Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

anonymoooose

Members
  • Content Count

    1
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I agree with that tweet from that student. One of the most obvious barriers to entry is socioeocnomic status, which is more likely causative than ethnicity alone (not lumping in indigenous status, as they face significantly unique challenges that other groups do not due to the history of directed oppression in Canada, residential schools etc.) People are wondering why is it not a low-SES stream in addition to or in place of an ethnicity stream? Surely the systemic racism has led to systematic disadvantages in SES, leading to difficulty even affording quality resources for education or med school preparation material... In the last few months there was major, major activism by the current student bodies in Canada to specifically introduce a black student applicant stream. The problems I saw posted on social media were that last year there were zero black students at Queens' (the year before there were a few, maybe 2-3%, someone correct this), even though they are 3% of the population. But the statistics here seem abused - in Toronto, there were 24 black admissions (8-9% of entering class), so simply quoting admitted students isn't evidence enough to say they are underrepresented (I'm sure there are though, to be clear). I support the movement but I really hope that future physicians can interpret data properly, citing just one year's admission stats for one of the smallest classes in Canada is just textbook cherry-picking and undersampling. I don't doubt the interpretation (there are a lot of qualitative factors like saying that Queens or Kingston itself is a systematically unwelcoming place etc) and there is likely systemic racism, affecting even application to Queens. Social sciences is a really, really touchy issue and needs to be approached very critically. I totally support the stream better than the status quo beforehand of QuARMS, but some of the "evidence" presented by the lobby especially on social media is unscientific or overgeneralizing where it seems to stir up antagonism without details e.g. the movement saying the "healthcare system is racist" - ok, that's plausible but which part? Education? Treatment selection? Drug selection for different ethnicities? Profiling? Triaging? Identify the specific problem so we can change it! Don't just lump all doctors, nurses, techs, PTs, OTs, - most of which are absolutely genuine people, to one umbrella term for the sake of a catchy tagline! Or you might get a healthcare worker who feels wrongly attacked and dissent on social media, leading to an online argument over semantics or whether the healthcare worker is racist. I really hope this doesn't make a school have the reputation as the ignore-science-for-social-media-catchphrases school. Note that the student's twitter shown in the comments above is not like this, her twitter is fantastic and provides a critical look at the issue. She points out that in dermatology there is limited education on non-white skinned lesions which is absolutely a valid issue. The question is that is school doing this because it is best policy to tack barriers or is it for optics? (I'm sure it's in the right direction, but can it be improved to address other causes of racism in the city and school other than admission statistics? can it also consider low-SES of other ethnicities?) Or are they caving in to political pressure? If a faculty member dissents in any form, are they afraid of protest or public shaming of them?
×
×
  • Create New...