Avoiding Politicized Answers

[Cuttlefish]

This just came to mind as I was reading an article on Ontario's plan to introduce a pilot program of guaranteed basic income. It is thought that this would help to address key aspects of the social determinants of health, and even improve health outcomes for those living in poverty. 

 

I understand that this may be viewed as a "leftist" approach to solving the issue of poverty and health disparities, so if it is brought up by an applicant as their potential approach to addressing the social determinants of health, would it be viewed in a negative way at all?

 

I guess I am just having a hard time figuring out where the line should be drawn between answering a question without seeming partisan/politicized.

 

Thanks!

[SunAndMoon]

Structure and support your arguments properly, look at different perspectives, pros and cons and formulate it all in a reasonable way and it should be fine IMO. I don't plan on pretending I don't have political opinions and I sincerely think that's ok.

[ralk]

I think it's fine to present potentially political opinions, so long as it's done in a neutral manner. Any opinions should be supported, have their weaknesses acknowledged, and should be relevant to the question at hand. No interviewer should be treating your interview like a political litmus test, but every interviewer is looking at your ability to think critically and to carry on in a socially acceptable manner. Failing to justify your opinions, or bringing up opinions that do not naturally fit into the conversation, could be justifiably held against you, even if the interviewers agree with your opinion.

[Bambi]

During one CaRMS interview, to my surprise, I was asked a political question. I responded with great delicacy so as not to step on anybody's toes, the Panel smiled at my response, there was no follow-up and they moved on. 

[futureGP]

Medical education in Canada is very 'left-wing', so it probably wouldn't hurt if you mention it.

 

It would be more concerning if someone were to suggest we should privatize health care and create discrepancies in health care and argue that health care is a privilege not a right.

 

the fact of the matter is that medical education in Canada is very progressive. Pro-choice, Euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, women's rights etc. Think of any politically hot topic and it will be lectured in med school in a 'left-wing' manner. 

 

So I won't be too worried about it unless you have a tendency to speak in a conservative way, that would hurt your interview.

[Mephisto]

In other words, that kind of interviews want brainwashed student. We should be free to think the way we want without being scared to be discriminated negatively.

[ralk]

Medical education in Canada is very 'left-wing', so it probably wouldn't hurt if you mention it.

 

It would be more concerning if someone were to suggest we should privatize health care and create discrepancies in health care and argue that health care is a privilege not a right.

 

the fact of the matter is that medical education in Canada is very progressive. Pro-choice, Euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, women's rights etc. Think of any politically hot topic and it will be lectured in med school in a 'left-wing' manner. 

 

So I won't be too worried about it unless you have a tendency to speak in a conservative way, that would hurt your interview.

 

I would strongly disagree with this characterization that speaking in a conservative way would be a liability in an interview. Regardless of the political climate in medical school, most interviews are conducted by students, faculty, and community representatives who run the full political spectrum. It's impossible to predict what the political leanings of your interviewers will be. I mean, heck, if you're talking about physician-assisted suicide, you're far more likely to encounter a physician with a traditionally conservative view of the practice than you are talking to someone in the general public!

 

In other words, that kind of interviews want brainwashed student. We should be free to think the way we want without being scared to be discriminated negatively.

 

The last thing medical schools want is brainwashed students. Giving stock answers is a great way to give yourself a mediocre interview score. Applicants are free to think however they like without fear of discrimination, with the caveat that their opinions have to be supported in evidence and reason, and must adhere to the basic ethical principles they'll have to work under.

 

For example, pro-life groups are common in medical schools - an applicant holding pro-life views with respect to abortion wouldn't be an anomaly and while I can't see it coming up in an interview, I don't think it would be held against them. However, if an applicant indicated that they would refuse to refer a woman seeking an abortion to an abortion provider, then yes, that will be held against them because it's below the standard of care and in violation of college-mandated ethics guidelines.

[rmorelan]

while you couldn't completely purge someone political views remember the point of the question is to evaluate the process much more than the answer. Do you have a logical approach with some evidence you have enough interest to learn some basic facts?

 

As it happens most well thought out answers are probably more likely to be more middle ground than extreme anyway in the real world.