I think many of you are sorta forgetting something here: This is to work prescribing said drugs. Also, how in the world is the Med Baord going to go around trying to find out who uses what drug and in what quantities and how well they handle it, particularly when its all illegal to start with!
Here’s another useful question to put on the test: “Are you a liar?”
One of my colleages suggested that the question should be re-stated as, “Are you stupid enough to admit that you have used drugs in the past five years?”
Qadgop–as usual, your comments are spot-on and insightful. I have no worries about my own situation; I had been thinking about the issue, though, and I thought it would inspire interesting debate, which it has. That said:
This sounds like a perfectly reasonable approach to take–with someone who has had a drug problem in the past. It is slightly less reasonable for someone who claims to be a habitual user. For someone who experimented briefly several years in the past, though, it looks remarkably like stamping “druggie” on his forehead. I would consider this to be overreaction.
One’s residency director (at least) would almost certainly have to know that one is undergoing counseling and monitoring as a drug user; it doesn’t seem fair for the brief experimenter or seriously infrequent dabbler to have to start off residency with that black mark.
And yes, my class has its share of stoners, but it (and the other classes that I know) seem to have a whole lot of people who just never got much from pot. We all joke about how expensive our crank habits are, though.
Hamlet:
**
You and me both. The problem is that that’s not what they’re asking here. The question is asking if one has used illegal drugs in the past five years, at all. The guy who got passed the bowl at the Widespread Panic show in his senior year of undergrad has to give the same answer to this question as your benzo-popping surgeon–“Yes”. While the two are probably not treated exactly the same in the follow-up, I fear that they are treated far more similarly than I’m comfortable with.
Dr. J
‘Here’s another useful question to put on the test: “Are you a liar?”’ (erislover)
This is an actual question you will find now on some job applications. My best friend and I were looking for summer night jobs, and you would be amazed at the questions you can get asked at menail labor jobs these days. Ex:
Have you ever lied?
Have you ever done drugs? (yes, that vague)
Would you steal if you thought you were not appraicated?..
While these jobs were no pedaitric medicine or govermental database manager positions, it still shows a trend in job applications… Using simple questions to set up control senarios. Is there any other questions like “Have you done any illegal activities” or such on the test?
Also in this thread there is a very frequent reference to smoking “pot”. To me this seems to be one of those common “educated americans” on pot. Which is occasional or past use shouldn’t condem ones future (more the later than the former though).
Personaly I would tell the truth, but thats because I have some stupid adversion to lying. Ah well…
Thats what I think, and since I’m not paid to think take it as you will…
-Duncan
Yes and no. A good addictionist can differentiate between a potential problem, and normative behavior, and a good medical examining board will tend to follow the recommendation of a competent professional, especially if they ask for the opinion in the 1st place. Here in Wisconsin, it doesn’t even mean a public record of the issue being raised, as the license usually doesn’t even get limited.
But the public mood being what it is towards drug abuse, the Med Boards of the nation must also reflect this. So if they collect urine test results for 2 years, they can always point to the fact that they did their job. And a license to practice is not a right, it is a privilege, so if one is dragging any baggage behind them, they’d better be ready to jump thru whatever hoops the board deems worthy of setting out.
How about looking at this from the other direction? Isn’t whoever formulated the question lying by omission? They aren’t exactly being forthcoming about what they are going to do with the information, are they?
I think the applicants should have been told way in advance if any drug use at all was going to be an issue.
So, unless you know for sure what the policy is, of course you should answer “No.”
I would base my answer upon whether on not that information was directly relevant for the job, ie if any previous or present drug taking would impede my ability to carry out the job/be detrimental to others. It seems a self-defeating question: I can’t imagine any employers looking favourably upon drug use, so what incentive is there to tell the truth?
I guess I must be a moral realitivist.
If, as you seem to feel, this is a case of zero tolerance, then almost everybody is interpreting that question as “Are you stupid enough to admit to illegal drug use?” Zero tolerance policies force people to choose between lying or putting themselves at a severe disadvantage in the job market.
A person who answered truthfully, on principle, with the intention of perhaps advocating more realistic hiring practices, would accomplish nothing. And would be unemployed. A case of choosing one’s battles.
Well, I would tell the truth… 'course that’s not especially helpful, since in my case the answer would be ‘No, I have never taken illegal drugs’. However, I would still be annoyed that the interviewer/company felt the need to ask that question - what i did in my personal life 1/2/5/10/20 years ago is none of their damn business… if the question was ‘Have you ever been to work under the influence of drugs?’ THEN I can see a reason for them asking (but how stupid would you have to be to answer ‘yes’ to that one?)
But this is exactly an “Are you a liar” question in a different guise. The difference between people motivated to answer the truth because they haven’t used drugs will answer “no,” and the people motivated to lie because they have yet still need/want the job will say “no,” making the question’s answer totally useless at weeding out those who it is supposed to weed out.
If the test said, “Answering this question will have no bearing on determining the fitness of the applicant” then perhaps we would be getting somewhere. Even still, it is my opinion that the question cannot be asked and deliver accurate answers unless it is anonymous.
paididiot, heh, I’ve taken those tests too. I always score in the “ambiguous” range, whatever that happens to be (on some tests they score like traffic lights; in such a case I invariably get yellow).
Those tests crack me up. Like that is America’s businesses’ problem: those darned employees just can’t be used and tossed aside without problems. And they’ve lied in the past!
hehe
[sidetrack]
Luckily, my boss and I agree on most ethical and social issues’ solutions. Most. And we are willing to comfortably disagree on them when we don’t. Ironically, that man is a communist idealist! [shakes head] Strange way for the president of a company to be, eh? 
But by stating this, they are explicitly telling me that the question is not relevant to the job-application process - so why is it on the sheet in the first place? But I agree that they may as well have ‘Are you a Liar?’. In fact, if I ever have to write a job application form, I may well include that one just for the fun of it 
I’d also throw in some questions like: “If the sky were cyan with green stripes, what colour would a zebra be?” Anyone who wrote anything other than ‘this is a silly question’ would be instantly disqualified…
Ha, shadow, right on. There is no way that question should be on the test at all. When it is finally reduced to the point where it will probably give decent results, the answers become worthless! hehehe
If I were in a police station and a cop asked me that question, and then followed it up with a statement that any answer I gave him would not be harmful to me, I wouldn’t believe him. Is he asking just to make chitchat?
You have the right to remain silent. And you have the right not to be forced to give testimony against yourself.
Never admit to anything.
Thats a good way to be on occasion Cookeze… but with the fact that in this circumstance if one were to lie and then get caught, thats eight years of school down the drain. It becomes one of those stupid questions of “Fucked now, or fucked later”.
So all moral questions about lying aside… Would you rather risk not getting this job right now, and possibly putting a little red flag on your record… or perhpaps in the future (near or far) permantely losing the ability to get a job in the feild you prepared for…
I hate ethics…
-Duncan
I am going through this with military security clearance, I am choosing to be honest and let the chips fall where they may. However, as the medical board is not military intelligence, I wouldn’t worry about not telling them you smoked a joint once.
Erek
I don’t know much about the process for getting a medical training license in North Carolina. No, scratch that, I know nothing about it. But a lot of people are making the assumption that a “yes” answer is a death penalty. Is that necessarily true? I mean, it might just be the first step in a process.
From what Quadrop is saying, it doesn’t sound like the truth is a bar to getting the license. They’ll send you to talk to somebody and determine if it’s a problem. If the program is run properly I see some value in this question since it can be a step in protecting the public from problem doctors.
I guess what I’d like is some clarification. It seems a whole bunch of people are assuming that a truthful answer will end your medical career. Is that the case?
mswas, of course, depending on your level of clearance, the military might find out anyway, so it is in your best interest to tell the truth out the door. A medical examining board won’t, making it in your best interest to lie (unless you have an overriding principle of not lying, in which case it falls under scenarios I’ve previously mentioned). So, basically, a “me too” post that is longer than the one it is agreeing with.
Sorry, I’m still giggling to myself- that’s one of my favorite jokes.
Thank God I don’t have to wonder how to answer those questions anymore! Back when I would have had to decide whether or not to lie, they never asked stuff like that. It was just the standard “Have you ever been convicted of a felony?”, and thankfully I was able to answer no.
QtM nailed it- if you lie and they catch you in that lie at any time in the future, you could be completely and utterly fucked.
Most people probably would lie. They would balance one “little white lie” against being barred from their chosen career before it even starts.
I don’t have an opinion on other people’s moral choices- it’s none of my business! If it was me, I would avoid lying any way I could.
You have to know the consequenses of the answer. I shall provide a personal example.
After I got my DWI, I decided I still wanted to keep open the option of being employed in areas out of reach of mass transit, so I went to ASAP class.
The first class, we had to fill out a questionaire, and the questions concentrated not on alcohol abuse but drug abuse history. Now, I had already taken the time to learn that ASAP in Virginia is a racket, with the counselors being paid on a per-meeting basis. The information you provide is not confidential. I also learned that saying “yes” to any of the drug abuse questions meant a guaranteed five extra weeks of class, twice a week, at roughly fifty bucks a class.
I also had long hair, and looked exactly like what I was–a dope-smoking drunk. So when the counselor looked over my questionaire and matched it to me, he decided to call me out in front of the everyone.
“Mr. King,” he said in a most patronizing tone, “I notice you say here you’ve never smoked marijuana? I find that hard to believe.”
“That’s my story and I’m sticking to it,” I said, staring straight at him. He was not pleased.
The more I learned about ASAP, the more I realized that the ASAP folks weren’t under any of the constraints that law enforcement is under. Profiling, publicly airing confidential information, coercion, it’s all part of the game, and the House is rewarded by keeping you in the course for as long as possible, while also sharing any information they learn about you with the police. One person I knew who had answered truthfully was visited at home by police detectives–they were on the trail of a dealer in her area and thought she might know something about him.
It also meant that the next time I showed up to that class, I could expect a urinalysis, with all of the distasteful consequenses which would result from that. It’s a slippery slope from ASAP to the halfway house, especially when you’re essentially homeless as I was, and nobody gives a shit about you once you’ve gone there. I was dancing on the teeth of The System’s maw, and the tune to which I was dancing was “Pop Goes the Weasel.”
That’s when I decided Metro was my friend. I cancelled my insurance, which automatically revoked my license. So what did the bastards do? They threw me back in court for failing to show up to class. I had to explain to the judge that I had voluntarily revoked my priviledge to drive, and the judge, who was seemingly impressed, called off the dogs for me.
The hundreds of dollars I invested in the course was of course not returned. The only thing they failed to get from me was an admission that I broke a law completely unrelated to that for which I was being (rightly) punished. They made that small victory as expensive and as inconvenient as possible.
I hope everyone understands me when I say that their tactics were not illegal (as far as I can tell) or even unfair. It was simply one of the consequenses I had to deal with for my transgression.
That does not mean I cannot protect myself.
So was I wrong to lie? Hell, no! I was doing the most important thing a person can do, looking out for Number One. If you find yourself in a situation like that, you’d better lie, or your ass will be in a sling. As it was, I patched up my life fairly well and learned to live with the disadvantages I had created for myself.
But I don’t think it would have played out that way had I told the truth.
I apologize for the monologue. What I’m trying to say is that the truth is the most important thing you possess. You must decide how that truth can work for and against you. Sometimes, the truth can ruin you. You must decide whether or not that’s a price you’re willing to pay.