Supporting DACA recipients and international students pursuing careers in medicine: A pilot program for advisors.

The United States (U.S.) health professions are becoming more invested in diversity. Information on students who are undocumented or recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and international students on student visas entering U.S. medical education is sparse. Few programs offer targeted training for educators on advising students who are undocumented, DACA recipients, or on a visa. We piloted a virtual program for pre-health advisors and educators on supporting students who are undocumented or recipients of DACA and international students transitioning to medical school. Program evaluation consisted of an anonymous retrospective pre-post survey. Of 117 registrants, 40% completed the survey. Prior to the program, most participants indicated that they were unsure or thought students were ineligible for financial aid during medical school if they were DACA recipients (40% unsure, 26.6% ineligible) or on a student visa (30% unsure, 30% ineligible). After the program, most respondents reported students were eligible for merit scholarship or private loans with DACA (66.6% eligible) or an international student visa (60% eligible). Perceptions of students with DACA being able to lawfully practice medicine in the U.S. changed from pre-program (43.3% unsure or not eligible) to post-program (90% eligible). Participants indicated they were more confident advising DACA recipients and international students post program. This virtual program was an effective step in providing support for advisors who are assisting non-citizen or permanent resident students start their careers in healthcare. Our findings show the need for more information on advising students who are DACA recipients, undocumented, or on student visas prior to matriculating to medical school and throughout training.

Abolitionist Reimaginings of Health.

In 2020, the authors of this article published "Abolition Medicine" as one contribution to international abolitionist conversations responding to widespread anti-Black police violence and inequity laid bare by the COVID-19 pandemic. Over the past year, there has been a surge of efforts to abolish deeply embedded patterns of race-based oppression in policing and incarceration in the United States. In this essay, the authors continue to explore how health care can join these conversations and move toward a praxis of health justice. Using the framework of Ruth Wilson Gilmore's organized abandonment, the article revisits grassroots organizations and efforts that have been engaging in abolitionist health care all along. It also looks to current and emerging abolitionist policies and practices operating at the margins of status quo health care for models of abolition in medicine.

Your Patriotism Will Not Protect You: Anti-Masking Movements and the “War on Terror”

Susan Sontag famously discussed the problems of this metaphorical language in Illness as Metaphor, and this framing has become even more dangerous in the COVID-19 pandemic.2 The authors of this essay previously discussed the dangers of the militaristic #healthcareheroes metaphor that emerged in the COVID-19 era.3 We examined how this metaphor became a call for self-sacrifice on the part of healthcare workers while they lacked essential personal protective equipment (PPE), and yet were celebrated with costly military flyovers. While military metaphors, and metaphors in medicine in general, can be used to arouse and heighten sensorial or emotional experiences, they are often at the expense of the nuance that is required to implement public health measures that function beyond the scope of political parties. Media coverage of quarantine protestors showed them wearing camouflage gear and bulletproof vests, armed with nooses, axes, and guns, protesting mask-wearing mandates.6 While former President Trump repeatedly pointed fingers at China, and COVID-related anti-Asian hate crimes rose in the U.S., these protesters carried to the fore of American consciousness racist imagery and slogans, including, “Muzzles are for dogs and slaves, I am a free human being” and the infamous Nazi phrase from Auschwitz, “Arbeit Macht Frei.” In “Of Ziplock Bags and Black Holes: The Aesthetics of Transparency in the War on Terror,” Rachel Hall argues that the aesthetics of transparency belongs to governments who “understand security in terms of visibility” and that it is motivated by “a desire to turn the world (the body) inside-out such that there would no longer be any secrets or interiors, human or geographical, in which our enemies (or the enemy within) might find refuge.”

Narrative trajectories of disaster response: ethical preparedness from Katrina to COVID-19.

While COVID-19 brings unprecedented challenges to the US healthcare system, understanding narratives of historical disasters illuminates ethical complexities shared with COVID-19. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina revealed a lack of disaster preparation and protocol, not dissimilar to the challenges faced by COVID-19 healthcare workers. A case study of Memorial Hospital during Hurricane Katrina reported by journalist-MD Sheri Fink reveals unique ethical challenges at the forefront of health crises. These challenges include disproportionate suffering in structurally vulnerable populations, as seen in COVID-19 where marginalised groups across the USA experience higher rates of disease and COVID-19-related death. Journalistic accounts of Katrina and COVID-19 offer unique perspectives on the ethical challenges present within medicine and society, and analysis of such stories reveals narrative trajectories anticipated in the aftermath of COVID-19. Through lenses of social suffering and structural violence, these narratives reinforce the need for systemic change, including legal action, ethical preparedness and physician protection to ensure high-quality care during times of crises. Narrative Medicine-as a practice of interrogating stories in medicine and re-centering the patient-offers a means to contextualise individual accounts of suffering during health crises in larger social matrices.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the residency match among surgical specialties.

BACKGROUND: Despite unprecedented changes to undergraduate medical education and the residency selection process during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is little objective evidence on how the pandemic affected match outcomes such as matched applicant characteristics, interview distribution, geographic clustering, and associated costs. We investigated COVID-19's impact on the residency match by comparing surgery applicants' characteristics, interview distribution, and related costs from 2018 to 2020 to 2021. METHODS: Data from the Texas Seeking Transparency in Applications to Residency initiative were analyzed. Descriptive statistics, bivariate testing, and sensitivity analysis were performed to compare matched applicants in surgical specialties from 2018-2020 to 2021. RESULTS: This study included 5,258 applicants who matched into 10 surgical specialties from 2018 to 2021. In 2021, there was a decrease in proportion of students who reported a geographic connection to their matched program (38.4% vs 42.1%; P = .021) and no significant difference in number of interviews attended (mean [SD], 13.1 [6.2] vs 13.3 [4.7]; P = .136) compared to prior years. Applicants in 2021 had more research experiences and fewer honored clerkships (both P < .001), and these associations persisted in sensitivity analysis. Matched applicants in 2021 reported significantly lower total costs associated with the residency application process compared to 2018 to 2020 (mean [SD] $1,959 [1,275] vs $6,756 [4,081]; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Although COVID-19 appeared to result in a reduction in number of honored clerkships, it may have provided more opportunities for students to engage in research. Overall, the adoption of virtual interviews and away rotations may have successfully mitigated some of the adverse consequences of the pandemic on the residency match for surgical specialties.

Military metaphors and pandemic propaganda: unmasking the betrayal of 'Healthcare Heroes'.

Dr Caitríona L Cox's recent article expounds the far-reaching implications of the 'Healthcare Hero' metaphor. She presents a detailed overview of heroism in the context of clinical care, revealing that healthcare workers, when portrayed as heroes, face challenges in reconciling unreasonable expectations of personal sacrifice without reciprocity or ample structural support from institutions and the general public. We use narrative medicine, a field primarily concerned with honouring the intersubjective narratives shared between patients and providers, in our attempt to deepen the discussion about the ways Healthcare Heroes engenders military metaphor, antiscience discourse, and xenophobia in the USA. We argue that the militarised metaphor of Healthcare Heroes not only robs doctors and nurses of the ability to voice concerns for themselves and their patients, but effectively sacrifices them in a utilitarian bargain whereby human life is considered the expendable sacrifice necessary to 'open the U.S. economy'. Militaristic metaphors in medicine can be dangerous to both doctors and patients, thus, teaching and advocating for the critical skills to analyse and alter this language prevents undue harm to providers and patients, as well as our national and global communities.