.

[Texicana210]

[deleted]

Edited September 7, 2020 by Texicana210

[Guest mands]

16 minutes ago, Texicana210 said:

I ask you to please read this without judgement, but also give it to me straight.

I was charged as an adult with possession of a controlled substance (a  3rd degree felony) when I was 17. I plead no contest (which I've read is generally considered a conviction), received probation, and the case was "dismissed". I'm 26 now and I just got my first PA school interview in Florida which does not grant licenses to anyone convicted of a 3rd degree felony or higher. I want to practice in Texas though, so I contacted the Texas Medical Board, paid for a review of my application, and got fingerprinted. All they could tell me was I am "potentially ineligible based on existing law".

I am wondering if anyone was tied to a felony and was able to get licensed or knows anyone who did.

I would be willing to move to other states or get my record sealed, but I'm worried how the school will react if I say in the interview that  I plan to get my record sealed, concealing my prior charge from the licensing boards.

 

Thank you.

i'm VERY interested in how this plays out. 

So based on how i'm understanding your situation though...Even if you got an interview,  you get accepted, they find your felony on a background.... YOU CAN STILL enroll but you can't get a license in Florida? It's weird that they don't weed you out right then and there based on the fact that you couldn't stay in state/local and practice (which I feel like is quite common for the mission of PA schools). So, you would like to go to texas to license after finishing, but they can't give you a straight answer that you may or may not be able to license?! <-- That's wrong of them to do to you, to be honest. 

So I pose the question to you (you don't have to answer), why texas? Is there any other state that you have looked into that allow people with a felony?

In terms of getting your record sealed, I can't say from an administrative point of view.... however (if I understand what that term means), if I was on a committee, I would see that as a red flag.. Based on the fact I feel like having possession of a controlled substance at 17 is really not that bad, whereas a sealed record could mean hiding something worse?! I wanna hear others weigh in on this too! 

Frankly, I don't believe in incarcerating/criminalizing minors for anything (besides murder, really) is ethical but that's a conversation for another day. I don't think that it's reflective of you, but i'm not an admissions committee.... and I think that for more "conservative" states it might be an issue. I'm sorry you're in this boat of ambiguity.