New mom sues medical licensing board

[Jwax]

Yeah -I'm pretty sure an article somewhere said she got double the time for MCAT just like she's getting for USMLE. The fact that she gets twice the time for the test itself makes this sooo much worse.

They have bent over backwards for her, she should learn to do SOMETHING FOR HERSELF!

You know, this whole issue should give any pre-meds reading this some insight on how to get into medical school. Just fake the symptoms of ADHD for a few years until you can fake out your doctor (which I really don't think would be all that difficult to do, you can find out everything about ADHD online and just say you have a large handful of those symptoms). Then you can get extra time for your MCAT (which, since you don't actually have ADHD, you should be able to do much better on). Then, while in medical school, make SURE to get pregnant before any important tests or anything so you can use your pregnancy as an excuse for poor performance.

Why didn't I think of that?

Personally, I would think that you would be nuts to plan having a child during medical school (as a female, men have it a lot easier as women are still the primary caregivers to children and primary household managers). There is a girl in my 1st year class that actually planned to have her baby during school (and found out she was pregnant 1 week before classes began). There is NO WAY I would do that. Med school is supposed to be hellacious enough, without the added extreme pressures of motherhood.... I met an EM doc (female) who has 6 kids (ages 22 to 5).

All that being said, as a female, there really is no good time to have a child. The aforementioned EM doc says that the last year of residency is the best time for it (b/c you have protected/paid time off, unlike when you are practicing).

Anyways, back to the point. Everyone else has said it 20 different ways: boo to her trying to get special accomadations. It is all too easy as women for us to try and play the "female" card when it suits us (like when we are moving and don't want to lift heavy boxes...), but demand equality at every other time. In general, I expect women to be able to do just as much as men. That being said - when a woman cannot fulfill her expected duties in her career of choice, either she needs to learn how to or recognize that she simply needs to do something else. I think it is AMAZING the women who want to go into orthopedic surgery. Personally, I know that I am a wimp and there is no way I could physically do all the things ortho surgeons need to do. Now, I could either start working out and build my muscles up so I COULD do it or I can pursue something else. I SHOULD NOT just go into that field and expect that I will be given special treatment. That's just pathetic.

While not exactly the same issue, I want to throw out there that while people may have the right to desire to be whatever they desire to be, but not everyone has the abilities to do so. It is only wrong to discriminate on basis of ASSUMING that someone cannot do things that others can based on things such sex, race, sexual orientation, etc. It is NOT wrong to discriminate against people who actually cannot do things that someone else can. We are NOT entitled to do whatever we want in life, especially when our actions impact others lives.

*off soap box*

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Abilene85]

(as a female, men have it a lot easier as women are still the primary caregivers to children and primary household managers)

This is true. If men were expected to contribute equally to these things after a baby was born, would male medical students/physicians still be saying that it is necessary to choose a career OR a family?

 

[GreenShirt]

No, we only say "well that's equality" when women argue for the same opportunities/professions/rights as men (notions I whole heartedly support). But then issues such as pregnancies/maternity leave/child bearing/part time work come up and all of a sudden women are not equal? In terms of social justice, it seems to me that women take steps forward, and then jump right back as soon as it fits their needs.


Viewing women as 'lazy', never. Viewing them as 'selfish and a nuisance', a certain few.

Not sure I get your logic. My point is that applying the issue of equality between men and women to pregnancy doesn't make sense because, duh, only women get pregnant. Although, I suppose you could make it work one of two ways:

1) In order for women to be equal to men in the work place, they should not get pregnant.
2) In order for there to be equality between men and women in the work place regarding pregnancy both men and women should get leave for child rearing.

I'm assuming by the tone of your post, you're an avid supporter of point #1.

 

[Tired]

This is true. If men were expected to contribute equally to these things after a baby was born, would male medical students/physicians still be saying that it is necessary to choose a career OR a family?

Maybe men are just more realistic.

Or maybe they make due in their own situation, and don't expect everyone to pick up the slack while they hang at home with the baby.

Or maybe more men don't underestimate their mates, and understand that sometimes one parent has to spend more time with the kid, while the other advances their education and the future of their family.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Well, as many males on this forum have pointed out there is no reason for women to get "special" considerations while experiencing the additional physical and emotional burdens of being pregnant. I mean if a man can do surgery for eights hours straight, then it's ridiculous to think a nine month pregnant woman should require "concessions". I'm mean it's just plain lazy. In fact, a female physician should pop out a baby, hand it to the nurse, and get back on rounds. Of course, women working in "men's" professions such as medicine should not even have babies, after all nobody "has" to have children. Why should you get maternity leave to provide the bonding a human baby needs in order to properly develop?

I'm not siding with Ms. Currie and I know that there are plenty of women who juggle work and family admirably but I'm peeved by some of the attitudes on this forum that women who decide to have children are being selfish and are just trying to get exceptions at work so that they can be lazy. Just because a women needs to take one or two years out of her life to have a child doesn't mean that she can't pursue a lifelong career like medicine. The comments that pregnant women should be treated the same as men for the sake of social justice get an are just plain ridiculous and callous.

FYI, I and many of the posters here are female (although I see you've edited your post to remove my name). Interestingly, most of the critics of Dr. Currier have been female.

Your over-arching anecdote is interesting. There have been no serious discussions here or elsewhere in which males or females have said there shouldn't be any concessions. If they are warranted, they should be offered. However, Dr. Currier is asking for more than anyone else, breast feeding or not, gets and is still unhappy. Pregnant women, especially those who planned their pregnancies, need to make arrangements for the physical challenges they will face. Dr. Currier did not do so despite having been pregnant before and presumably being aware of the discomfort and potential for problems at 8.5 months pregnant while taking the USMLE.

We are not advocating NO concessions...if you need them, they should be available. Nor did anyone seriously suggest that women with children are not cut out for medicine. If you read here and in the responses to her blog and the on-line stories, it appears that everyone who questions her ability to be a physician, because of the ADHD and the breastfeeding, is NOT a physician but rather a member of the laypublic. The problem as I see it, is that Dr. Currier expects concessions and when she gets them is ungrateful for them, refuses to see the impact that the changes to the testing setting may have and is unwilling to consider any other options other than what she wants.

A polite society doesn't operate this way but rather looks for solutions which best fit everyone. Again, smacks of a "me first" generation and elitism to me.

Finally, although you've edited my name out, I challenge you to show me where I say that "women should be treated the same as men". I mention that my colleagues and I worked extra hard so that people wouldn't say that "women can't cut it" but have never said that NO ONE should get any concessions or that there aren't differences. I cannot speak for others but my anger about this isn't about her wanting extra time for breastfeeding, its about her fairly obvious attempts to muddle the truth and get further accomodations so she doesn't fail again.

 

[GreenShirt]

Maybe men are just more realistic.

Or maybe they make due in their own situation, and don't expect everyone to pick up the slack while they hang at home with the baby.

Or maybe more men don't underestimate their mates, and understand that sometimes one parent has to spend more time with the kid, while the other advances their education and the future of their family.

LOL. I've got the 1950's on the phone, it's for you, apparently they want you to come back.

You just have the wife stay at home while you advance your career. Such easy choices for men.

How would you feel about "hanging out" with the baby for year, while your wife finishes her medical education?

Or you can hire a nanny to raise your child....that's realistic. Why don't women think of that?

 

[GreenShirt]

FYI, I and many of the posters here are female (although I see you've edited your post to remove my name). Interestingly, most of the critics of Dr. Currier have been female.

Your over-arching anecdote is interesting. There have been no serious discussions here or elsewhere in which males or females have said there shouldn't be any concessions. If they are warranted, they should be offered. However, Dr. Currier is asking for more than anyone else, breast feeding or not, gets and is still unhappy. Pregnant women, especially those who planned their pregnancies, need to make arrangements for the physical challenges they will face. Dr. Currier did not do so despite having been pregnant before and presumably being aware of the discomfort and potential for problems at 8.5 months pregnant while taking the USMLE.

We are not advocating NO concessions...if you need them, they should be available. Nor did anyone seriously suggest that women with children are not cut out for medicine. If you read here and in the responses to her blog and the on-line stories, it appears that everyone who questions her ability to be a physician, because of the ADHD and the breastfeeding, is NOT a physician but rather a member of the laypublic. The problem as I see it, is that Dr. Currier expects concessions and when she gets them is ungrateful for them, refuses to see the impact that the changes to the testing setting may have and is unwilling to consider any other options other than what she wants.

A polite society doesn't operate this way but rather looks for solutions which best fit everyone. Again, smacks of a "me first" generation and elitism to me.

Finally, although you've edited my name out, I challenge you to show me where I say that "women should be treated the same as men". I mention that my colleagues and I worked extra hard so that people wouldn't say that "women can't cut it" but have never said that NO ONE should get any concessions or that there aren't differences. I cannot speak for others but my anger about this isn't about her wanting extra time for breastfeeding, its about her fairly obvious attempts to muddle the truth and get further accommodations so she doesn't fail again.

I agree with your observations about Dr. Currier case. I think I meant o quote another poster when I used your screen name, which is why I removed it. However, there were a few posts (which I'll dig up in a minute) that connected Dr. Currier's case to the general issue of pregnant women in medicine and how asking for concessions, such as maternity leave, undermines the state of equality between men and women in the workplace. There were also implications that women who choose to become pregnant during their medical education are being selfish and creating more work for everyone else. I believe those sentiments are unfair and insensitive.

 

[Doctor&Geek]

Or you can hire a nanny to raise your child....that's realistic. Why don't women think of that?

I've avoided entering this discussion, considering I am incapable of becoming pregnant. But either the statement above is the height of sarcasm or an incredibly stupid and poorly thought out response. Not everyone is rich, nor can everyone afford to proceed with delaying their residency because they have loans to pay or other financial difficulties very common to residents.

I also want to note that delaying residency may not be possible because of limits to taking Steps I, II, and III within a set, state board mandated, seven year time period, a period in which dual degree students (such as Dr. Currier) may not exceed.

 

[Winged Scapula]

I agree with your observations about Dr. Currier case. I think I meant o quote another poster when I used your screen name, which is why I removed it. However, there were a few posts (which I'll dig up in a minute) that connected Dr. Currier's case to the general issue of pregnant women in medicine and how asking for concessions, such as maternity leave, undermines the state of equality between men and women in the workplace. There were also implications that women who choose to become pregnant during their medical education are being selfish and creating more work for everyone else. I believe those sentiments are unfair and insensitive.

Gotcha.

And I agree that there is inequality in this situation...only women get pregnant and need maternity leave. Paternity leave does exist in some workplaces but I know from experience that men who take it, at least during residency, are hit with a fair bit of derision.

It is not fair to be angry with women who take maternity leave but I understand it - you leave co-workers with YOUR work AND THEIR work. Perhaps because of the work load in surgery I am unaware of anyone who had a child during their clinical years but I know it happens fairly frequently in other specialties. The facts as I see it is that women do have a choice and sometimes that choice, the choice of if and when to have children, aren't good options.

 

[UnderdogMD]

Not sure I get your logic. My point is that applying the issue of equality between men and women to pregnancy doesn't make sense because, duh, only women get pregnant. Although, I suppose you could make it work one of two ways:

1) In order for women to be equal to men in the work place, they should not get pregnant.
2) In order for there to be equality between men and women in the work place regarding pregnancy both men and women should get leave for child rearing.

I'm assuming by the tone of your post, you're an avid supporter of point #1.

We were discussing this in the context of Medicine (or other complicated, demanding, and high liability careers). Nobody cares if a cashier takes 20 years off to raise children. Please don't assume anything and I choose option 3.

3)Women are equal to men. They can perform the same jobs as men. And when they get pregnant it is their (the parents) responsibility to deal with it. Not their coworkers, not their employers, and not their medical schools etc.

I will stop posting in this thread because I feel like I keep saying the same thing over and over and over again. I have stated my opinion and feel that I respectfully disagree with some other ones held on here. I really like the post by Jwax above because it is lucid and logical and says it better than I could.

 

[Abilene85]

It is not fair to be angry with women who take maternity leave but I understand it - you leave co-workers with YOUR work AND THEIR work.

Can someone briefly explain maternity leave during residency? If your current classmates would have your work dumped on them when you left, would it be fair to say the new classmates when you returned would have their workload reduced?

 

[Northerner]

Can someone briefly explain maternity leave during residency? If your current classmates would have your work dumped on them when you left, would it be fair to say the new classmates when you returned would have their workload reduced?

And increase the post-pregger resident's work hours to....something above 80?

 

[Winged Scapula]

Can someone briefly explain maternity leave during residency? If your current classmates would have your work dumped on them when you left, would it be fair to say the new classmates when you returned would have their workload reduced?

Since residency can be a fluid concept, especially in fields like surgery where people go in and out of research labs, there really aren't classes.

But for the same of argument, let's say you take maternity leave and your class then has 1 fewer person and the class below you has one more after you return. This would only occur if you took an entire year off...otherwise you would simply rejoin your class and make up the missed time at the end of your residency.

While it may seem like the class below would end up having less work when you returned, since medical teams don't function on as class basis, it doesn't really work that way. When you are gone, whatever team you would have been assigned to will be short a person (and hence everyone has more patients to see, more work to do) and the call schedule is down a person, adding more call to everyone's schedule. When you return, you are assigned to a rotation schedule just as you would have been if you had never left...you are not added on to a rotation which is already fully staffed with residents and thereby making everyone's work load lighter.

I don't know if this makes sense, but in practice, no...the work load isn't less when you return except for now that you are in the call schedule and whatever rotation you are on is fully staffed, so the load goes back to normal, not less than normal.

 

[Abilene85]

I don't know if this makes sense, but in practice, no...the work load isn't less when you return except for now that you are in the call schedule and whatever rotation you are on is fully staffed, so the load goes back to normal, not less than normal.

Makes total sense. I kind of thought it might be a fixed "concentration" of work, not a set total amount of work. Like 5 patients per person, so 5x patients depending on how many people are on your team. Then if someone leaves for a year, that number goes down. Guess it doesn't work that way, so I can definitely understand being frustrated - especially when people are overworked to begin with.

 

[BabyBop]

Well, I fully understand why other residents are upset when they have to pick up the slack, but at the same time, you can't really expect women to put their whole lives on hold. I mean, men don't do it. Male residents wouldn't want their wives to do it.

I think the problem is not with the "insensitive" residents, or the "inconsiderate" ones who get pregnant, it's with the employers. In ANY profession, women get pregnant and need maternity leave. This leaves the team short of one person for a few weeks to months. What do employers do? Hire someone else! Really, it's only an issue of manpower, nothing else. There are locums available, but it's all a $$$ issue. If residency programs/hospitals/whoever is in charge weren't so intent on using residents as slave labor, no one would be resentful of pregnant colleagues, no pregnant women would have to feel guilty fpr choosing to have a family, and everyone would be happy just like in any other profession. But of course, money is everything...

 

[Winged Scapula]

Makes total sense. I kind of thought it might be a fixed "concentration" of work, not a set total amount of work. Like 5 patients per person, so 5x patients depending on how many people are on your team. The if someone leaves for a year, that number goes down. Guess it doesn't work that way, so I can definitely understand being frustrated - especially when people are overworked to begin with.

Trouble is, nothing is set in stone.

As they say, nature abhors a vacumn. Well, so does medicine. Lots of team members? The amount of work seems to increase by some geometric factor not always related to the amount of people available to do the work!

In your example, if there are 5 residents on the team and a patient census of 25, each resident will see 5 patients (not really, because usually only the junior members do any real work). However, if one of the 5 leaves, the census doesn't change, but now you have each resident (4 of them) seeing 6.25 patients.

It can especially hurt if its an intern or Chief who's off...the interns do most of the floor work and the Chiefs do most of the rounding with the attending, cases and procedures if they are in such a specialty, etc. so these people are generally missed more than the PGY2 or 3 (provided the 3 isn't the Chief).

So to make your example more realistic; let's say the team has 4 members: 2 interns, 1 PGY2 and the Chief. And lets say the census is 24. The interns switch off every other day taking the service pager for floor calls and each see 10 patients on am pre-rounds. The PGY-2 has deigned to see the remaining 4 patients. When the Chief shows up, they all round together (for the moment we'll ignore medical students seeing patients because legally the patients still have to be examined by a physician...although we know it doesn't always happen).

One of the interns gets pregnant, hit by a car and breaks their leg, felled by bacterial meningitis, has a PE, has a GI bleed, emergency surgery, or sepsis from an I&D gone wrong with seeding to the brain (all situations I have seen)...whatever. Now the PGY-2 says he'll see 8 patients, but there are still 16 patients for the remaining intern to see. Even if the PGY-2 split patients in half, each would still be seeing 12 patients, or more than they had before the other intern left. In addition, the intern is now taking all of the calls from the floor except for the merciful days when he is post-call and the PGY-2 has to take the pager. And instead of taking call q4 for his intern class, the one left behind is now on call q3 to make up for his colleague being gone.

Each hospital program will function a little differently so my examples above may not be representative for everyone, however, I think it gives you a good idea of why having someone off makes for more work for everyone, and that the work isn't less when they come back, but just back to status quo. I am also ignoring the concept of "capped admissions" or "team admissions" because that isn't the reality of my world, or of many others (plus it complicates the explanation).

 

[GreenShirt]

I've avoided entering this discussion, considering I am incapable of becoming pregnant. But either the statement above is the height of sarcasm or an incredibly stupid and poorly thought out response. Not everyone is rich, nor can everyone afford to proceed with delaying their residency because they have loans to pay or other financial difficulties very common to residents.

In my defense, I was being sarcastic. I was referencing a post by Tired where he said that men are more realistic when it comes to pregnancy than women (I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry at that statement).

Maybe men are just more realistic.

Or maybe they make due in their own situation, and don't expect everyone to pick up the slack while they hang at home with the baby.

Or maybe more men don't underestimate their mates, and understand that sometimes one parent has to spend more time with the kid, while the other advances their education and the future of their family.

Anywho, enough posting for me. I need to study for finals!

 

[Winged Scapula]

Well, I fully understand why other residents are upset when they have to pick up the slack, but at the same time, you can't really expect women to put their whole lives on hold. I mean, men don't do it. Male residents wouldn't want their wives to do it.

I think the problem is not with the "insensitive" residents, or the "inconsiderate" ones who get pregnant, it's with the employers. In ANY profession, women get pregnant and need maternity leave. This leaves the team short of one person for a few weeks to months. What do employers do? Hire someone else! And yes, there are locums available, but it's all a $$$ issue. If residency programs/hospitals/whoever is in charge weren't so intent on using residents as slave labor, no one would be resentful of pregnant colleagues, no pregnant women would have to feel guilty of choosing to have a family, and everyone would be happy just like in any other profession. But of course, money is everything...

That certainly is at the crux of the problem.

Hospitals and residencies function as they do because the administrators refuse to hire people in these situations. Small employers who can't afford to pay for maternity leave and to hire a temp do without. Yet, hospitals claim that they cannot afford to hire a PA or NP or even a locum to fill an open residency spot, even for a temporary period, while at the same time spending obscene amounts on CEO salaries, food, etc.

Residency has been designed so that hospitals seemingly fail to function without them and the cheap labor they provide.

 

[BabyBop]

That certainly is at the crux of the problem.

Hospitals and residencies function as they do because the administrators refuse to hire people in these situations. Small employers who can't afford to pay for maternity leave and to hire a temp do without. Yet, hospitals claim that they cannot afford to hire a PA or NP or even a locum to fill an open residency spot, even for a temporary period, while at the same time spending obscene amounts on CEO salaries, food, etc.

Residency has been designed so that hospitals seemingly fail to function without them and the cheap labor they provide.

So then, do you feel that female residents who want a child during residency should pay the price for that? Of course, there will be women who will abuse it (as always), but we're not talking about them. Just the average woman who takes the needed time off while trying to make up for it as much as possible before/after.

Tough situation...

 

[Abilene85]

So really we're just talking about problems with gender roles in America and sharing of the second shift, the organization of our country's medical education, the way in which our health care system is run...

 

[Winged Scapula]

So then, do you feel that female residents who want a child during residency should pay the price for that? Of course, there will be women who will abuse it (as always), but we're not talking about them. Just the average woman who takes the needed time off while trying to make up for it as much as possible before/after.

Tough situation...

Depends on what you mean by "pay the price".

Of course I don't support not allowing women to have children during residency (if you could even do that) or making them feel bad about doing it. But I want them to realize the impact their decision has on others and I want them to care about it.

You can't legislate empathy I know, but just as there are people who are callous about women wanting time off to deliver or breast feed, IMHO, there are just as many women who don't give a fig that their colleagues are picking up the slack for them. Honestly, I think men, perhaps because of their common experience of team sports, do a much better job of recognizing the valuable role that each team member plays and how much the team hurts when one is gone. Some women seem not to understand this, nor do they care...its THOSE women who tend to PO everyone off.

Its a fact of life that women bear children and that residency coincides with active childbearing years. I want women to think about these options and not expect, at least not in our current society, special treatment and I want them to try and minimize the trouble their pregnancy causes.

I fail to understand women who PLAN on having a child right at the beginning of residency...like Dr. Currier did (had she not failed Step 2 I venture that she would have started residency on time with a newborn). But I would not dare to refuse them the right to do so even if it makes me angry...although I think most women have a bit more foresight and tend to deliver earlier in their 4th year.

It would be hypocritical of me to deny them the right to take time off...after I took time off to grieve a family death. Of course, I could make the case that I tried to work and failed to do so safely (or so I thought), rather than assume that would be the case. And I could also say, "well I came back to work post-op hour 36, why couldn't you?", but that's just because I'm insane AND realized that the team was ALREADY down a person (on vacation) and that my absence (albeit unplanned and emergency) would be a serious hit. I wouldn't expect the same of someone with planned maternity leave.

 

[Winged Scapula]

So really we're just talking about problems with gender roles in America and sharing of the second shift, the organization of our country's medical education, the way in which our health care system is run...

In some ways, yes...those issues are at the root of Dr. Currier's problem, although I think what makes most of us mad is the belief that she is using these issues to her personal benefit rather than any real belief in "the fight".

 

[BabyBop]

I completely agree with you. There is always abuse or lack of consideration by some people, and the rest of us are given a bad name. I still think a pregnant woman who is doing as much as possible not to let down her team, but still has to take some time off shouldn't be resented, because it really isn't her fault that the hospital is unwilling to cover her absence with a sub in the same way they would cover the janitor's, nurse's, or secretary's maternity leave.

I also don't understand the planned internship baby... although many people didn't understand my planned baby #2 in 2nd year and planned baby #3 in 4th year of med school. Just like people keep referring to Ms. Currier's poor planning (having a fourth year baby - isn't that supposed to be the best time?). I guess there truly isn't a perfect time. But some older women in my class, or some residents I've taked to, are a bit unrealistic about their projected fertility after residency, when they would be nearing 40. Anyway, that's a different story.

 

[Winged Scapula]

I also don't understand the planned internship baby... although many people didn't understand my planned baby #2 in 2nd year and planned baby #3 in 4th year of med school. Just like people keep referring to Ms. Currier's poor planning (having a fourth year baby - isn't that supposed to be the best time?). I guess there truly isn't a perfect time.

4th year is a great time, IMHO...I find issue with Dr. Currier because she had hers so late in 4th year that she:

a) was in danger of not even being able to take Step 2 if she had delivered early (she admits she was 8.5 months pregnant when she took the exam - and then was "so sick that she had to go to the hospital". Well, she shoulda taken it during her second trimester, huh?)

b) would be faced with a newborn and adjusting to her second child if she had passed Step 2 and started residency July 1.

Now far be it for me to tell someone when to have a child, but it would appear that it would have been better to have a her child a tad earlier so that it would not interfere with taking Step 2 and starting residency. I mean, if there was any chance of failing (and perhaps she was worried about it) and you knew you couldn't start residency without passing, conventional wisdom would suggest taking it early enough that you could reregister to take again before July 1 as well as not risk early delivery or just basically feeling like crap in your final 3rd trimester. But I'm mean to suggest that I suppose.

I think getting pregnant late 3rd year/early 4th year and delivering in the spring so that your child is at least 4 months old when you start residency would be best...probably sleeping longer at that point, going longer between feeds, your body is normalizing, you have a schedule figured out, etc. Then again, I'm speakly purely from a theoretical POV having never done it myself.

But some older women in my class, or some residents I've taked to, are a bit unrealistic about their projected fertility after residency, when they would be nearing 40. Anyway, that's a different story.

Its funny...I agree that many older women overestimate their fertility as they age and underestimate the risks whereas younger women do the opposite (ie, their fear of genetic defects after 30 well exceeds the actual risks and they often take risks, underestimating their fertility).

We see the same thing with breast cancer...young women overestimate their risk whereas the older ones underestimate it. I spend a lot of time telling young women that I don't really care that their grandmother or aunt had breast cancer and that their risk of many many other things far exceeds their risk of breast cancer, and trying with older women (like my own mother) to get them to understand the risks and at least to have annual exams and mammos. But personal beliefs die hard don't they?

 

[BabyBop]

Yes, yes, you're right. Obviously she could have taken it in her second trimester... I was referring to other people who say she should have planned to take Step 2 when not pregnant or breastfeeding, but if she's going to breastfeed for a year or more... you know. I mean, if you plan on having children in med school, you're going to have to take some major exam either pregnant or breastfeeding unless you take significant time off.

Also, "planning" for a baby is easy, but it doesn't always happen just as planned. So maybe some of the women who have babies right before starting residency were planning for an early 4th year baby, but it didn't quite work out. And you know women, once they start TTC, especially if having trouble (and already panicking "am I ever going to get pregnant?"), it's hard to say "oh no, too late, let's stop and wait 18 months before trying again". That baby fever is hard to turn off. I'm also speaking from a theoretical POV since I always get pregnant within 5 minutes of trying (usually after spending months trying to convince my husband, haha).

Alright, I'm off. Have a good week!

 

[biogirl215]

......

 

[ladynice]

This is why men think we are incompetent and shouldn't be in the work force. This is the kind of argument that gives these eastern and middle eastern fundamentalists and even christian fundamentalists in the west support to their argument against working women.

This lady has more then enough accomodations and I don't buy any of the BS she wrote on her blog response to all of us.

Then they are stupid. Babies take a lot of time that could have been spent studying. People who chose not to contribute to society by being babyless and getting better scores on their tests should not be advantaged by an antisocial behaviour. Society should favour behaviour that is a benefit for itself and not let having babies be a detriment for your career.

It's that simple.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

But some older women in my class, or some residents I've taked to, are a bit unrealistic about their projected fertility after residency, when they would be nearing 40. Anyway, that's a different story.

Is it that they're unrealistic, or is it really not that big of a priority? I'm 31 and am in second year now. When asked about children (hate getting that question), I say I might think about it during residency, but to be truly honest, I don't have a burning desire to have kids. If I really, really wanted kids and it was a big priority to me, I'd get working on it now. No one really knows about other people, but I wonder if that's going on more than anything. Right now I feel like it's possible I'll want kids later, so I'll try then, but I'm not really worried about future infertility -- if it happens, it happens. In all, I think people are pretty rational and don't delay pregnancy if it's what they really want. And telling people you don't want to have kids is a big thing and lots of times isn't well received. Woman are deemed as unnatural if they feel that way.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

Then they are stupid. Babies take a lot of time that could have been spent studying. People who chose not to contribute to society by being babyless and getting better scores on their tests should not be advantaged by an antisocial behaviour. Society should favour behaviour that is a benefit for itself and not let having babies be a detriment for your career.

It's that simple.

And to prove my point about why women don't want to talk about not having kids.

 

[Coastie]

Anyone who compares Christian fundamentalists (typically Southern Baptists) in the U.S. to islamofascists is quite mistaken. I see someone has been watching Christiane Amanpour too much.

This is why men think we are incompetent and shouldn't be in the work force. This is the kind of argument that gives these eastern and middle eastern fundamentalists and even christian fundamentalists in the west support to their argument against working women.

This lady has more then enough accomodations and I don't buy any of the BS she wrote on her blog response to all of us.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Is it that they're unrealistic, or is it really not that big of a priority? I'm 31 and am in second year now. When asked about children (hate getting that question), I say I might think about it during residency, but to be truly honest, I don't have a burning desire to have kids. If I really, really wanted kids and it was a big priority to me, I'd get working on it now. No one really knows about other people, but I wonder if that's going on more than anything. Right now I feel like it's possible I'll want kids later, so I'll try then, but I'm not really worried about future infertility -- if it happens, it happens. In all, I think people are pretty rational and don't delay pregnancy if it's what they really want. And telling people you don't want to have kids is a big thing and lots of times isn't well received. Woman are deemed as unnatural if they feel that way.

I think its an important distinction to make.

Women who know they want children but put off trying to get pregnant until after 40 may find that they are unable to have them or unable to do so without expensive medical intervention. A lot of young women don't understand this...they see people in Hollywood having children in their 50s and think it will be easy to get pregnant. After so many years of trying hard not to, its difficult to understand that you may not be as fertile as you thought. They also neglect to think about the emotional, physical and financial aspects of trying to get pregnant when your body doesn't want to do it naturally.

If they are like you (and I) and just don't have a burning desire, and realize that by wanting until a point when (and if) they do, they may risk decreased fertility, are probably better off. I recognized long ago that I didn't have those maternal feelings and also realized that my own mother probably never did as well, but she didn't have the choices that I do.

But as you note, its hard...people think they're something wrong with you if you aren't drooling to have children. They'll assume you hate children when nothing could be further from the truth, or that you're too selfish to want them. It gets better as you get older, and associate with a more educated crowd. The difficulty I find is finding a man who doesn't want children and isn't one of those swinger hipster types that doesn't want children because he dislikes them or doesn't want to be "tied down". Seems all the nice guys want kiddies.

I can tell you after a recent trip back home to see my friends from college, one (who has never really connected with me and doesn't really know me as well as she thinks she does) kept talking about how good it must have been for me to see my friend's children. Eh, they just don't interest me...its like watching football. I can appreciate that other people enjoy it and when something funny or interesting happens I react appropriately, but I'd rather be doing something else. Guess that makes me weird.

Don't worry...there are many women in medicine who don't have children and its due to choice, not chance.

But we are getting off the topic here, aren't we.

 

[Abilene85]

Eh, they just don't interest me...its like watching football. I can appreciate that other people enjoy it and when something funny or interesting happens I react appropriately, but I'd rather be doing something else. Guess that makes me weird.

I'm totally using this in the future. Maybe we have a mutation in the mother gene.

 

[Winged Scapula]

I'm totally using this in the future. Maybe we have a mutation in the mother gene.

Feel free to use it at your discretion!

It must be a germline mutation because everyone in my family thought I would "grow out" of it (my tomboyishness and dislike of baby dolls) when I hit puberty. Interestingly, I loved stuffed animals and Barbies when I was a child but was only interested in dressing the Barbies, my mom said I never wanted one of those "wetsy betsy" dolls or strollers, etc. and had little to no interest in my baby brother (except to pinch and torture him!)

I'm plenty feminine (love make-up, clothes, shoes, kitty cats, etc.) but I guess my maternal gene never switched on. The defining moment for me was several years ago when I was walking down some city street with my brother (who had always been a bit of a ladies man but by then was a relatively new father) and he was cooing or something over some baby who went by in a stroller. I was like, "huh? What baby?" I think I was distracted by some shiny jewelry or shoes on the mother! Even my brother thought it was a bit strange that a woman "my age" didn't appreciate the baby.

As I said, I inherited it from my mother who was never very maternal herself.

 

[Miami_med]

Men have the luxury of always putting their career before their family, women don't. You make it sound like it's an easy thing to work around, like planning a vacation. While women have some choice in the matter, the choices aren't great: Either 1) Never have children or 2) Have children during your training or wait until you're in the age when there's a significantly high risk for birth defects. These are decisions that men will never have to make in their lives. A little sensitivity is all I ask. Should only men be allowed to work in medicine because they don't have child rearing responsibilities?

I'm sure its sucks when you have to do extra work, but is it any different than when one of your co-workers gets sick or has surgery and has to stay home?

This is absolute garbage. Men have all sorts of considerations when deciding to have a family that impact a career, or are you implying that women shoulder the caretaker burden 100%. This argument, like all others, is both sexist and actually degrading to women. It minimizes a man's contribution to raising children as though he were some kind of useless side player that happily runs of to work leaving his helpless wife at home with his children.

The whole argument AGAINST women going into the workplace was that they would act like this woman is acting. Many women DO NOT act like this women and successfully prove that women can and do function quite well in the modern work environment. She can work in whatever she wants, but that isn't a right, and the expectation that everyone else should happily shoulder her burden or be graded relatively unfairly is a disgrace. We all make choices, and we all have disabilities or struggles. That's life. We make decisions. There are opportunity costs for all of them, and we each have to decide how we want to spend our time, because it is limited for all of us. At the end of the day, is the breast feeding more important to her baby than all of the quality time I'm giving up with my son to do medical school and residency? I really don't think so.

Back in the 1930s, when a woman's supposed place was, "barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen," the whole argument relied on the "physical incapabilites of women." It's amazing how the entitlement mentality of modern america has twisted this. It's gone from, "I can do just as good a job as men can do," to "I actually can't do the job but you have to let me do it anyway because not letting me do so violates my **insert made up right here**." It's insulting to all of the women who really do the job well, and it's insulting to my intelligence as another human being.

 

[Abilene85]

This is absolute garbage. Men have all sorts of considerations when deciding to have a family that impact a career, or are you implying that women shoulder the caretaker burden 100%. This argument, like all others, is both sexist and actually degrading to women. It minimizes a man's contribution to raising children as though he were some kind of useless side player that happily runs of to work leaving his helpless wife at home with his children.

You are taking it to an extreme, but in America today the woman in general is still by far the primary caretaker. Unfortunate, but true. If a dad changes a diaper, many people would say "oh look how nice you are to help out." But a woman can change 800 diapers without one thank-you. If working parents put their kids in daycare, chances are people who don’t believe in daycare would look down on the mother, not the father. If our society encouraged the man to be a primary caretaker, men would be allowed paternity leave.

Even in my house…who does the cooking? My mom. Who does the cleaning? My mom. Who does the laundry? My mom…well, she finally got on my dad’s case about that and he grew up and started doing his own laundry. I don’t think I have ever seen my dad press start on the dishwasher. He finds it a bit of an event when he actually goes to the grocery store (usually for steak to cookout, never for an actual restocking of the pantry). Now I love my dad, and I’m not saying he is a bad person for slacking off, but it really isn’t fair to my mom to work full-time and take care of the entire house. Obviously she has tried to get him to help more, but most attempts failed. I think my household is pretty average. Some men will be a lot better about sharing the housework (I have seen them) and some will be a lot worse (I have seen them).

While the second shift gap is closing, women are still taking on much more of the responsibility of kids and house.

 

[alwaysaangel]

You are taking it to an extreme, but in America today the woman in general is still by far the primary caretaker. Unfortunate, but true. If a dad changes a diaper, many people would say "oh look how nice you are to help out." But a woman can change 800 diapers without one thank-you. If working parents put their kids in daycare, chances are people who don’t believe in daycare would look down on the mother, not the father. If our society encouraged the man to be a primary caretaker, men would be allowed paternity leave.

While I agree that right NOW women are still primary caregivers but that is quickly changing and you seem to be ignoring that. There are many more Stay at home dads than there used to be. They are taking more responsibility. Your house is much more traditional than a lot of households are becoming.

At a lot of companies men CAN take paternity leave. I worked at a place where it was incredibly common place for men to leave for 4-6 weeks once their wives gave birth. (University of California system allows paternity leave for men just live women). So even employers are acknowledging the shift in responsibility.

 

[MossPoh]

Why would she post a blog with activating the comments section if she doesn't want to respond to people??? Was she hoping everyone would jump on the bandwagon and tell her what she wants to hear??

Most likely. If you look at the statistics, most people only read blogs for stuff they are interested in. The blog world polarizes stuff a bit....that is why you get those extreme liberal or conservative sites where people never really comment about the looney stuff. You always get a few wanders just to piss them off, but the author usually deletes those comments.

 

[Abilene85]

While I agree that right NOW women are still primary caregivers but that is quickly changing and you seem to be ignoring that. There are many more Stay at home dads than there used to be. They are taking more responsibility. Your house is much more traditional than a lot of households are becoming.

Maybe it wasn't particularly clear, but I meant to acknowledge that things are changing in this line:

While the second shift gap is closing, women are still taking on much more of the responsibility of kids and house.

From what I have seen, my generation (20s) seems much more open to sharing of household work. I still know quite a few traditional people in their 30s and even late 20s. We are in a MUCH better place now than we were in the 1950's, and my hope is that things will continue to improve until work is shared 50/50 in a two working parent household. Now, I have no problem with stay-at-home moms or dads, and I have no problem with one partner working less in the career world while taking on much more of the responsibility at home, but I do have a problem with 2 professional, full-time workers having such an uneven distribution of housework. However people want to split things up. I don't know anyone, man or woman, who wants to go to work 8-5, come home and cook dinner, then spend the rest of the night cleaning and whatnot while his or her partner chills in front of the TV or computer.

To my father's credit, he does mow our 7.5 acres and he can fix things when they break, but that still doesn't compare to the daily tasks in the house.

At a lot of companies men CAN take paternity leave. I worked at a place where it was incredibly common place for men to leave for 4-6 weeks once their wives gave birth. (University of California system allows paternity leave for men just live women). So even employers are acknowledging the shift in responsibility.

Haha. That's great, but Cali is kind of its own little corner of the country, doing things the Cali way. But often times trends start there and work East, so I hope this is one of them. Those of us in Ohio might have to wait awhile...

 

[alwaysaangel]

Haha. That's great, but Cali is kind of its own little corner of the country, doing things the Cali way. But often times trends start there and work East, so I hope this is one of them. Those of us in Ohio might have to wait awhile...

Ok, it just sounded like you were focusing more on the inability to change.

And as far as paternity leave, I happened to be reading an article that related. It says that "The federal Family Medical Leave Act guarantees certain employees (male or female) up to 12 weeks a year in unpaid leave to care for a newborn. Combine that with the fact that 17% of companies responding to the SHRM survey said they offered paid paternity leave, and 18% paid maternity leave beyond what's covered by short-term disability, and the opportunity exists to combine child care with self care."

So its federally mandated to allow certain employees 12 wks of unpaid leave - then 17% allow MORE paternity leave. So its already pretty common and written into law. So I bet if you looked around you'd find its more common than you think even in Ohio.

 

[Abilene85]

I've never heard of men around here taking paternity leave. Probably because it wasn't considered "manly" to take time off work to care for the baby. And men don't really need to let their bodies heal after popping out another person, so cowokers would probably get more upset with the extra work from paternity leave. I hope the boys start to take advantage of that more. I'll force my future husband to do that, if I ever have kids, so HE has to wake up in the middle of the night for feedings too and won't have the excuse of work in the morning!

But ya...back to pumping during exams...

 

[Miami_med]

Maybe it wasn't particularly clear, but I meant to acknowledge that things are changing in this line:



From what I have seen, my generation (20s) seems much more open to sharing of household work. I still know quite a few traditional people in their 30s and even late 20s. We are in a MUCH better place now than we were in the 1950's, and my hope is that things will continue to improve until work is shared 50/50 in a two working parent household. Now, I have no problem with stay-at-home moms or dads, and I have no problem with one partner working less in the career world while taking on much more of the responsibility at home, but I do have a problem with 2 professional, full-time workers having such an uneven distribution of housework. However people want to split things up. I don't know anyone, man or woman, who wants to go to work 8-5, come home and cook dinner, then spend the rest of the night cleaning and whatnot while his or her partner chills in front of the TV or computer.

To my father's credit, he does mow our 7.5 acres and he can fix things when they break, but that still doesn't compare to the daily tasks in the house.



Haha. That's great, but Cali is kind of its own little corner of the country, doing things the Cali way. But often times trends start there and work East, so I hope this is one of them. Those of us in Ohio might have to wait awhile...

Individual families make individual decisions about how to divide up housework, making money, taking care of the children, etc... I think that the last place we need any government mandates is on this. Individuals choose to get married and/or have children(atleast there are no more legally mandated arranged marriages in the US), and that is a decision between them. I actually don't believe that there should be any MANDATED leave time for men or women (that's an argument for a different day), though most people don't have a problem with a few days when necessary, mandate or not.

I don't think any of this has to do with better or worse, it just is. I recommend not marrying someone with whom you can't agree on the division of labor. There's nothing wrong with either way of doing things. However, there is something wrong with pushing the consequences of personal choices off on other individuals, and that is what is happening in the case of this woman.

 

[Jwax]

You are taking it to an extreme, but in America today the woman in general is still by far the primary caretaker. Unfortunate, but true. If a dad changes a diaper, many people would say "oh look how nice you are to help out." But a woman can change 800 diapers without one thank-you. If working parents put their kids in daycare, chances are people who don’t believe in daycare would look down on the mother, not the father. If our society encouraged the man to be a primary caretaker, men would be allowed paternity leave.

Yep... I also recognize that while this may be shifting towards more equality in household chores (including the child-rearing), the disparity is still quite large. I was a sociology major and remember a stat of something ~75-80% of the household work is still performed by women. So while men may be doing more, women are still doing a large majority. It also isn't changing quickly enough that any of us are likely to see a 50/50 division in our marriages.

Of course I don't support not allowing women to have children during residency (if you could even do that) or making them feel bad about doing it. But I want them to realize the impact their decision has on others and I want them to care about it.

To be honest, I never even consider any of the impact my taking maternity leave would have on the rest of the residents. I'm most likely going to pursue EM (but I'm only MSI), so maybe it won't be as big of a deal (since I don't think EM residents do on-call nights - correct me if I'm wrong). Thanks for bringing it up.

I really like the post by Jwax above because it is lucid and logical and says it better than I could.

Hey, thanks!

I recommend not marrying someone with whom you can't agree on the division of labor.

Nice thought... Where do you bring that up in the dating process? "So, do you do housework or do think it's the woman's job? How much of the child rearing do you intend to do? Will you change at least half of the diapers?"

 

[Miami_med]

Nice thought... Where do you bring that up in the dating process? "So, do you do housework or do think it's the woman's job? How much of the child rearing do you intend to do? Will you change at least half of the diapers?"

If this hasn't come up in the dating process, the dating process hasn't gone on long enough . I dated my wife for 4 years before we got married, there were few surprises when it came to these things.

 

[Terpskins99]

If she's having this much difficulty passing her USMLE (breast-feeding aside), how in the world is she going to deal with pathology boards (which I hear are among the most difficult of residency exams).

 

[Miami_med]

If she's having this much difficulty passing her USMLE (breast-feeding aside), how in the world is she going to deal with pathology boards (which I hear are among the most difficult of residency exams).

Sue for a 3 day open book exam.

 

[Jwax]

If this hasn't come up in the dating process, the dating process hasn't gone on long enough . I dated my wife for 4 years before we got married, there were few surprises when it came to these things.

My point was that by the time it has come up in a conversation, you are generally too far into the relationship to say, "Well... I guess that's something we just can't agree on. I know I love you, but... it's just not going to work." Can anyone actually do that? My fiance and I have been together 5 & 1/2 years now (getting married this xmas break ), and by the time I really realized I would either be stuck doing most of the cleaning and cooking or be forced to live off of take-out in a pig-stye house.... there wasn't much to do except determine that I'll get a house cleaner when I'm a 'rich' doctor.

Anyways. . . the thought is that you really can't determine who you are going to marry based on one component of a marriage that you usually won't find out about until you've been together for awhile (b/c that kind of talk doesn't usually happen in the first few months... or years maybe). That's all.

 

[Jwax]

Sue for a 3 day open book exam.

 

[psychophobia]

In case anyone's interested in today's Boston Globe story:http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/blog/2007/09/breastfeeding_m.html#more

 

[Winged Scapula]

There are a few more interesting comments to her blog, including one from "Dr Mom" (could it be our own Dr. Mom?) who notes that if she finishes a section early (which almost everyone does) she can add that to her break time.

Of interest in the Boston Globe article is the statement that she is looking for 2 EXTRA HOURS for breaks on top of what is already given. Dr. Currier states in her blog that she is only asking for 20 minutes.

If she wants two extra hours, that really is over the top!

 

[Cirrus83]

Not sure I get your logic. My point is that applying the issue of equality between men and women to pregnancy doesn't make sense because, duh, only women get pregnant. Although, I suppose you could make it work one of two ways:

1) In order for women to be equal to men in the work place, they should not get pregnant.
2) In order for there to be equality between men and women in the work place regarding pregnancy both men and women should get leave for child rearing.

I'm assuming by the tone of your post, you're an avid supporter of point #1.

I actually think a lot of people here are in support of #2. In Canada it's actually like that (just ask any of the canadian meds or pre-meds).