Re:Match experience

[zyx]

Just wondering if anyone had a similar experience this CARMS cycle or prior where their Canadian clinical experience was not valued at all. I have heard from many people that the Canadian experience/Letter of recommendation is better than foreign but I have seen many foreign graduates who had zero Canadian experience and got matched even before setting foot in Canada.

 I’m not sure how it goes for the CMGs since I have not interacted with many of them yet but the selection process is so flawed for IMGs. Every year we see quite a few people who surprise everyone when they match especially many having poor English skills or below average scores. I understand extracurricular activities and other stuff is important but there are many great candidates who have all those qualities sought out by the programs including excellent interview skills, yet they fail to match. As much as it is a shock to them, it is also the shock for those around them because we get to spend more time with those candidates than the programs and brief interviews and paper applications are not helpful in truly selecting the best people for the job. I know life is not fair but Western systems are supposed to be better than other parts of the world, but I guess it ain’t true anymore and the programs don’t give a d*** as long as they do their ‘job’. I mean I have heard it from program directors and others involved in the process that if you put a lay person into the residency program, he/she will come out successful at the end so what’s so special about any candidate or any other healthcare professional for that matter when the system is capable of molding anyone into anything they want. Infact, that might be one of the reasons(in addition to cutting cost) that the North American governments  brought more nurse practitioners into family practice to address shortage and may do so for other specialties in future.

I’m not sure what exactly is the cause?May be the programs choose people who they can work on thereby having them attribute their successes to the program instead of taking all the credit themselves or it might be because there are so many IMGs who apply each year and it’s hard who to choose but some of the criteria they use are ridiculous like year of graduation which is as unfair as using race, ethnicity or other discriminating policies. UBC,in particular, has recently started doing this and eliminating many qualified candidates like the universities in US. This wastes a lot of time, money and effort and leaves people with a lot of disappointment.

I know people come to North America to chase their ‘American dream’ but for most it remains just a dream and they end up realizing that they were better off where they came from. It’s better to believe in yourself and work hard in your field in your country than wasting your life doing odd jobs in someone else’s country and the system is not as promising as it seems. The grass is always greener on the other side. From time to time, we keep hearing about something in the news and also learn from other people about the toxic system in the universities that are predominantly dominated by political ideologies(mainly leftists) who make reactionary/vindictive policies against anyone opposed to their views. Certain groups are given preferential treatments over others and most of them are not even Caucasians. We hardly hear the truth about what truly goes on behind the scenes as the politicians plot and implement their schemes but health and well-being of the people should never be compromised. However, there are many cons to globalization and who knows what mess it would eventually lead to!

 

[shikimate]

Unfortunately the process is far from what people idealize it to be. It's extremely politicized (although the veneer of an open, fair, transparent process is important). You'll realize this is true not just for residency, but also for fellowship, job, money making opportunities etc etc, basically most things in life. If you believe the system here is immune to nepotism, (hidden) corruption and politics, then you are in for a rude awakening!

- many IMG have connection through family/friends of friends/former schoolmates who are already in the system/people of same ethnic background

- people from different backgrounds can bring with them their old prejudices against other backgrounds.

- if you know nobody in the system, it's hard to get a leg up. That's why so many IMGs are working as lab techs, research assistants, volunteers, whatever they can do to get people in the system on their side.

- affirmative action is alive and well, so race, ethnicity, and various other factors play a big role in politically correct hiring procedures.

- don't be naive and believe one side of political spectrum is better than the other. At heart, it's a struggle of different interest groups for pieces of the pie. Sometimes "fools" are more useful to groups than "smart" people, so it may be advantageous to hide your merit in certain situations.

[zyx]

I agree with what you mentioned and I, too, was once a ‘fool’ at a younger age and very naïve but learnt a lot with time. Life teaches one a lot only if he/she is willing to learn.

As for the politics, I have observed it very closely for last decade or so and know that politicians are not very different. Money and power has a strange way of ruining peoples’ minds. At the end, it’s the balance which must be maintained and made sure none oversteps their authority.

I appreciate the last piece of advice you gave. I, too, was thinking the same and sometimes feel that ignorance is not that much of a curse in this day age, if not blessing.   

My plan is to stay optimistic, have an open mind and keep working hard and hopefully things will fall in place with time.

Thanks a lot for your input.

 

[Pakoon]

12 hours ago, Among few good people said:

I know life is not fair but Western systems are supposed to be better than other parts of the world, but I guess it ain’t true anymore and the programs don’t give a d*** as long as they do their ‘job’. I mean I have heard it from program directors and others involved in the process that if you put a lay person into the residency program, he/she will come out successful at the end so what’s so special about any candidate or any other healthcare professional for that matter when the system is capable of molding anyone into anything they want. Infact, that might be one of the reasons(in addition to cutting cost) that the North American governments  brought more nurse practitioners into family practice to address shortage and may do so for other specialties in future.

I'm sorry you had this experience and you are right as the system remains flawed, but I do have to respectfully disagree with you. I don't think a lay person could be thrown into any residency program and come out successful. The special thing about any candidate is training, I'd argue you could take most medical students and train them to be great physicians. The nurse practitioner argument is a very different one, and has nothing to do with with the flaws in the residency match system, at the end of the day they are still training medical students with medical training. You absolutely cannot mold anyone into anything they want, especially mid-levels, just ask our friends our friends in the States.

[zyx]

2 hours ago, Pakoon said:

I'm sorry you had this experience and you are right as the system remains flawed, but I do have to respectfully disagree with you. I don't think a lay person could be thrown into any residency program and come out successful. The special thing about any candidate is training, I'd argue you could take most medical students and train them to be great physicians. The nurse practitioner argument is a very different one, and has nothing to do with with the flaws in the residency match system, at the end of the day they are still training medical students with medical training. You absolutely cannot mold anyone into anything they want, especially mid-levels, just ask our friends our friends in the States.

I understand what you are saying and the point behind it but it's not my opinion. I am merely referring to what is often said and sometimes done to the prospective residents/medical students, I guess to put them in 'place' but is wrong. However, there is so much you can change,at the end of the day, in the system that's flawed . Hopefully, by increasing awareness and making efforts, such misconceptions can can be cleared gradually but it'll definitely not be easy especially in a system that's heavily influenced by politicians, bureaucrats and other stakeholders who exercise their authority and advance their interests in the name of 'limited resources' and what not!

[Masterpizza]

Sorry to hear this. AFMC has blocked all electives since COVID started and they stated that any electives in Canada outside of its process are not allowed. Thus, I would argue some programs might eliminate applicants who overrode the AFMC decision. Combined with that, most programs don't accept letters from observerships or research. Then the only way to show that you have Canadian experience is on your CV, research or volunteering sections on CaRMS website. Lastly, a letter from Canadian clinician is theoretically better but the content of the letter is what is most important, in my opinion, If the letter doesn't fulfill the CaRMS content criteria, it is harmful rather than helpful regardless of the letter source.

[zyx]

7 hours ago, Masterpizza said:

Sorry to hear this. AFMC has blocked all electives since COVID started and they stated that any electives in Canada outside of its process are not allowed. Thus, I would argue some programs might eliminate applicants who overrode the AFMC decision. Combined with that, most programs don't accept letters from observerships or research. Then the only way to show that you have Canadian experience is on your CV, research or volunteering sections on CaRMS website. Lastly, a letter from Canadian clinician is theoretically better but the content of the letter is what is most important, in my opinion, If the letter doesn't fulfill the CaRMS content criteria, it is harmful rather than helpful regardless of the letter source.

Thank you for your feedback.The content of the letters was fine because I choose the refrees who would give me a good letter but COVID did affect the way clinical experiences were weighted for last few CARMS cycles. However, even in the past foreign experiences(non-western) were accepted as equivalent to the local. Furthermore, in some provinces of Canada observership is hand-on clinical experience but they just call it observership and even those are very difficult to obtain. Only a few physicians out of hundreds allow you to work with them and at the end it's of no use!

[Intrepid86]

Back when I matched in the IMG stream, I had no Canadian LORs. What I did have was a very strong interview.

No amount of Canadian clinical experience will overcome a below average interview performance.

[zyx]

1 hour ago, Intrepid86 said:

Back when I matched in the IMG stream, I had no Canadian LORs. What I did have was a very strong interview.

No amount of Canadian clinical experience will overcome a below average interview performance.

True, but even with otherwise great interviews, some provinces, especially Ontario, looks for independent practice which is another thing that does not make sense. The whole point of residency is to train residents so they can be independent practitioners and not just take people who are already trained enough. From these  clinical experineces,at least, I know that some physicians(especially family physicians) don't like to spend a lot of time teaching while running their businesses(mainly because of the fee for service model and relatively less reimbursement from the givernment)and they just use the trainees to aquire positions as faculty and get promotions while treating them like s*** in the process. I have met some good physicians as well but some of them were from abroad. Canadian healthcare system(and even North American for that matter) is not the best and certainly not the only country in the world that produces great doctors.I have learnt better from some of the doctors in developing countries and found them more competent than the ones in the developed. There are definitely differences in technological advancements and resources but they don't always gaurantee better people in a field like medicine. Some of the developing places have tech and facilities that even developed countries don't have yet but the main problem was corruption but that gap is being bridged rapidly.Thanks to globalization! 

I just wanted to know about how useful the Canadian experience was so don't have to keep wasting more time and effort with no use in the end. I would rather do my best at a place which can harness my potential and values my hardwork than being somewhere where you would never have a fair chance of getting what you deserved no matter how 'great' the system is!It's the people who make a place great, not vice versa!And most of the elite universities/institute earn their mark by turning most people away where learning does not remain enjoyable either. I have learnt more and better at 'low-level' places and had more fun. Bigger places come with bigger challenges to tackle.      

Anway, I don't want to waste my time replying to every comment(especially the diplomatic ones) becuase I have been through enough troubles, treachery and corruption to spot it at the very first sign!Sometimes it's good to let people believe that you are stupid to avoid seeing their real faces but this is not one of those times!

[HoopDreams]

On 5/25/2022 at 2:41 AM, Among few good people said:

I just wanted to know about how useful the Canadian experience was so don't have to keep wasting more time and effort with no use in the end. I would rather do my best at a place which can harness my potential and values my hardwork than being somewhere where you would never have a fair chance of getting what you deserved no matter how 'great' the system is!It's the people who make a place great, not vice versa!And most of the elite universities/institute earn their mark by turning most people away where learning does not remain enjoyable either. I have learnt more and better at 'low-level' places and had more fun. Bigger places come with bigger challenges to tackle.      

I completely disagree with this statement.
Equality of opporunity does not mean inexistent barrier to entry.

As a 1st generation immigrant with parents that had to start from scratch, not a single country in the World would have offered us what Canada did.
I am deeply convinced that equality of opportunity is a profound Canadian value, shared by the majority of the people who live here.
McGill's medical school considers sexual, racial, religious and ethnic diversity in the admission process.
During my graduation today, I felt at a UN convention because of how many countries were represented.

Regardless, I know it's very difficult for IMGs to match.
I am sorry the road has been disappointing and difficult for you.
There are certainly good and bad doctors eveywhere. 
There is corruption, racism, inequity, nepotism, everywhere.
Here, just like back home.

I encourage you to pursue your passions regardless.
And maybe turn this experience into an opporunity to help perfect IMGs' experience all over the country.
See it as a motivating factor rather than a fatality.
I hope you can match in the near future.

Best of luck!

[bearded frog]

I'm sorry you didn't match, but I would hesitate to say your N of 1 experience of having Canadian clinical experience and not matching vs others who did match means that Canadian clinical experience isn't valued at all. Clearly it's just one of many factors, but likely still is a valuable asset for applicants.