Varun Hariharan BMS 6990 3 February 2024 Reflection Paper 1. The financial incentives for hospitals and healthcare corporations prioritize seeing as many patients as possible, which inherently leads to less time with each patient and a subsequent less personal experience for the patient. A hasty visit could lead to several consequences, ranging from missing socioeconomic factors, emotional aspects of the visit, and even important medical information. For example, omitting the social history aspect of a patient interview could lead a doctor to miss important aspects of the patient’s life that are exacerbating their circumstances (ie. poor diet and heart problems, smoking before the visit increasing blood pressure). 2. Fields that have high rates of mortality, particularly regarding terminal illnesses, would be the most difficult for me. In fields such as oncology, a large portion of the job is working with emotionally vulnerable patients and family members, and it is important to display immense emotional intelligence throughout. I think that to relieve the stress of this specialty, the doctor would have to be very naturally empathetic and compassionate. Insincerity can come across very easily in these settings, and a physician who is not wholeheartedly invested will not be able to tolerate that life. 3. Similar to my previous answer, I think that conditions that ultimately require a patient to determine the best course of action are particularly difficult to deal with. This is especially true when none of the options sound compelling (ie. operation with a high mortality rate vs grueling chemotherapy regimen vs refusing any treatment). I think that facing the reality of this situation and acknowledging that the attitude of a doctor at this time can play a large role in the decision-making process has helped me overcome these reservations. 4. During my gap year, I worked at a lab and for a PI who was incredibly impressive but also had a reputation for being very harsh toward her subordinates. I had seen her scold the receptionist and other members of her staff before as early as my first week on site. During one of our weekly lab meetings, I explained what I had gotten done in the previous week and my PI believed that I had not gotten enough done, so she proceeded to publicly scold me in front of the 40 other participants. She raised her voice, used language that many would consider unacceptable, dismissed any explanation I gave, and ultimately did not let me respond. This was difficult, and I rationalized it by assuming that her impressive career justified that behavior. What made me feel better was members of the meeting coming up to me and explaining that it was not personal and this was one of the PI's character flaws. 5. My lowest score was rumination, and the specific critique was that I may not give my problems enough time. This could lead to sloppy output as a future physician, and an inability to learn from previous mistakes. I would like to improve this so that I can spend more time thinking about my patients and adjusting for future scenarios.
