|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:56 am
I really don't agree with the ruling. Goodness knows how many women have taken the test before while lactating and I'm sure they all did just fine. What ticks me off especially about the decision is that her test is split over the course of two days which means that, if the test is at all content based, she has more time to go study which is BULLSHIT.
I know that this sounds elitist of me, but if she needs so many accomodations, then maybe she just doesn't belong in the field of medical research. Testing and licensing procedures and set up for a reason and they're supposed to give everyone a common playing field. And if you can't get through all the required steps on your journey toward a career well then, I'm sorry, but you're S.O.L. Go find something else to do.
This also makes me wonder what happens to all those other people out there with a temporary condition that's going to affect their performance on the test. What happens when someone shows up for their exam with a migraine? Do they get to take the test over the course of two days in a room all by their lonesome? No? Well, why not? Honestly, I'd be willing to bet money that a migraine sufferer is in just as much pain, if not more so, than a woman who has to delay expressing milk. And with the migraine, it's not just one problem. It's vision-changes, nausea and vomiting, and did I mention the screaming pain? Just trying to get through class and take a few notes while coping with a migraine is a tremendous task--screw trying to take my MCATs or something with one.
Life demands sacrifice, both in being a parent and in completing your education. What happens in the future when we have a lactating surgeon or something who decides that she can have the same breaks that this woman got? Are you really comfortable with her just handing your care or the care of your loved ones off to another surgeon who may be less qualified? I know I wouldn't be. And she gotten through her boards in a matter similar to this case, I would severely doubt her credentials and probably wouldn't put myself into her care in the first place.
You can't have everything in life. Eventually, you have to choose what's more important to you. Do you want to be comfortable or do you want to go into goddamn research? Make your choice and then don't b***h about the hurdles you have to overcome to reach your goal.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:59 pm
It's funny that a whole lot of people like to go on about how motherhood includes sacrifices, yet when a mother can't get what she wants for a good ******** reason, she sues.
Her getting extra time for this doesn't give her an equal opportunity, it gives her a huge advantage over everyone else.
The test gives you an insight as to what the job will be like. If you need your s**t handed to you on a silver platter, how the hell are you going to cope with the pressure of working in the medical field? If she can take all this time to pursue legal action, she can take the time to do the test like everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:31 pm
Well.... I've got nothing.
I think I let my emotions get the best of me and jumped to conclusions based on my limited knowledge of the issue.
I definately think exceptions should be made for the disabled, but these exceptions should be reasonable. If this woman was asking for excessive extra time, which it appears to me now that she was, it was unreasonable.
However, I have a problem with the judgemental or bitter tone I've sensed from a few people. I think that's what made me so quick to stick up for this woman. I don't think it's right to judge someone for their reproductive decisions, even if we disagree and find these decisions poorly made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:46 am
Well, I don't know if she was given too much time. I'm not going to argue one way or another. I have no idea how much time is reasonable and how much time is not. I have no idea why one amount of time would be give over another amount of time. So I won't comment.
But I still think it reasonable to make accommodations to allow a woman to express milk. Why? For the same reason we have legally mandated that certain employers give things like maternity leave. If a woman becomes pregnant and her boss wants to fire her because she'll need time off (an accommodation) we don't say, "Well, she should have thought about that before she had a baby!" Instead we say, "This woman has a right to give have children without compromising her career," and then act accordingly.
So, in short, I guess I just don't see the difference between the accommodation of giving a woman extra time to express milk and any of the other accommodations we pass out to people who have children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:59 am
She has gotten too much time. You know what, it's ridiculous. I'm not going to preach women's rights and then support a woman getting an advantage over everyone else because she's a woman who happens to be lactating. She can stuff it and go if she really wants to be in the medical field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:06 pm
But if she's just asking for a reasonable (which is, as we've said, subjective and debatable) amount of time to express milk, it's not an advantage, it's an accomodation. It's so that she won't be in pain and that her baby will be healthy. She's being treated differently because she has a physical need to express her breat milk. It's like giving someone with urinary/digestive problems extra bathroom breaks. Or like having a wheelchair ramp. Or a sign-language interpreter for the deaf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:51 pm
out of sheer curiosity: why the hell does she HAVE to take the test NOW if she can't even work for the next few months? why not take it when she can get to work right away afterwards? i know, i know, it's not my place to tell her when she can and can't take tests, but it doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:11 am
She's being selfish but not entirely unreasonable. Selfish because she can't work but is pushing to take the exam now anyway, but not unreasonable because there's a reason she's asked for a little extra time. I think she could probably do it in the exam time without extra time, but I'm not in the best position to judge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:26 am
Peppermint Schnapps out of sheer curiosity: why the hell does she HAVE to take the test NOW if she can't even work for the next few months? why not take it when she can get to work right away afterwards? i know, i know, it's not my place to tell her when she can and can't take tests, but it doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:56 pm
ShadowIce But I still think it reasonable to make accommodations to allow a woman to express milk. Why? For the same reason we have legally mandated that certain employers give things like maternity leave. If a woman becomes pregnant and her boss wants to fire her because she'll need time off (an accommodation) we don't say, "Well, she should have thought about that before she had a baby!" Instead we say, "This woman has a right to give have children without compromising her career," and then act accordingly. So, in short, I guess I just don't see the difference between the accommodation of giving a woman extra time to express milk and any of the other accommodations we pass out to people who have children. I addressed this in another post: Tragic Christmas This isn't like squabbling over maternity leave or denying a woman the right to work for having a child, because temporary absence is a part of any job and the employee fulfilled her obligations to get company benefits in return. Now, is she disabled? In poverty? Is doing the exam later than planned going to put her at some sort of serious jeopardy although she can't even work properly until she stops producing milk? Did she do something to deserve an advantage over every exam participant, although she certainly isn't the first nursing mother taking this exam? Seriously. To add to that, the same principles apply to vacation days and sick days. Even with legal mandates in place, they still require a certain number of hours worked before you're eligible. No one's being put at a disadvantage because some employees earned their own benefits and temporarily left in a situation where someone else could cover for them. It really can't be compared to a competitive licensing exam, where you're supposed to be responsible for yourself to begin with. PhaedraMcSpiffy But if she's just asking for a reasonable (which is, as we've said, subjective and debatable) amount of time to express milk, it's not an advantage, it's an accomodation. It's so that she won't be in pain and that her baby will be healthy. She's being treated differently because she has a physical need to express her breat milk. It's like giving someone with urinary/digestive problems extra bathroom breaks. Or like having a wheelchair ramp. Or a sign-language interpreter for the deaf. Urinary/digestive problems, being wheelchair-bound, and being deaf are usually chronic and lifelong problems, much like learning disabilities. They are not comparable to a temporary state of producing breastmilk. Also, it doesn't require giving loads of extra testing time and skewing everyone else's chances when you put a ramp on a building or when you simply explain the material for someone who can't hear. But then again, chances are that people with waste management problems or physical handicaps can't work in a demanding residency environment where they're confined to a hospital/lab all day and can't take frequent bathroom breaks on the job. At least deaf people can learn to read lips and communicate through writing. It really doesn't fit into the context of a medical licensing exam and what the profession itself will entail. If your health issue is severe but not lasting, then you are expected to reschedule your exam for another time like everyone else. I don't see how this woman is being singled out and "treated differently" for being held up to the same standards as any other person with a temporary condition. Why should her mere want to take the test now (when she can't even take on a full-time residency until she stops producing milk so often) interfere with the other students' need for a fairly administered exam?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tragic Christmas Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:44 pm
PhaedraMcSpiffy But if she's just asking for a reasonable (which is, as we've said, subjective and debatable) amount of time to express milk, it's not an advantage, it's an accomodation. It's so that she won't be in pain and that her baby will be healthy. She's being treated differently because she has a physical need to express her breat milk. It's like giving someone with urinary/digestive problems extra bathroom breaks. Or like having a wheelchair ramp. Or a sign-language interpreter for the deaf. The thing is, though, that breast feeding is temporary, whereas an actual disability (such as being deaf, needing to use a wheelchair, or having urinary/digestive problems) is not. Why can't she take the test after she weans her daughter? Is it really going to hurt her to wait a couple more months to take this exam?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:51 am
PhaedraMcSpiffy However, I have a problem with the judgemental or bitter tone I've sensed from a few people. I think that's what made me so quick to stick up for this woman. I don't think it's right to judge someone for their reproductive decisions, even if we disagree and find these decisions poorly made. If you caught a bitter vibe from me, it's because I am bitter about the situation. I think she's unfairly used her status as a woman capable of bearing children and lactating to gain an advantage and, in doing so, has just proved what so many people say about women being less capable than men because of their reproductive abilities. I'm also indignant at the situation because of the fact that I'm also going into the medical field and I know that every single one of these hurdles that I'm having to jump is there for a reason--namely, to make sure that I know my s**t and that I'm not going to hurt anyone once I get out there in the medical field. Like I said before, these exams were put in place for a reason and the conditions that they are to be taken under are also put in place for a reason. Possible employers (and schools before that) have to be able to evaluate your abilities on a level playing field with everyone else and I can't help but feel that her results will be skewed. The fact that her test was split over two days is enough for me to want a throw a fit. While all the other students are battling through test-exhaustion, she's off at home getting to spend time with her baby. I don't think the situation is at all fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:34 am
Tragic Christmas I addressed this in another post: Tragic Christmas This isn't like squabbling over maternity leave or denying a woman the right to work for having a child, because temporary absence is a part of any job and the employee fulfilled her obligations to get company benefits in return. Now, is she disabled? In poverty? Is doing the exam later than planned going to put her at some sort of serious jeopardy although she can't even work properly until she stops producing milk? Did she do something to deserve an advantage over every exam participant, although she certainly isn't the first nursing mother taking this exam? Seriously. To add to that, the same principles apply to vacation days and sick days. Even with legal mandates in place, they still require a certain number of hours worked before you're eligible. No one's being put at a disadvantage because some employees earned their own benefits and temporarily left in a situation where someone else could cover for them. It really can't be compared to a competitive licensing exam, where you're supposed to be responsible for yourself to begin with.
People also keep saying that if she can't compete she shouldn't be given an advantage to help her compete. But the simple fact is that if she tries to compete without help, she'll be facing challenges that the other participants aren't facing. So you aren't really judging her and her competitors equally; you're judging her with a handicap against her competitors without a handicap. We don't say, "Well, if she can't deal with the test because of her ADHD, then she couldn't handle the job with ADHD!" We make accommodations to help. And, unlike with her ADHD, this is a handicap that will eventually go away. Her breastfeeding will impact her job less over the long haul than a learning disability.
And I'm not saying she should get an advantage because I don't see how giving her a longer break with which she could express milk automatically gives her an advantage. Yes, maybe the time she was actually given gives her an advantage, but I'm not talking about the time she was actually given. I'm talking about giving her extra time period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:20 am
I'd also like to mention that there IS such a thing as a temporary disability. My school recognizes it. I know it's not the same as a lifelong disability, but it's still a disability. Like an injury. Or pregnancy. In this case, I think lactation counts. It's a legitimate physical condition. Maybe she's asking for excessive accomodation in this case, but some accomodation should be given.
Seriously, I'm getting fed up with the blaming and the bitterness. I thought being pro-choice was about respecting women's reproductive choices. It seems that some of the comments being made are not about her asking for excessive accomodation, but about blaming and attacking her for her choice and for asking for any accomodation. It really does not look good for the pro-choice side. It looks angry, bitter, and downright spiteful to women who do become mothers.
And like ShadowIce, I just can't see an advantage to her having extra breaktime. If she's just expressing milk, it's not going to give her muc of an advantage. If anything, it might hinder her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 9:15 pm
ShadowIce Peppermint Schnapps out of sheer curiosity: why the hell does she HAVE to take the test NOW if she can't even work for the next few months? why not take it when she can get to work right away afterwards? i know, i know, it's not my place to tell her when she can and can't take tests, but it doesn't make any sense. that makes sense. just getting it out of the way, i suppose. the only real difference is that it seems she has to go through quite a bit of trouble to take it now. it is a pretty serious test, though, so it makes sense to worry about forgetting the gist of it in a couple months. i was just wondering...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
