This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

DJFresh

New Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2023
Messages
5
Reaction score
17
University of Hawai'i Psychiatry Residency is risky because of its legal structure, culture, and recent history.

Legally, it is unique because residents are employed by a corporation known as Hawaii Residency Programs. HRP is employed by the University of Hawaii.

This gives the program directors, program managers, and EVEN administrators extreme leverage over the residents. This leverage is commonly abused during your most vulnerable period of medical training.

The culture is passive aggressive at best. Attendings are grossly underpaid, unhappy, and rarely stay long.

The amount of disciplinary actions, probations, and terminations over the past 10 years is appalling and the threat of all 3 are always present and often utilized.

If you match here, be prepared to do everyone’s grunt work (including social workers and program administrators) while receiving very little education and protection.

The program itself is often under investigation and on probation by the ACGME.

Finally, funding is a major issue. As a PGY4 we had our elective blocks taken away and assigned new rotations to make money for the program without any input or warning. It's an awful program, be careful!

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 15 users
Hey at least you get to live in Hawaii! 😂
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 9 users
I did my psychiatry residency at Tripler Hospital, you get to be in Hawaii without any of that stuff. Downside, you have to join the military and might get yelled at by the guy from Full Metal Jacket.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 6 users
Members don't see this ad :)
University of Hawai'i Psychiatry Residency is risky because of its legal structure, culture, and recent history.

Legally, it is unique because residents are employed by a corporation known as Hawaii Residency Programs. HRP is employed by the University of Hawaii.

This gives the program directors, program managers, and EVEN administrators extreme leverage over the residents. This leverage is commonly abused during your most vulnerable period of medical training.

The culture is passive aggressive at best. Attendings are grossly underpaid, unhappy, and rarely stay long.

The amount of disciplinary actions, probations, and terminations over the past 10 years is appalling and the threat of all 3 are always present and often utilized.

If you match here, be prepared to do everyone’s grunt work (including social workers and program administrators) while receiving very little education and protection.

The program itself is often under investigation and on probation by the ACGME.

Finally, funding is a major issue. As a PGY4 we had our elective blocks taken away and assigned new rotations to make money for the program without any input or warning. It's an awful program, be careful!
Just curious, but why does having the residency under HRP make any difference?
 
Just curious, but why does having the residency under HRP make any difference?
As it's not the university as your employer, there is no university oversight ( no academic institute protecting you ) which makes it very quick and easy to decide any residents fate
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
As it's not the university as your employer, there is no university oversight ( no academic institute protecting you ) which makes it very quick and easy to decide any residents fate

I'm not sure it makes much functional difference. You do realize there are residency programs out there that don't have an academic institution behind them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Is it still under ACGME? That's the regulatory body for residencies (although they don't do much to protect residents from abuse that I can see), regardless of who's sponsoring them.
 
I was wondering why I got so many recruitment spam from them lately, thanks for clarifying that. It's really ashame, Hawaii is such a unique place that could attract good residents based on location, too bad it's being squandered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I'm not sure it makes much functional difference. You do realize there are residency programs out there that don't have an academic institution behind them.
It makes a huge difference. I was in a residency program also not run by an academic institution, but instead by a large, business-oriented corporation. I performed extremely well during my 2 years in the program, but when I made a legal complaint, the corporation's legal/HR department took over. Everything regarding "due process" as per ACGME guidelines, program guidelines, and/or the institutional policies didn't matter anymore after that. I was terminated 2 weeks later and didn't find out until they were already confiscating my things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
University of Hawai'i Psychiatry Residency is risky because of its legal structure, culture, and recent history.

Legally, it is unique because residents are employed by a corporation known as Hawaii Residency Programs. HRP is employed by the University of Hawaii.

This gives the program directors, program managers, and EVEN administrators extreme leverage over the residents. This leverage is commonly abused during your most vulnerable period of medical training.

The culture is passive aggressive at best. Attendings are grossly underpaid, unhappy, and rarely stay long.

The amount of disciplinary actions, probations, and terminations over the past 10 years is appalling and the threat of all 3 are always present and often utilized.

If you match here, be prepared to do everyone’s grunt work (including social workers and program administrators) while receiving very little education and protection.

The program itself is often under investigation and on probation by the ACGME.

Finally, funding is a major issue. As a PGY4 we had our elective blocks taken away and assigned new rotations to make money for the program without any input or warning. It's an awful program, be careful!
Hey friend. Would you mind if I PM’d you about this to get more insight? Would appreciate
I did my psychiatry residency at Tripler Hospital, you get to be in Hawaii without any of that stuff. Downside, you have to join the military and might get yelled at by the guy from Full Metal Jacket.
question for you! how competitive are the military psychiatry residency programs? Would they decline any resident with a chronic health condition? And Do they ever have transfer spots open?
I appreciate any insight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
@DJFresh, apologies for the long-winded answer here. A fellow colleague here from the same class, hope you are doing well now post-training! I miss our ohana, I think we would all agree and we have said regularly our colleagues were the best part of the program. I hope to paint a more positive light based on my own experiences. This is not to invalidate your experience.

I completely recall that time period when COVID hit hard and the program was struggling for funding. It was hard to see the year prior having 8-9 electives because not many fast-tracked into child psych. Then there was our class with only 1 month of elective time due to COVID/ less graduating seniors. We definitely got "selectives" where we had more limited options for things we can do based on funding sources. I think the expectation of possibly having multiple elective blocks (given what we saw for the year prior, which was even an anomaly for them) with the reality of funding/covid/management limiting opportunity is what made it difficult.

Some highlights for me were access to some amazing faculty. I think they were as invested in my learning as I bother and asked questions. It was easy to always jump on projects within the department. I also really appreciated our dynamic therapy training. Things got much harder when we hit an outpatient year, working remotely and no in-person didactics. I personally found it isolating and found myself upset about many things that typically would not have bothered me as much. Finally, something most programs don't have is our awesome culturally focused training. I really think the quarantining hit our experience and bonds within the department hard. Not just in our department but now in fellowship I see similar issues at the residency program where my fellowship is. I was so glad when my current fellowship department from the get-go said didactics are in person, period. It felt like the beginning years of our training in Hawai'i all excited and looking to the future. That being said, so glad we quarantined in Hawai'i. Still miss my poke from Ona seafood and surf-watching in Waikiki blocks away from my apartment. Work-life balance will be hard to beat anywhere else. Even on our heavier services like ED, CL, and Inpatient psychiatry, we did not reach our 80-hour limits. I think the closest I got was 70 hours once. That being said we are all different and I appreciate that fact but I am not a fast worker, at best moderate speed.

I definitely want to echo some similar points but perhaps from a different light. Faculty retention has been difficult I think in part with salary to cost of living gap. But in hindsight now searching for jobs I see it differently. I was discussing with current and to-be faculty, it appears they have adjusted some things. Now have a flat salary upwards of 300k or the option to do an RVU-based model if heavier services where you would make much more money. I have been looking at faculty positions at various university institutions. Academic salaries are not impressive anywhere. I think this was a sobering reality, it would be difficult to compare to private or group practice income. Most academic institutions go by the 25 percentile pay level which is around 200-220k. Found it unique that UH allowed private practice without taking a cut and would waive non-competes if asked. Fancier institutions and even not as fancy state universities typically want upwards of 30% or all of the private pay (the latter) patients you would bring in.

I do think you are right about the culture, and being from outside Hawai'i it was an adjustment to how the islands were in general. I am much more blunt and to the point where as Hawai'i generally had a less confrontational stance. I recall when I first moved to Hawai'i for training someone fell asleep at a green light and no one honked. The driver woke up after some 20 seconds and cars began to drive. This more non-direct approach definitely has its negatives as well which you cited. I also think our ED rotation was probably one of the busiest I have ever seen. Definitely grateful for the faculty that took over down there, especially with their forensic backgrounds. I think one thing I would definitely like is for services to not be resident-dependent. Currently at other institutions services will be tucked away by the attending if needed and residents do not have to worry about finding coverage if they are gone. That being said, where we worked hard others did not. I hear not too infrequently at my current university program the general residents themselves sharing not feeling ready to go into full practice due to lack of experience. They got the teaching and time to learn and fancy research tracks, but they didn't gain the clinical caseload. I hope a balance is struck somewhere in between for our program and I am sure it will.

My understanding of HRP is it is an independent non-profit (which you can check online) not under the University of Hawai'i which primarily funds the resident/fellow training. Funding for the Department is a patchwork of grants, university of Hawai'i funds, Queens Medical Center, and other things. That being said the system can be confusing for us younger trainees. Given I'm still a fairly recent graduate, I believe there was one citation/warning by ACGME but no official sanctions. Proud to be corrected if wrong but unfortunately these are not open-source things we search on a database for verification. On the education side, I think didactics were slowly starting to improve. We did have significant time from 1030am to 5pm for various "learning" activities.

On a final note DJFresh, please feel free to DM. February would be a bit more than half a year past our graduation and the last thing I would want any of us to do is ruminate on these things now in the past.

For any future interested candidate for UH I would be happy to share more insights while it is worth anything given programs are changing so rapidly due to regulations, turnover, and culture. Mahalo!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Hey friend. Would you mind if I PM’d you about this to get more insight? Would appreciate

question for you! how competitive are the military psychiatry residency programs? Would they decline any resident with a chronic health condition? And Do they ever have transfer spots open?
I appreciate any insight.
The army would decline chronic health conditions. If you develop one while in the army you will be discharged and expected to immediately repay all funds you have received in full. They will send you to collections. It will make your life awful.

They didn't even tell me they had intent to recoup the funds until a collections agent called me.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 users
@DJFresh, apologies for the long-winded answer here. A fellow colleague here from the same class, hope you are doing well now post-training! I miss our ohana, I think we would all agree and we have said regularly our colleagues were the best part of the program. I hope to paint a more positive light based on my own experiences. This is not to invalidate your experience.

I completely recall that time period when COVID hit hard and the program was struggling for funding. It was hard to see the year prior having 8-9 electives because not many fast-tracked into child psych. Then there was our class with only 1 month of elective time due to COVID/ less graduating seniors. We definitely got "selectives" where we had more limited options for things we can do based on funding sources. I think the expectation of possibly having multiple elective blocks (given what we saw for the year prior, which was even an anomaly for them) with the reality of funding/covid/management limiting opportunity is what made it difficult.

Some highlights for me were access to some amazing faculty. I think they were as invested in my learning as I bother and asked questions. It was easy to always jump on projects within the department. I also really appreciated our dynamic therapy training. Things got much harder when we hit an outpatient year, working remotely and no in-person didactics. I personally found it isolating and found myself upset about many things that typically would not have bothered me as much. Finally, something most programs don't have is our awesome culturally focused training. I really think the quarantining hit our experience and bonds within the department hard. Not just in our department but now in fellowship I see similar issues at the residency program where my fellowship is. I was so glad when my current fellowship department from the get-go said didactics are in person, period. It felt like the beginning years of our training in Hawai'i all excited and looking to the future. That being said, so glad we quarantined in Hawai'i. Still miss my poke from Ona seafood and surf-watching in Waikiki blocks away from my apartment. Work-life balance will be hard to beat anywhere else. Even on our heavier services like ED, CL, and Inpatient psychiatry, we did not reach our 80-hour limits. I think the closest I got was 70 hours once. That being said we are all different and I appreciate that fact but I am not a fast worker, at best moderate speed.

I definitely want to echo some similar points but perhaps from a different light. Faculty retention has been difficult I think in part with salary to cost of living gap. But in hindsight now searching for jobs I see it differently. I was discussing with current and to-be faculty, it appears they have adjusted some things. Now have a flat salary upwards of 300k or the option to do an RVU-based model if heavier services where you would make much more money. I have been looking at faculty positions at various university institutions. Academic salaries are not impressive anywhere. I think this was a sobering reality, it would be difficult to compare to private or group practice income. Most academic institutions go by the 25 percentile pay level which is around 200-220k. Found it unique that UH allowed private practice without taking a cut and would waive non-competes if asked. Fancier institutions and even not as fancy state universities typically want upwards of 30% or all of the private pay (the latter) patients you would bring in.

I do think you are right about the culture, and being from outside Hawai'i it was an adjustment to how the islands were in general. I am much more blunt and to the point where as Hawai'i generally had a less confrontational stance. I recall when I first moved to Hawai'i for training someone fell asleep at a green light and no one honked. The driver woke up after some 20 seconds and cars began to drive. This more non-direct approach definitely has its negatives as well which you cited. I also think our ED rotation was probably one of the busiest I have ever seen. Definitely grateful for the faculty that took over down there, especially with their forensic backgrounds. I think one thing I would definitely like is for services to not be resident-dependent. Currently at other institutions services will be tucked away by the attending if needed and residents do not have to worry about finding coverage if they are gone. That being said, where we worked hard others did not. I hear not too infrequently at my current university program the general residents themselves sharing not feeling ready to go into full practice due to lack of experience. They got the teaching and time to learn and fancy research tracks, but they didn't gain the clinical caseload. I hope a balance is struck somewhere in between for our program and I am sure it will.

My understanding of HRP is it is an independent non-profit (which you can check online) not under the University of Hawai'i which primarily funds the resident/fellow training. Funding for the Department is a patchwork of grants, university of Hawai'i funds, Queens Medical Center, and other things. That being said the system can be confusing for us younger trainees. Given I'm still a fairly recent graduate, I believe there was one citation/warning by ACGME but no official sanctions. Proud to be corrected if wrong but unfortunately these are not open-source things we search on a database for verification. On the education side, I think didactics were slowly starting to improve. We did have significant time from 1030am to 5pm for various "learning" activities.

On a final note DJFresh, please feel free to DM. February would be a bit more than half a year past our graduation and the last thing I would want any of us to do is ruminate on these things now in the past.

For any future interested candidate for UH I would be happy to share more insights while it is worth anything given programs are changing so rapidly due to regulations, turnover, and culture. Mahalo!
You are going to be a happy person whatever you decide to do in life, congrats on being born to the right family and/or cultivating the sense of gratitude that you carry.

I will say it's pretty amazing to be a psych resident that thinks being just under ACGME work hour caps is a great work life balance. I know of many psych residents who barely pushed 50 hours by PGY 2 year and were 40 or under in pgy 3-4 years. Some don't even take in house call these days. I think it's very important to have residencies offer transparency on how work heavy they are so prospective residents can self-select the workload that works for them. If you have someone looking for 40 hour weeks and working 60-70 they will be miserable and that will harm everyone around them. Similarly someone who fell into psychiatry but was born to be a neurosurgeon may be bored to tears working 40 hours/week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Members don't see this ad :)
The army would decline chronic health conditions. If you develop one while in the army you will be discharged and expected to immediately repay all funds you have received in full. They will send you to collections. It will make your life awful.

They didn't even tell me they had intent to recoup the funds until a collections agent called me.
That's horrific. I would have thought you would get service connected benefits and forgiveness of any outstanding obligations if deemed medically unfit for service. This should definitely be highlighted for anyone considering this route! Seems basically unconscionable to approach it this way
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The army would decline chronic health conditions. If you develop one while in the army you will be discharged and expected to immediately repay all funds you have received in full. They will send you to collections. It will make your life awful.

They didn't even tell me they had intent to recoup the funds until a collections agent called me.
Wow. Awful. And sorry to hear that.

Doesn’t make sense why they’d have the same policies in place regarding disqualifying health conditions in the cases of non-combat personnel.

Anyway, thank you for the helpful information.
 
The expectation is that every active duty member is “worldwide deployable” so they are pretty strict about this. That said, there are plenty of chronic conditions that aren’t disqualifying and you can ask for a waiver, which you may get if the condition is mild and they really want you. Talk a to recruiter if you’re really interested but take it with a grain of salt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The expectation is that every active duty member is “worldwide deployable” so they are pretty strict about this. That said, there are plenty of chronic conditions that aren’t disqualifying and you can ask for a waiver, which you may get if the condition is mild and they really want you. Talk a to recruiter if you’re really interested but take it with a grain of salt.
Don't talk to a recruiter. Much of the time they have no idea what is actually involved in the medical side of the military (even ones who "specialize" in that area of recruitment) or will straight up lie. I went through much of the HPSP process when applying to medical school and was fed a lot of incorrect information until I was able to talk to a military physician who had taken that route and was still active. What he described was completely different from 80% of what the recruiters said.

That's horrific. I would have thought you would get service connected benefits and forgiveness of any outstanding obligations if deemed medically unfit for service. This should definitely be highlighted for anyone considering this route! Seems basically unconscionable to approach it this way
Wow. Awful. And sorry to hear that.

Doesn’t make sense why they’d have the same policies in place regarding disqualifying health conditions in the cases of non-combat personnel.

Anyway, thank you for the helpful information.
The problem is that while you're in med school or residency you are not "active duty", so you wouldn't qualify for any of the benefits that come from being active duty like service connection. You're not active duty until you start working and repaying those years you owe them, and if you don't match or have to defer then that can add years you owe. All things recruiters routinely failed to mention when I was looking at this but military docs were very up front about. If people are interested in that route, there's a mil-med forum here with some great info that lined up with what I was told irl by military (mostly navy) physicians.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
As it's not the university as your employer, there is no university oversight ( no academic institute protecting you ) which makes it very quick and easy to decide any residents fate
So…your statements seem to not match reality. Are you currently resident? Because your stores definitely don’t match what I and the rest of us know as realty
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'm not familiar with the military rules, but the ACGME is fairly clear and protective of trainee rights. I can imagine that the military may not be willing to pay for school if not fit to serve, but residents are employees. They are hard to fire and well protected by due process. Of course, be careful choosing bedfellows when you owe. GME is very different from undergraduate medical education.
 
Residents are amazingly well protected by due process at so many levels. If you think it's easy to separate a resident anywhere...you've never been involved with residency administration.
 
*From an outsider perspective*

I interviewed for a faculty job here. The chair was… inflexible? Very strange. Other faculty members clearly tried to keep him on a leash the whole time and reign him in.

Needless to say, I wanted nothing to do with that department. No-go for me. Bad boss = dead in the water.

Just my experience as potential faculty. Not sure if there’s carryover to the residency program itself. Not an “ohana” I wanted to be involved with.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
The army would decline chronic health conditions. If you develop one while in the army you will be discharged and expected to immediately repay all funds you have received in full. They will send you to collections. It will make your life awful.

They didn't even tell me they had intent to recoup the funds until a collections agent called me.
That seems pretty harsh - certainly if the chronic condition could be said to be absolutely not your fault. You develop multiple sclerosis at the age of 30, get treated, and then they boot you the hell out and send you to collections despite your having done everything by the book except for being unlucky?
 
That seems pretty harsh - certainly if the chronic condition could be said to be absolutely not your fault. You develop multiple sclerosis at the age of 30, get treated, and then they boot you the hell out and send you to collections despite your having done everything by the book except for being unlucky?
Yeah lots of other ways being unlucky totally ****s a physician.

Try developing a disability where you don't complete intern year or residency. Even quality disability insurance often can't save you.

If you're totally disabled, given the average work history most people have prior to med school, you won't even qualify for SSDI and you'll have to live on $940 a month SSI.

Being sent to collections is the least of the problems there.

Anything can happen in the 5 years it takes to get licensed, or 8 for board certification. We're talking about that in another thread. It's easy to think as a less than over the hill person that you've got 7 good years in you, but it doesn't always work out that way.

People also try to tell you how much the system will help disabled residents but that's also bull. That doesn't mean residents with chronic conditions can't make it, and some have very supportive programs. Like everything it depends.
 
As far as how easy or hard to fire a resident, I think it depends on your perspective. Some programs do it more often so they seem to have it down.

It also depends on how hard it is for a program to check the boxes, do the write ups, fake a remediation plan, and let time go by while compiling. Not fast is not the same as hard, either.

From what I can tell, a lot of things depend on policy. Some institutions have a lot more red tape.

This last bit is speculation on my part, but I also wonder if some programs by virtue of the candidates they get, sometimes they have to be more prepared to let people not working out go.

This is another reason why I think some programs have this rep, because they do this regularly. More than one senior resident telling you so, usually isn't an outlier. My experience also is that people don't start sharing their own experiences being targeted by a program until someone else does and notes are compared.

If you don't know someone is on a probation/remediation, unless someone exits the door (and in this case program and resident goals align in saving face presenting it as "personal reasons") people who don't struggle or aren't targeted might remain blissfully unaware of the issues with the program. It can be a real shock to people not impacted directly. Even if it's a spate of people, it's very easy to say well those residents deserved it the program has limited responsibility (clearly the residents themselves had issues, no denying that. From the outside though it can be hard to know how the program treated them). Again, if you know, you know. If you don't, you don't.

It's very hard to get these stories from the horse's mouth, because for many situations there are severe repercussions for people to talk about it. You'd have to suspect how bad it was for someone else to say a damn thing about your own nightmare to them, and hope they reciprocate. People still at the program will say the least; too much to lose. The ones on the way out... still have a lot to lose.

And so the cone of silence. Meanwhile the people dealing with the administrative burden of paper pushing will declare how hard it is to fire a resident and that everyone is treated fairly. And if not, it was deserved.

I do want to be clear, there are situations where a program really doesn't have the resources to help struggling residents. So someone does all the hard work to terminate and someone else's career does or almost ends after a decade of effort.

But no matter. They are isolated incidents and malcontents so they don't matter.

The tools of disciplinary action, probation, termination, bad LORs/recommendations, absolutely are used like statecraft at some programs. Even by very nice and well meaning people. Administration is hard. You have to do what you have to do. It can be surprising in that way as well.

<insert rebuttals, Crayola doesn't know what she's talking about, you suck, and residency admin are all unicorns and rainbows> to save people time.
 
As far as how easy or hard to fire a resident, I think it depends on your perspective. Some programs do it more often so they seem to have it down.

It also depends on how hard it is for a program to check the boxes, do the write ups, fake a remediation plan, and let time go by while compiling. Not fast is not the same as hard, either.

From what I can tell, a lot of things depend on policy. Some institutions have a lot more red tape.

This last bit is speculation on my part, but I also wonder if some programs by virtue of the candidates they get, sometimes they have to be more prepared to let people not working out go.

This is another reason why I think some programs have this rep, because they do this regularly. More than one senior resident telling you so, usually isn't an outlier. My experience also is that people don't start sharing their own experiences being targeted by a program until someone else does and notes are compared.

If you don't know someone is on a probation/remediation, unless someone exits the door (and in this case program and resident goals align in saving face presenting it as "personal reasons") people who don't struggle or aren't targeted might remain blissfully unaware of the issues with the program. It can be a real shock to people not impacted directly. Even if it's a spate of people, it's very easy to say well those residents deserved it the program has limited responsibility (clearly the residents themselves had issues, no denying that. From the outside though it can be hard to know how the program treated them). Again, if you know, you know. If you don't, you don't.

It's very hard to get these stories from the horse's mouth, because for many situations there are severe repercussions for people to talk about it. You'd have to suspect how bad it was for someone else to say a damn thing about your own nightmare to them, and hope they reciprocate. People still at the program will say the least; too much to lose. The ones on the way out... still have a lot to lose.

And so the cone of silence. Meanwhile the people dealing with the administrative burden of paper pushing will declare how hard it is to fire a resident and that everyone is treated fairly. And if not, it was deserved.

I do want to be clear, there are situations where a program really doesn't have the resources to help struggling residents. So someone does all the hard work to terminate and someone else's career does or almost ends after a decade of effort.

But no matter. They are isolated incidents and malcontents so they don't matter.

The tools of disciplinary action, probation, termination, bad LORs/recommendations, absolutely are used like statecraft at some programs. Even by very nice and well meaning people. Administration is hard. You have to do what you have to do. It can be surprising in that way as well.

<insert rebuttals, Crayola doesn't know what she's talking about, you suck, and residency admin are all unicorns and rainbows> to save people time.

Yes and no. Some programs are quite good at it and may not care as much, but if a resident lawyers up then it can be nearly impossible to fire them and sometimes the PD doesn't even have say anymore. Saw a situation like this in residency where a resident ahead of me should have 100% been fired (would straight up skip work repeatedly without telling anyone among other things), resident was a nightmare to work with and very weak in general. They were fired in spring of their PGY-3 year, lawyered up, and then was allowed back in with certain significant restrictions to complete their outpatient year before transferring to a CAP fellowship. None of us could believe they were let back in after the extent of problems they caused, but lawyers and upper admin took things out of PD's hands.

Even malignant programs may have their hands tied once lawyers get involved and anyone who is being fired/let go should seek legal counsel. The only times I've heard of where lawyers didn't matter were when residents had their licenses revoked by the board due to some egregious violation. Not much a lawyer can do to keep someone in residency when the state board won't license them...
 
Yes and no. Some programs are quite good at it and may not care as much, but if a resident lawyers up then it can be nearly impossible to fire them and sometimes the PD doesn't even have say anymore. Saw a situation like this in residency where a resident ahead of me should have 100% been fired (would straight up skip work repeatedly without telling anyone among other things), resident was a nightmare to work with and very weak in general. They were fired in spring of their PGY-3 year, lawyered up, and then was allowed back in with certain significant restrictions to complete their outpatient year before transferring to a CAP fellowship. None of us could believe they were let back in after the extent of problems they caused, but lawyers and upper admin took things out of PD's hands.

Even malignant programs may have their hands tied once lawyers get involved and anyone who is being fired/let go should seek legal counsel. The only times I've heard of where lawyers didn't matter were when residents had their licenses revoked by the board due to some egregious violation. Not much a lawyer can do to keep someone in residency when the state board won't license them...
It's not that common that lawyering up does this. He must have had something very damaging on the program.
 
It's not that common that lawyering up does this. He must have had something very damaging on the program.

Nope, she had nothing damaging on the program at all. An attending at one location volunteered to supervise her directly so she could finish PGY-3 before transferring and admin basically told PD that was what would happen. Resident told me herself. I'm also aware of several other cases where programs balked once lawyers got involved. Maybe it's not common, but ime for my N=3 to 4 it was quite effective.

Would be interested in what some of the PDs/APDs here know, but also don't want to derail the thread too much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Nope, she had nothing damaging on the program at all. An attending at one location volunteered to supervise her directly so she could finish PGY-3 before transferring and admin basically told PD that was what would happen. Resident told me herself. I'm also aware of several other cases where programs balked once lawyers got involved. Maybe it's not common, but ime for my N=3 to 4 it was quite effective.

Would be interested in what some of the PDs/APDs here know, but also don't want to derail the thread too much.
The word around SDN a long time has been, not only will it not work, but it will make things worse. I don't know about the latter, I can argue about that, but generally it seems like most residents in trouble who fight it don't get to stay. I also wonder if this is specialty dependent though.
 
The word around SDN a long time has been, not only will it not work, but it will make things worse. I don't know about the latter, I can argue about that, but generally it seems like most residents in trouble who fight it don't get to stay. I also wonder if this is specialty dependent though.

SDN is also primarily seeing the posts of those where things don’t work out. This vocal group needs assistance.

I only know a couple people that had issues in residency. They both got legal involved. Neither went to trial. End result - Admin/legal essentially told the program chairs to ensure the residents complete the program.

Both those I know were at what I would consider normal programs. They aren’t malignant places that regularly terminate residents.

Like terminating employees anywhere, there is an art to doing so without blowback on you. Places with lots of turnover will have a system to ensure strong compliance that has passed through legal many times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top