"Spent conviction rules top student out of medical course..."

[couldntgetaname]

If the conviction was for parking tickets or TV licence evasion, I don't see any reason for it to have any relevance.

But it was for burglary. Would my grandmother, uncle, neighbour or postman feel comfortable dealing with a doctor with a burglary conviction? I doubt it. I very much doubt they would be comfortable handing over or granting access to their most personal and private information to someone with such a conviction, and they should not be expected to feel otherwise.

[agneishd]

Originally Posted by couldntgetaname

If the conviction was for parking tickets or TV licence evasion, I don't see any reason for it to have any relevance.

But it was for burglary. Would my grandmother, uncle, neighbour or postman feel comfortable dealing with a doctor with a burglary conviction? I doubt it. I very much doubt they would be comfortable handing over or granting access to their most personal and private information to someone with such a conviction, and they should not be expected to feel otherwise.

thing is, the nature of the crime i feel is still relevant - if it was a childish moment of weakness (and 15 is young) - say stealing a choco bar from a newagents or something while under peer pressure, I wouldn't not trust such a person who has "chaged his ways" (for example)

not everyone here is totally honest i'm sure, everyone makes mistakes

[NorthernLight]

There's a lack of balanced information about this case generally, but the one thing I have noticed in hearing what the student thinks about it all is that he comes across as not taking any responsibility for what he did. Apparently all he did was "go into a friend's new chill out pad" not realising it was someone else's house and was arrested "a few minutes later" apparently having done nothing else. He "fell in with the wrong crowd" which was "inevitable" given the area in which he grew up and only pleaded guilty to the crime to avoid subjecting his mother to the "shame" of a more drawn out trial.

In other words - it was all out of my control, I didn't do anything wrong really.

If that's what he said at the Fitness to Practice interveiw at Imperial where they reviewed his offer and subsequently decided to withdraw it, then it seems to me the nature of exactly what he did and how bad it was would have been a secondary consideration for them - they surely just thought "all we're hearing is excuses and evasion" and decided that perhaps he hadn't learned the right lesson from this experience . . .

And yes, the media overkill about it won't be helping either.

[Gizmo says -]

Originally Posted by agneishd

it's understandable to a certain extent though (obvious I guess)

doesn't mean it's right

Q is were Imperial right to do what they did?
such is the nature of the career, they have to be cautious to the highest degree

which doesnt come close to explaining why they select peeple to pass their course as the primary intention, rather than as good doctors as prime aim.
and if we're all being onest about it, the admissions system currently predelicts towards liars, though not intentionally, of course! a fair proportion of the peeple on this forum ave lied about summat on their application, often summat that aint smallfry.

not that imperial are along in that, Agnosher, many med skools do the same.

tell you what though, the real question is why a snooch from a ruff background would want to apply to imperial in the furst place.

[Gizmo says -]

Originally Posted by couldntgetaname

If the conviction was for parking tickets or TV licence evasion, I don't see any reason for it to have any relevance.

But it was for burglary. Would my grandmother, uncle, neighbour or postman feel comfortable dealing with a doctor with a burglary conviction? I doubt it. I very much doubt they would be comfortable handing over or granting access to their most personal and private information to someone with such a conviction, and they should not be expected to feel otherwise.

so you would burgle then if you were down and out?
or addicted to drugs?
for years on end?
if you knew you would get away wif it and you werent causing mush 'arm?

[agneishd]

Originally Posted by NorthernLight

There's a lack of balanced information about this case generally, but the one thing I have noticed in hearing what the student thinks about it all is that he comes across as not taking any responsibility for what he did. Apparently all he did was "go into a friend's new chill out pad" not realising it was someone else's house and was arrested "a few minutes later" apparently having done nothing else. He "fell in with the wrong crowd" which was "inevitable" given the area in which he grew up and only pleaded guilty to the crime to avoid subjecting his mother to the "shame" of a more drawn out trial.

In other words - it was all out of my control, I didn't do anything wrong really.

If that's what he said at the Fitness to Practice interveiw at Imperial where they reviewed his offer and subsequently decided to withdraw it, then it seems to me the nature of exactly what he did and how bad it was would have been a secondary consideration for them - they surely just thought "all we're hearing is excuses and evasion" and decided that perhaps he hadn't learned the right lesson from this experience . . .

And yes, the media overkill about it won't be helping either.

his excuses don't sound too clever...

he probably plead gulty cause he was guilty, and it would reduce his sentence if he pled guilty earlier.... it only had to be proved he was subjectively reckless in trespassing, which is not difficult to prove on part of the prosecution

[Imhotep]

Originally Posted by NorthernLight

In other words - it was all out of my control, I didn't do anything wrong really.

I think that's the important point - although we don't know all the details his story is very much that he has been the victim of a great injustice. I certainly don't think a prior conviction should necessarily bar someone from medicine (depending on its severity), but it's one thing to admit you did something wrong, have learned your lesson and changed and quite another to claim that you had no choice (regardless of peer pressure, etc. there is always a choice, if not always a very easy one).

He does seem has done a lot since then to make up for it, although the majority of people applying for medicine could claim many of the same things. However, it does come across as him claiming to absolve him from a crime he doesn't seem to accept resonsibility for. Whilst we don't know the exact reasons why Imperial withdrew the offer I would hope it would be because of not accepting responsibility for his own actions (I don't think I'd want to be treated by a doctor who doesn't realise that their actions have consequences) as opposed to simply a blanket ban on anyone who has done something wrong in the past (who hasn't - even if they weren't comparably criminal!)

But he's still young, and I think if medicine is his dream he should reflect on what has happened and use that in his next set of applications. I just can't help but think that this media melodrama will be another obstacle in his path though.

My own tuppence - based on a very limited knowledge of what really went on (standard disclaimer!)

Stephen

[Gizmo says -]

its probably just a response to the recent revelations about the true nature of med skool intakes and ow they do let in peeple ranging from complete psychos to couldnt-care-less-butlied-enuff-on-ucas-form-to-get-in peeps. peeple are really waking up to ow crap med skool admissions systems are (although the majority on this forum tend to be blind to this, note).
fortunately we get plenty of adequate and good candidates too lol to compensate.

[Imhotep]

Originally Posted by Gizmo says -

its probably just a response to the recent revelations about the true nature of med skool intakes and ow they do let in peeple ranging from complete psychos to couldnt-care-less-butlied-enuff-on-ucas-form-to-get-in peeps. peeple are really waking up to ow crap med skool admissions systems are (although the majority on this forum tend to be blind to this, note).
fortunately we get plenty of adequate and good candidates too lol to compensate.

But that's true in any walk of life! Although I admit getting it right for future doctors is probably more important than for most other jobs. I don't think it's possible to create a perfect admissions system, but I do agree that UCAS is not ideal, particularly for medicine and those tests are simply more academic hurdles (I think there's a balance that has to be reached between cost and effectiveness).

Any suggestions on how to put the world of med school admissions to rights?

Stephen

[James]

I don't think that this kid should go into med school. He may be playing the disadvantaged background card. But chances are there is another applicant with a similar background and aspirations but without the criminal conviction or offer at Imperial. Surely the second candidate, who managed to resist peer pressure and not commit a crime is a better candidate to be a doctor than this convicted criminal.