Who decides if you'd make a good doctor?

[Guest aneliz]

Three strikes and your out...interesting concept... I know that the Ontario veterinary school uses this rule (and it is three applications...not three interviews)... They do this to try and force unsuccessful applicants to 'improve' their application before re-applying instead of just resubmitting exactly the same package again. I think this has merit... If you know that you have a limited number of shots, you are going to do your best to improve your chances with your next shot...instead of just re-doing what you have already done and 'hoping' that your luck changes....

 

I am not necessarily agreeing that there shoud be only 'three strikes and your out' for med...however, if there was to be some limit to the number of times that you could apply, you can bet that people would really look into improving their MCAT/GPA, life experiences, interviewing skills, etc before reapplying...because if they didn't they would be 'wasting' one of their chances. I think that is the key...it doesn't matter how many times you apply, as long as at the end of an unsuccessful cycle you do some serious reflection about *why* you were unsuccessful (and "there was too much competition and I have bad luck" doesn't count!!!!) You would probably be surprised at the number of unsuccessful people that simply 're-submit' their unsucessful applications again the next year (with no changes) and hope for better luck...but there is always a reason you weren't successful last year and there is always something that you can improve for the next cycle...and if there comes a time when you can't identify anything to improve any more (ie you have written the MCAT multiple times and still have the same score, you have done three undergrad degrees and still have the same GPA or you have done numerous practice interviews and are not improving anymore...) then, I think you should probably have some kind of limit on how many times you apply with exactly the same application....Realistically, if you don't get in with three consecutive interviews at the same school, there is something lacking in your interview...and either you can figure out what and fix it or you won't be able to...

 

Another thing to realise is that every school is looking for something a little bit different. So if you interview three times at Mac (for example) and don't get in, it doesn't mean that you are a bad applicant or would make a bad doctor. It just means that maybe other applicants better satisfy the criteria that Mac is looking for...and perhaps the situation would be reversed at a different school...and you would better satisfy the criteria at a different school. You need to cast the net wide, and apply to as many schools as you meet the criteria for....but be aware that each one is looking for something different, so a strategy that works at one school may get you a rejection at another.... Of course none of the 'application hoops' really prove that you would be a good doctor.....

 

So, don't give up...but make sure that if you are unsuccessful this year (or any year) you *do* something about it before you reapply...and if you have to take a year off between application cycles to do that, that is okay!!! Applying to med is expensive...so sending in the same 'failed' application again the next year without changes is unlikely to get you any results. Ask the different schools for feedback on your application....some won't offer any, others will...but you won't know unless you ask. Talk to some students who were successful...get some tips from them about what they did, strategies they used etc. Do some self-reflection about your application and your interview....think of things that you could improve and improve them!!! However, there has to come a point (and I think each person needs to deterrmine their point) where you will have improved everything that you can think of, have gotten help and advice from others and you are still unsuccessful...you will need to decide when the point is that you will stop applying...

[Guest Ian Wong]

My thoughts on the whole issue is that it's impossible to tell who's going to be a good, until it happens. Luckily though, most people accepted into med school are good people, and those med students go on to become good physicians. In that sense, I don't think medical school is anything different than applying for a job, or perhaps an even better analogy would be something like the NHL draft. All the candidates have unique strengths, and each team/medical school has their own criteria about which candidates are most likely to fit within that team.

 

Unfortunately, despite the fact that everyone applying for medical school, or everyone registered in the NHL draft, has a huge amount of potential, there are going to be only a few people who turn out to be great or terrible at their field, and most everyone else will be middle of the road average. For every standout Jaromir Jagr that you draft, there will also be a less than stellar Andre "Red Light" Racicot.

 

Similarly, there's only a few Ben Carson's running around out there (a world famous pediatric neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins who grew up in the ghetto), and a few physicians who have gained similar, but negative notoriety, while the majority of us will become those more stereotypical physicians in private practice seeing people and helping them one patient at a time.

 

I think the defining quality that separates a good physician from a bad one has little to do with intellect, board scores, grades, etc. Quite frankly, medicine isn't rocket science, and a lot of what we do comes from lots of repetition, and lots of reading; it isn't like we are trying to solve problems that have never been successfully solved before (like a nuclear physicist, or a mathematician trying to develop a new theorum). What we do is take treatments that have worked in the past, and apply them to current patients. The Lasix that I used in Mrs. Smith yesterday to alleviate her congestive heart failure symptoms, is probably going to work in Mrs. Jones today.

 

What I truly think separates the good physicians from the bad ones, is that a good physician is willing to go the extra mile for his/her patient. That can mean so many different things. It might mean taking a bit of extra time in the day to listen to that patient instead of blowing them off (even in the face of each of your following appointments being serially delayed, and you getting home 2 hours late), or trying harder to get your hospital patient that consult that you feel is necessary, or taking the time to see your patients immediately post-op to reassure them, or being aggressive on the phone/fax to ensure that your patient is approved for the medication that you feel is necessary, or sticking around a few extra hours in the hospital to see how your patient is doing instead of just handing them off to the on-call team.

 

The trouble that that all of these intangible extras that show the patient that his/her doctor really cares about their welfare and medical progress, are not financially recognized or reimbursed. It's hard to justify spending 30 minutes talking with your patient, or counselling them about lifestyle modification when the "other MD" down the street at the walk-in clinic gets paid the same amount by just putting everyone on a blood pressure pill, but can do it in 5 minutes. It's perhaps really hard to fight so aggressively with the Pharmacare/insurance guys to get special approval for a patient's medication when you know there's not a great deal of chance it will be approved anyway. And it's downright depressing to go through all the paperwork/phonecalls/faxes to get someone ready for surgery, only to find out that OR's are being rationed further, and the surgery has to be delayed/cancelled/rescheduled due to lack of beds/lack of staff.

 

It's these sorts of issues, I think, that really define the worth of a physician. A great physician is one who really looks after his/her patients, and is willing to go the extra mile for them. Unfortunately, there can really be a financial disincentive to practising this sort of "good" medicine, because while you are working hard in your patient's best interests, you often aren't getting paid for it.

 

Ian

[Guest mdhopeful23]

wow, good post ian.

 

i volunteered with a doctor who fit the 'go the extra mile' bill very well. not to get into details, but he was the kinda guy that would use his contacts in the community, write letters for his patients, take on politically 'touchy' issues at the hospital, etc. with the knowledge that he would receive little in return, if not more headaches. it was at times a thankless effort. however, knowing that you 'did the right thing' at the end of the day can be a reward in itself.

 

he ended up having a large influence on my decision to go into med. i can only hope to be that kind of dr. one day...

 

that is, if these dangs schools ever let me in...grumble, grumble...this waiting is torture .

[Guest MdotDdot]

for starters u don't seem very open minded and/or tolerant from reading your previous posts. good luck nonetheless:hat

[Guest Phil667]

MdotDdot,

 

How can you read a great post like Ian just wrote and then turn around and slam mdhopeful? The whole point is that no one can judge how good of a doctor anyone can be. Maybe mdhopeful23 will be a great doctor, maybe s/he will be a horrible doctor. But how can you make that judgement based on a few internet postings?

[Guest mdhopeful23]

lol, well that was some nice feedback. sorry you feel that way mdotdot.

 

you know, its difficult to express your true feelings on this board...its comparable to 'road rage' situations where you are limited to an individuals body language, tone, etc, and we get touchy. anything i write here isn't my absolute opinion, its just random thoughts...im sure if i met some of you in person, our conversation would be pretty civil. yes, even if you were someone that i had a differing opinion with on this board...im not too concerned with being 'right' all the time...but i do like to share my opinion, don't we all?

 

though i dont agree with certain opinions on the board, i certaintly dont wish anyone ill will...after all, i dont know who they really are...and who cares what i think anyway...im just a random med school applicant :\

 

sacha15, sorry i chewed up your post. i could of written a nicer response...i still would of made the same points though, but kept the negative tone out of it.

 

well, i only came to the board once today...eeee, im my compulsion is easing...maybe i can make it a whole day without visiting..maybe...

[Guest 15Sacha]

I think we'll all be great. Good luck everybody and great post Ian!!!:rollin