education in general.
Jeff,
I agree. However you know how they settle these lawsuits…
Medschool lawyer: “You still interested in med school?”
Plaintiff: “Yes”
lawyer:“The school has a seat waiting for you…if you drop the suit”
Former plaintiff now MS1: “What lawsuit?”
Thankfully,
I have already been accepted to several schools. So, I just sat there and listened to their B.S. with a sense of amazement.
Funny but I had a heated argument with a Nontrad that this does not happen and saying it does is not right, also the fact that I went to the Caribbean and this being one of my reasons is a Cop out! Really you think they would not look at me and just pass me by at 45 ( the age I would be if I went the US route) I think my chances are better graduating medschool at 45 then trying to start. Even though I’m in the Caribbean, Primary care is not too difficult from here, I know I be able to do Rural FP.
With other acceptances in hand, it would have been alomost impossible for me to not have said something, tactifully of course. The reason people say these illegal things and get away with it is because most of us are so desperate for an acceptance we’ll tolerate anything.
Oh yeah, and as a future MD/PhD student, I hear stuff like this more often than I’d like. I find that changing the subject with something humurous while relaying the idioticy of such a statement goes over reasonably well.
Thankfully,
I have already been accepted to several schools. So, I just sat there and listened to their B.S. with a sense of amazement.
Why didn’t you just get up and walk straight out the door?
Cheers,
Judy
- jcolwell Said:
- Quote:
I have already been accepted to several schools. So, I just sat there and listened to their B.S. with a sense of amazement.
Why didn't you just get up and walk straight out the door?
Cheers,
Judy
I did not say anything controversial b/c at the time I was considering suing them. I was trying to make the best possible impression so that I might get high interview marks. The funny thing about all of this was that I interviewed with the Asst. Dean, also a laywer/physician. They said that we would either get an admission letter or hold card within days of the interview. I have received neither. Which leads me to believe that they don’t know what to do with me. BY THE WAY, there is case law out there that says despite the fact you may have been admitted to a medical school you can still bring a suit for discrimination because: the injury is capable of repetition but yet evades review. Ie…this can happen again and again to other people. I am curious to see how this ends. (By the way, I am the least litigious person in the world–this whole thing is really unjust.)
playing devil’s advocate–could it be they were testing your ability to react under pressure? I’m willing to concede, contrary to my libertarian leanings, that it’s a provocative and probably illegal thing to say, but properly handled could it not be turned to your advantage? For example:
“I would respectfully dispute that conclusion. I am more mature, more directed, and more motivated than probably most of your 21-year-old applicants are. Sure, they’re fine people and probably more mature than the average for their age, but I will hit the ground running while many of them are still growing up and learning how to deal with people in the adult world. That cuts me about 10 years of slack right there. Regarding this notion that I have fewer years to practice, well, you can’t control how many years people will practice. Recent statistics indicate that physicians are burning out in their 40s and 50s, partially from not knowing why they went into medicine in the first place and partially because they expected a dreamland of big bucks and huge prestige which didn’t pan out. I, on the other hand, am entering the field with my eyes open and intend to practice well into my 70s.”
Or something like that. Just some food for thought. Turn a lemon into lemonade and all that.
- ttraub Said:
Am I missing something? Did the well dry up? Are doctors no longer revered and set on pedestals? I mean just the other day I say a doctor on a pedestal....it was in a courtroom but still....it WAS a pedestal.
Just messin whicha Terry. Unfortunately I see this as a cop out. You are letting them off the hook. If they are using that to test you what's the test? How you handle stupid statements? Do med school interviewees really need to be tested to see how they will react when someone with some modicum of power over their life says something stupid? Is this to see if they will be assertive, aggressive, or submissive? Isn't a junior demonstrating any level of assertiveness in a benign situation a faux pas?
I'm not sure how regulated the interviewers are the necessary evil of litigation is what snaps people into "remembering" what they can and can not say. This isn't about being PC. The gatekeeper has no control on what happens after he lets people in. Medical schools can not dictate your specialty much less the length of practice so why make such a comment? Is it like telling someone who's fat that they're fat? As if we don't see ourselves in the mirror everyday....
You make some good points, Croooz, but there’s still the concept of “how does he handle himself under fire”. There’s nothing more provocative than being challenged on your age when you’re a nontrad. But think it through. Someone who’s >30 and has made it as far as the interview and still gets hot under the collar over such questions probably hasn’t developed a realistic vision of his career yet. (not saying that this applies to you, wcliffa).
If I were interviewing someone I might be tempted to challenge them in this manner, and they’d better have a really good answer. Come on, you’re about to let them into a program where they’re going to be working 80-100 hrs/week, sometimes around the clock, for the next 8-10 years and they’re going to need the endurance to handle it. Does a 43-year-old have the endurance of a 23-year-old? For the majority, the answer is hell, no! For the few crazies like us, probably we’re the exceptions, and we have to convince them we can hack it.
Even more importantly is that once we’re working, we’re going to be confronted with patients who will be ten times more provocative than any interviewer dares to be. People in pain and distress, people with cognitive impairments, people on the verge of death are going to say some pretty heavy stuff and we need to be able to handle it.
Perhaps the definition of “fire” would help. If your talking about a salty dog who’se “been there done that” then a statement like “the old guard doesn’t like to accept nontrads because of how long they’ll have to practice” won’t get much out of a response from me. If I haven’t been accepted to any school I will do the typical grin and nod. If pressed for an answer right off the top of head right now would be “perhaps it’s time for a changing of the guard.”…and again a grin.
My point is if accepted I would love the oppurtunity to just get up and walk. How many times in your life will you be able to do this? We could go on and on about what we think the interviewer’s intent (that one’s for you pathdr) was. I just know me and can say that 99% of the time I’ll grin and nod dismissively…however ALOT can happen in that 1%.
[
- ttraub Said:
I think Crooz hints on a good point which realtes to being a minority living in America. As a URM, you've already "heard it all" and had to keep on, keeping on, so how much can an interviewer really do to provoke a negative reaction?
- croooz Said:
The first situation happened when I was 19 and I was scared to death, did nothing and with my head held down walked away. The second situation happened when I was about 25, had returned to school for a second Bachelor's degree. This time, well lets just say that my conversation with the prof consisted of a word that begins the letter "F".
End result was that I got a "C" in both courses a grade I earned in the second course with the prof I had to get "jiggy" with, but the first one clearly gave me a grade I didn't earn. In the second situation I felt good that I had stood up for myself, and when it was time for the second prof to sign off for me to graduate, I'm told by my advisor that he was one of my biggest advocates.
Bottom line, sometimes in life people do really want to see if you'll stand up for yourself although I'm not suggesting anyone uses words that begin with the letter "F".
Update: I still have heard nothing from this school. It is as if they are waiting until May 15 to let me decide. No hold card, rejection or acceptance letter.
Wcliffa -
There is nothing for you to decide regarding this school if they have not notified you of an acceptance. Yes, you must decide by May 15th which one of your several acceptances that you will keep and release the others, but if you have not been notified of anything by this school, you do not have to notifiy them of anything. The only notifications you need to make are to schools where you are holding acceptances to let them know that you are not going to attend there.
A common misconception is that if you are holding an acceptance at a school, you have to withdraw your application from all other schools you applied to by May 15th. This is not the case. You can remain on waitlists for other schools. So, if you get an acceptance of a waitlist in June from a school that is higher up on your preference list than the one you are still holding an acceptance at, you are free to take that acceptance (and notifity the other school that you are relinguishing your spot).
If you are considering legal action against this school based on what the interviewer told you, I personally wouldn’t withdraw my application. Wait and see if they accept or reject you. Most schools have made their decisions by this point. It wouldn’t hurt to call the school and ask when you are likely to hear about any decision on your application (if you at all care). In any case, again, you have no obligation to withdraw your application from this school or notify them of anything.
Congrats on the acceptances, btw. And, good luck on deciding which school you want to attend!