Archives: Personal troubles

The Path to an Established Career in Medicine

In my previous post, I talked about going on a tour in a local hospital led by two medical residents (Ken and Jeff) and put together by an undergraduate club at UBC.  I explained my interest in a career as a physician and then briefly mentioned the themes of structure, agency, and autonomy, using an example from the tour.  In this blog post, I would like to write about the process to an established career in medicine in relations to two of the aforementioned themes: structure and agency and using my favourite reading (The Sociological Imagination) from our seminar this semester to analyze my thoughts.

 Photo: midwifery.ubc.ca

Working 70-80hrs/week 

A recurrent topic that both Ken and Jeff brought up was having 70-80 hour work weeks.  As residents they work 70-80 hours per week with a possibility of having additional hour devoted to research work which may add up to a 100-hr work week.  As a response, I tried to challenge them with the question, “How do you keep yourself healthy while trying to keep others healthy?” It just didn’t make sense to me that the job of medical residents and doctors is to keep people healthy and cure patients, but while they’re doing that, they’re asked to work 70-80 hour weeks, to work on-call, to work overnight, to do all-nighters, to skimp on sleep….. In response, Jeff described to us times that he would not have worked-out (exercised) for months and that he hasn’t cooked his own food in three months.   He told us that it is important to be adaptable because this is just something that you “adapt to.”  He then dubbed this work-life style an “old system.”

Relocating to rural areas to work

Jeff talked to us about his desire to work in the northern areas of BC, such as Kamloops, after he completes his residency.  My question, of course, was “why?”  From what I heard, his biggest reason for working in the interior is for the work variety and calmer lifestyle that it would provide.  Whereas in a big hospital in the metropolitan areas there are different doctors working in different units, instead, working in the rural areas would mean that one doctor could be moving across all units and following all the patients. He also mentioned that there are “more things you can do” and “it’s easier to do things.” By that, I think he meant that the system is less bureaucratic and more flexible, hence easier to navigate, work around, and to do things.

Working in a big hospital

Ken on the other hand, gives off a more ambitious and driven sense of character, and is firm about working in big hospitals.  His two main reasons for doing so are: (1) he wants to deal with kids who are super sick (these residents are pediatricians) and (2) he is really keen on the academic side of things and doing research — big hospitals and big cities would have the resources to assist him with grant-writing and open up to him a network of people relevant to his research work.

Tips for Applying to Medical School

A big question that we had as a group was about the process of applying to medical school.  On this topic, Jeff and Ken had similar insights.  Both of them agreed that you need to “jump hoops” and “play the game.”  They say that the admissions process is to find the right people.  Here are a list of inspiring messages I got from them:

  • be honest, genuine, and straight-forward
  • don’t contrive / blow-up or magnify your work and/or accomplishments
  • “If you’re in it [going to medical school] for the right reasons, it’ll show [in your interviews]”
  • be excited
  • be yourself!

Jeff also told us about how we wasn’t like most of the other medical students who were overachievers to begin with.  However, after being in medical school he started following the “culture” and tried to do many things too – trying to “find his place in the world,” but he ultimately burn out.  With that, he leaves us with some life advice:

–-> “Don’t sacrifice your happiness for your future” 

 Photo: newcw.phsa.ca

This reflection makes me think about  a quote from C. Wright Mills: “The first fruit of this imagination – and the first lesson of the social science that embodies it – is the idea that the individual can understand her own experience and gauge her own fate only by locating herself within her period, that she can know her own chances in life only by becoming aware of those of all individuals in her circumstances”

Throughout the three four examples I gave above, I see strong interlinks between structure and agency.  In the quote above and in Mill’s (1959) The Sociological Imagination, he discusses how people are living and making choices under the influence of the current time period and organizational structures.  Working 70-80 hour weeks – is it really a choice? Relocating to rural areas – is it really a choice? Working in a big hospital – is it really a choice? Or are these “semi-choices” or “choices under circumstances” Why must we “jump through hoops” and “play the game” in order to get into medical school? What are these “hoops”? What is this “game”? These are all questions that, I pose to the reader, you – to think about, discuss, and answer.

And the question for myself – who am I, this person who wants to do what to get where [medical school, a career in medicine]?

Reference: Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. Oxford University Press.

No commentsAdd a comment

Autonomy in the Medical Profession?

This drizzly afternoon, I rushed to the bus loop from class in order to make it to a tour of a local hospital put together by a student-run club at UBC whose mandate is to help students in their process of pursuing a certain health profession.

We were met by two residents (graduated medical school students who have begun practicing in hospitals/clinics) at the lobby of the hospital.  Both residents are males in their fourth year of residency — one had a staff identification badge hang down his t-shirt whereas the other had a stethoscope around his neck and was dressed in a neatly pressed dress shirt.  Let’s call the former Jeff and the latter Ken.

In the past year and a half, after hurdles and hurdles of career choice challenges and changes, I developed an interest in becoming a doctor.  There are various reasons why I think may be a suitable career choice for me (without thinking about my uncertainty of my capabilities in the natural and physical sciences for now).  Amongst the passion of directly help people, the excitement for science, the ability to earn a living wage, and the respect, a big draw for me was the autonomy I perceived that a career in medicine would entail.  To put it into picture, I have been (day)dreaming about how nice it would be to be a family physician/GP and be able to focus my time, attention, and efforts on helping patients without having to worry too much about living up to the expectations of supervisors, following bureaucratic rules, and navigating professional relationships with co-workers.

Hearing from the residents today made me feel a little grey as while Jeff was showing us around and telling us about his experiences in medical school and being a resident at the hospital, these words he spoke jumped at me:

  • protocol
  • procedures
  • divided
  • paperwork
  • culture
  • process
  • system
  • adaptable
  • protected time

These are all words that I would say can be related to bureaucracy and more pertaining to your class theme, structure versus agency.  Jeff used the word “protocol” when he showed us around the maternal care room.  In the maternal care room, there is an apparatus that you use to revive a newborn when he/she stops breathing (please excuse my faulty explanation). When he explained this to us he pointed to the poster on the wall which states the protocol, or what procedures the doctor should follow in such an event.  He said to us something along the lines of, “It’s here because you won’t have time to think, they just want you to follow the instructions and just do.”  

In my next blog post, I will expand on my thoughts about agency, structure, and the process to a career in a medicine.

No commentsAdd a comment

The Interconnection between the Self and Society: My Experience at an Orientation Event

In September, I attended an orientation/ ice breaker event hosted by one of the largest social clubs in UBC. Prior to entrance, I had a stereotypical notion of the club as being composed mainly of a certain ethnic group with a certain outgoing behaviour. I could tell I was anxious and hesitant of my interaction with the group as I found myself constantly delaying my entrance, despite the friendly welcome from the executives. Hiding in the washroom for a few minutes, I convinced myself to enjoy the event and stepped outside. Thankfully, I encountered some of my classmates at the door who encouraged me to go in and participate in the activity. As we entered the lecture room, we immediately gathered together and talked about how awkward we felt at the event and how we did not seem to belong. It was not until we were separated by group leaders to our stationed groups that our conversation ended.

The event preceded with the hosts’ introduction of the club and some ice breaker activities. In the middle of an ice breaker activity, my classmate and I decided to leave the event as we felt uneasy in the group. Once we exited the event and walked toward the bus loop, we asked eachother the reasons to our anxiety within the group. For me, ethnicity was an issue because I did not classify myself as a member of the ethnic group representing the club. For my classmate, dress code was an issue as she felt she had not dressed appropriately to the standard of the group. For both of us, age was an issue because we felt too old to be involved in orientations, mainly held to recruit freshmen and newcomers to the club. This was a surprising investigation as both of us were completely unaware of eachother’s concerns of feeling different, nor were we discriminated by the members of the club. It was our own evaluation of ourselves, based on our presumptions of who or what is appropriate for the group, that placed a judgment on our belonging in the group. It was a personal trouble, according to C. Wright Mills, a trouble “occur[ing] within the character of the individual and within the range of his or her immediate relations with others,” a private matter. After realizing this, we decided to go back to the club and enjoy the rest of the event.  However, it was clear that our personal troubles had a connection with how we were socialized by society. From micro socializations such as forming lunch groups in school and intaking values taught by our parents to macro socializations such as historical values imposed by our culture and new values imposed by the media, we are socialized to identify ourselves in a certain way and expected to interact within a certain group. Therefore, we feel comfortable in partaking certain identities and groups, while it is difficult for us to interact with other groups, especially structured organizations such as clubs, without preconceived notions. The confined boundaries of relationships and identities held by individuals thus becomes a public issue; as Mills states that it occurs when “some values cherished by publics is felt to be threatened.. form[ed by a] larger structure of social and historical life.” On a broader level, this confinement leads to racism, classism, sexism, etc.

The social club I attended attempted to tackle this public issue by opening the club to a diversity of people to break preconceived notions of the club and to provide an inclusive space for all students in UBC. This was evident through their announcements in introducing their club, representation of executives (including one of the hosts and our team leader) of a different ethnic group than the majority makeup of the club. Everyone spoke in English, providing an inclusive space for people who did not speak the language of the group but spoke English. Dress code was not imposed and stationed groups were organized according to a random selection of alphabets. Individual choices for engaging/disengaging in activities were respected and everyone was encouraged to be themselves while still being accepted. However, despite the club’s efforts and claims to provide an inclusive space for all students, the type of clothing worn by executives and the series of sexually provocative cheers and games visualized an identity of the group in a certain way which portrayed an imagined community of who belongs and composes the group, affecting the ratio of students who ultimately decide to join the club.

Furthermore, by the dress code and attitude of the executives in leading activities during the orientation, social standards of executive behaviour are set and place limits on individuals when applying for executive positions, as they would have to prove themselves to be outgoing, to posess leadership qualities, to be able to laugh at and promote activities underlying stereotypical sexual and masculine/feminine orientations, and to be, or at least embrace, the culture of the dominant ethnic group. This is similar to how new fraternity boys had to prove themselves according to certain standards placed by senior fraternity boys, which emphasized the group’s definition of masculinity, during a rush event in Kimmel’s “Guyland.”

While at a broader surface level, the club seems very welcoming and inclusive to diversity, at a higher level of executive positions, there are more exclusive standards on behaviour and ideals; it is expected that a successful candidate would be able to conform to the group’s ideas and definitions in order to be accepted.

References:

Mills, C. W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press, 1959.

Kimmel, M. (2008). Guyland: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men.

No commentsAdd a comment

Sociological Imagination and Analyzing the Struggles of a UBC Student.

Life of a university student, more specifically a UBC student, surely comes with a number of difficulties that would get us thinking: What did we do to end up here? As students, we get so caught up by our own troubles, that we don’t consider their historical and biographical context. In other words,  we don’t really understand how our problems can have an effect on the society that surrounds us. We usually think that our personal problems only affect us individually, yet there is actually a connection between our issues and the framework of society.

In his article “The Promise of Sociology”, C. Wright Mills introduces the concept know as the Sociological Imagination,  a non-individualistic way to look at our personal problems in a much larger scale. Sociological Imagination shows us the distinction between a “personal trouble” and a “public issue” and helps us identify the relationship between our own individual troubles and problems that are on a larger scale.

Imagine a  UBC student who is under a financial struggle to pay for his education. Let’s call him Bart. Bart is pursuing his university education in UBC as a business student in Sauder and, due to not being financially able to afford schooling himself, is being funded with student loans. He then eventually faces student debt after completing his degree, and is stressed with having to earn the money he needs to repay his student loans. This would be known as a personal trouble, because the issue he is facing exists within himself.

Now, how can we view Bart’s problem on a larger scale? He surely wouldn’t be the only person facing financial troubles in university, let alone facing student debt. As a public social issue, having a large amount of students facing debt would affect the student community within the university and could possibly lead to changes in tuition costs or a change in the number of students attending UBC. Student loans and student debt can be seen as public issues because of how they extend beyond an individual’s personal problem, helping us understand the structure of society and how it can be amended.

The recent protest that occurred outside the Koerner library regarding fairness in tuition and housing process is an example of how public issues can change the structure of society. Because of proposed increases in tuition costs and residence contracts, students demanded lower costs in order to make their university experience much more fair and affordable for them. By protesting and expressing their outrage for the increase in housing and tuition costs, students are using their voices to promote change in the current social order. It is also worth thinking about how each student has their own personal troubles that are financial, which contributes to the amount of students financially struggling because of the high tuition and housing costs. Each student would have their own personal reasons to be involved in the protest, and with the amount of students who appeared outside the library to oppose the status quo, it is clear that the increase in tuition and housing costs is a public social issue that calls for change within the university system at UBC.

The use of Sociological Imagination is a helpful tool that we can use to analyze aspects of our lives and of those around us. In addition, it can help us understand why events such as the protest against increased costs take place and the issues that are to be addressed. By thinking about the relationship between personal troubles and public issues, we will be able to realize how the things that happen to us can affect the structure of the society we live in.

 

References:

Mills, C. W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press, 1959.

 

 

 

 

 

 

No commentsAdd a comment