cbrsmurf Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 good to hear things kind of worked out for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcdavis Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 What a story. And what a shame it came to this. Like a lot of PC crap, the original intention if these questions has been lost, and it seems now that the licensing boards enjoy being nazi-like. The penalties here certainly outweighed the original "sin", and I am sorry that you had to go through this. Thank you for sharing the travail... And giving hope to others in the same boat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grinder993 Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 By definition, DUI IS problem drinking. Your denial of this is disconcerting..... Really?? Gotta disagree with you on that. Making a mistake does not mean you have a problem. Multiple DUI's I would say I yes, but single incident...No. People make mistakes. Please don't respond with DSM-IV BS about alcoholism. Judge not my friend..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE.PA.PAC Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share Posted July 30, 2013 Thanks to everyone that continues to send me private messages, and I am sorry to read that so many people are in similar situations (some with DUIs and some with other charges). It is stressful to say the least, but, again, it does get better. Anyway, to further address all of the questions I receive on a weekly basis I am providing a link that I have found pretty useful: http://www.fsmb.org/pdf/grpol_criminal_background_checks.pdf The aforementioned link lists all states that can do their own background checks -- along with those that cannot. For my situation, while I did apply and receive licensure in one of the states where they cannot do their own background checks, the others to which I have applied and since been licensed were states in which I applied in the same fashion as my initial state. This means I applied for licensure, answered "Yes" to the fact I have been convicted of a crime (as my expungement had not yet been granted). But these new states did not put up the same struggle as my initial state. Sure, they took their time, but it still came through without hassles. More so, after I had submitted my applications (but before I had received official acceptance or denial of licensure in the other states to which I had applied) I went ahead and sent my expungment documents as soon as they came through. That is to say even though I marked "Yes, I have been convicted of a crime," I still sent the expungement paperwork. Did it help? Maybe. This is because one license came before they had even received confirmation of my expungment. Nevertheless, if you can expunge your charge, then you should do it. For the 14 or so states the link says cannot do their own background checks, I would feel confident marking "No" to the ever-dreaded previous conviction question. But do not take this as legal advice. Again, as for PANCE, just answer truthfully and you'll be able to take the exam. This is my experience (and the experiences of others to whom I have talked). But do not take this as legal advice, either. I know that's vague, but it is what it is. Talk to a lawyer if it is really bothering you, but gut feeling is that it all works out. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aggesten Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 I live in NY too, and had a DUI in the past and just got my license. Granted, mine was a long time ago (11 years), but I'm just saying it's possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aggesten Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 i guess i have no shot at getting a PA license. I got a DUI Mar 2013 and i am done with school aug and have some great jobs lined up. still in court fighting to get it dismissed. does not look like that will happen. I am not a binge or a person who parties. One bad night. i have did my bs masters and pa program in 4 yrs. i suck!! i live in ny law is strict. I live in NY too, and had a DUI in the past and just got my license. Granted, mine was a long time ago (11 years), but I'm just saying it's possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d2305 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 We have enough problem providers to start an AA meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bohuntr Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 Here in Texas the Medical Board isn't much better. They want to know everything about you before they give a license; as if they are smart enough to know what to do with the information. They have given out super high fines for even minor infractions (a friend of mine got a 5K fine for prescribing an antibiotic to a friend) and they believe that they have a knowledge level higher than the rest of us pee-ons. Yes, it's cool to say that they are on the board, but can't that be enough? Do they actually believe that they have any superior insight? Other than keeping you from practicing to the optimum level of your license, did their decision help you in any way? Did it give you greater or lesser respect for the board? The belief that a four year old DUI should determine that starting license you have demonstrates that your board is completely devoid of a thought process. I think the Texas Medical board is similar, they are completely devoid of a thought process and just passing high fines to justify their existence, however pathetic it may be, because their fines and reasoning certainly do not earn them the slightest bit of respect. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jpjulz Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 To THE.PA.PAC: I got a DUI in October of 2012. I made a stupid and selfish mistake. I want to go to PA school but feel like I have no hope because of the DUI. What should I do? Do I have a chance? Do pa schools find out about it when applying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulfari Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Anybody have insight to OP's similar situation, but with charges being dropped/dismissed via Nolle Prosequi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maynard Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 @JPJulz This would be a good question to ask some admissions directors. I would recommend you start with the one answering questions in the pre-PA forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Febrifuge Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 To THE.PA.PAC: I got a DUI in October of 2012. I made a stupid and selfish mistake. I want to go to PA school but feel like I have no hope because of the DUI. What should I do? Do I have a chance? Do pa schools find out about it when applying? They find out when you tell them about it, if not some other way. If you're seriously considering withholding that information throughout the process of applying to schools, please do yourself and the profession a favor, and don't become a PA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoRyou Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 They find out when you tell them about it, if not some other way. If you're seriously considering withholding that information throughout the process of applying to schools, please do yourself and the profession a favor, and don't become a PA. As a PI I will tell you it is just too easy to get a background check these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grc5060 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I recently received a public drunkenness citation in Pennsylvania. My background check came back clear because the citation happened after. Will I have trouble finding rotation sites because of this charge? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BruceBanner Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 Possibly. Many school do a background check (and some rotation sites as well) prior to rotations. I would disclose it if I were you. The last thing you want is to have the school find out on their own, and expel you. They can and will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kep308 Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 I got a DWI 4 years ago, lowest level, and I got 2 interviews and waitlisted to one school. It's not a deal-breaker but definitely be upfront and honest about it. It's asked on your CASPA application. I emailed all the schools I would be applying to when I first decided to do this and even Duke said it would have to explained but that they've accepted people with DWIs. Not one school said it was an issue. However anyone pretty much can get ONE DWI but TWO?? After knowing how terrible the consequences, well that's another story. And as far as licensure, I don't think schools would accept people who couldn't be licensed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kep308 Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 bradtPA said By definition, DUI IS problem drinking. Your denial of this is disconcerting..... No, a DUI by definition is Driving Under the Influence, not 'you're an alcoholic'. And anyway, DUI, which, if you want to get technical is having ANY alcohol at all whatsoever and driving. And what point are you 'under the influence'? So you're telling us that you actually think that the person who has a .079 blood alcohol level and drives is a fine, upstanding citizen and someone with .08 is a raging alcoholic criminal? I mean, seriously, that makes sense to you? It takes ONE sip to put you on the wrong side of the law, not to mention .08 is a somewhat arbitrary number. If it weren't it wouldn't be quite so nice and round, do you think? Maybe .081 or .0768 or something like that? There are many, many people who have driven 'under the influence' but just never got caught, I'd say the majority of people who imbibe at all have done it at least once. How does a person know when they're taking that one sip that's putting them over the edge? THEY DON'T. .08 is hardly drunk, .10 used to be the legal limit. What you said is completely wrong, one DUI is hardly problem drinking, it COULD be, but 'not by definition'. TWO DUIs, knowing how absolutely devastating, and ungodly expensive it is, then, yes, then that definitely points to a problem. You should get off that high horse of yours. People who are so judgmental really don't make good caregivers, either. Just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator rev ronin Posted May 6, 2014 Administrator Share Posted May 6, 2014 bradtPA said By definition, DUI IS problem drinking. Your denial of this is disconcerting..... No, a DUI by definition is Driving Under the Influence, not 'you're an alcoholic'. And anyway, DUI, which, if you want to get technical is having ANY alcohol at all whatsoever and driving. And what point are you 'under the influence'? So you're telling us that you actually think that the person who has a .079 blood alcohol level and drives is a fine, upstanding citizen and someone with .08 is a raging alcoholic criminal? I mean, seriously, that makes sense to you? It takes ONE sip to put you on the wrong side of the law, not to mention .08 is a somewhat arbitrary number. If it weren't it wouldn't be quite so nice and round, do you think? Maybe .081 or .0768 or something like that? There are many, many people who have driven 'under the influence' but just never got caught, I'd say the majority of people who imbibe at all have done it at least once. How does a person know when they're taking that one sip that's putting them over the edge? THEY DON'T. .08 is hardly drunk, .10 used to be the legal limit. What you said is completely wrong, one DUI is hardly problem drinking, it COULD be, but 'not by definition'. TWO DUIs, knowing how absolutely devastating, and ungodly expensive it is, then, yes, then that definitely points to a problem. You should get off that high horse of yours. People who are so judgmental really don't make good caregivers, either. Just sayin'. ... and you called what I said in http://www.physicianassistantforum.com/index.php?/topic/13074-maxed-out-student-loans-how-will-i-pay-for-pa-school/ harsh? Allow me to be overly polite and suggest that, in light of your contributions to both threads, you certainly appear to need an education in both ethics and personal responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acebecker Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 bradtPA said By definition, DUI IS problem drinking. Your denial of this is disconcerting..... No, a DUI by definition is Driving Under the Influence, not 'you're an alcoholic'. And anyway, DUI, which, if you want to get technical is having ANY alcohol at all whatsoever and driving. And what point are you 'under the influence'? So you're telling us that you actually think that the person who has a .079 blood alcohol level and drives is a fine, upstanding citizen and someone with .08 is a raging alcoholic criminal? I mean, seriously, that makes sense to you? It takes ONE sip to put you on the wrong side of the law, not to mention .08 is a somewhat arbitrary number. If it weren't it wouldn't be quite so nice and round, do you think? Maybe .081 or .0768 or something like that? There are many, many people who have driven 'under the influence' but just never got caught, I'd say the majority of people who imbibe at all have done it at least once. How does a person know when they're taking that one sip that's putting them over the edge? THEY DON'T. .08 is hardly drunk, .10 used to be the legal limit. What you said is completely wrong, one DUI is hardly problem drinking, it COULD be, but 'not by definition'. TWO DUIs, knowing how absolutely devastating, and ungodly expensive it is, then, yes, then that definitely points to a problem. You should get off that high horse of yours. People who are so judgmental really don't make good caregivers, either. Just sayin'. Not to be rude, but I don't want to work with you. *IF* you're planning to go to PA school you should know that this attitude is not ok. This attitude is dangerous and the behavior of every single one of us reflects on the profession; we can't afford for you to have this attitude and your potential future patients can't afford it either. Specifically I'm saying this: the law has been written down. For good or ill, it is there. Wrong or right, it is there. When you decide to practice medicine, you have to be willing to submit to that law, no matter what. You can't go around saying, "Well medicare has a stupid and arbitrary law so I won't abide by it..." Or, "I'll fudge it...." That is fraud, regardless of whether or not you agree with the law just as much as driving with a BAC >0.079 is a DUI no matter how much you think the BAC threshold is bogus. When you commit fraud because you want to define laws around your own specific persona, you are still guilty of it and you are giving us all a bad name. Please tell me you understand this concept. It's not a hard one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradtPA Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 [/font][/color] bradtPA said By definition, DUI IS problem drinking. Your denial of this is disconcerting..... No, a DUI by definition is Driving Under the Influence, not 'you're an alcoholic'. And anyway, DUI, which, if you want to get technical is having ANY alcohol at all whatsoever and driving. And what point are you 'under the influence'? So you're telling us that you actually think that the person who has a .079 blood alcohol level and drives is a fine, upstanding citizen and someone with .08 is a raging alcoholic criminal? I mean, seriously, that makes sense to you? It takes ONE sip to put you on the wrong side of the law, not to mention .08 is a somewhat arbitrary number. If it weren't it wouldn't be quite so nice and round, do you think? Maybe .081 or .0768 or something like that? There are many, many people who have driven 'under the influence' but just never got caught, I'd say the majority of people who imbibe at all have done it at least once. How does a person know when they're taking that one sip that's putting them over the edge? THEY DON'T. .08 is hardly drunk, .10 used to be the legal limit. What you said is completely wrong, one DUI is hardly problem drinking, it COULD be, but 'not by definition'. TWO DUIs, knowing how absolutely devastating, and ungodly expensive it is, then, yes, then that definitely points to a problem. You should get off that high horse of yours. People who are so judgmental really don't make good caregivers, either. Just sayin'. Think before you leap, my young padiwan. Refer to the DSM-IV criteria. IF you go to PA school you will need to learn this. Just sayin''.http://www.alcoholcostcalculator.org/business/about/dsm.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoRyou Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 In May 2013, the American Psychiatric Association issued the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5). Although there is considerable overlap between DSM–5 and DSM–IV, the prior edition, there are several important differences Comparison Between the DSM IV and DSM V Changes Disorder Terminology DSM–IV described two distinct disorders, alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence, with specific criteria for each. DSM–5 integrates the two DSM–IV disorders, alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence, into a single disorder called alcohol use disorder (AUD) with mild, moderate, and severe sub-classifications. Changes Diagnostic Thresholds Under DSM–IV, the diagnostic criteria for abuse and dependence were distinct: anyone meeting one or more of the “abuse” criteria (see items 1 through 4) within a 12-month period would receive the “abuse” diagnosis. Anyone with three or more of the “dependence” criteria (see items 5 through 11) during the same 12-month period would receive a “dependence” diagnosis. Under DSM–5, anyone meeting any two of the 11 criteria during the same 12-month period would receive a diagnosis of AUD. The severity of an AUD—mild, moderate, or severe—is based on the number of criteria met. Removes Criterion DSM–5 eliminates legal problems as a criterion. Adds Criterion DSM–5 adds craving as a criterion for an AUD diagnosis. It was not included in DSM–IV. Revises Some Descriptions DSM–5 modifies some of the criteria descriptions with updated language. Source: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Good Leaders NEVER stop learning. PS I have the DSM V as a PDF, but I do not know how to attach it on here. If anyone let's me know how to attach it, I will be more than willing to share it. PM me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyM2 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 By definition, DUI IS problem drinking. Your denial of this is disconcerting..... Just to be clear, a DUI is NOT problem drinking. It is problem driving (and getting caught while doing it). Sent from my Kindle Fire HDX using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradtPA Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Just to be clear, a DUI is NOT problem drinking. It is problem driving (and getting caught while doing it). Sent from my Kindle Fire HDX using Tapatalk 2 Then we will just have to agree to disagree. Even DsM-V defines DUI as a form of substance abuse. What it is not in all cases, is addiction.http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/addiction/dsm5-addiction-swallows-substance-abuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BruceBanner Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Anybody who acts like they have never driven a vehicle within an hour or two of having a few beers needs to get off their high horse. That's all it takes. A DUI could be an indicator of problem drinking (certainly bad decision-making), kind of like a cough could be an indicator of pertussis. Doesn't necessarily mean it is. I always found it ironic how during PA school half of our class would get black out drunk and stumble down Main St. on a Friday night...or barf the next morning....or bang one of the upper classmen, and nobody batted an eye. But if someone had a DWI or smoked a little weed all of sudden they are a degenerate? Get real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acebecker Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Just to be clear, a DUI is NOT problem drinking. It is problem driving (and getting caught while doing it). Sent from my Kindle Fire HDX using Tapatalk 2 You aren't a PA, are you? I'm hoping not. Don't mean to be rude or anything, but this attitude is just not acceptable from a medical provider. Driving under the influence, whether you get caught doing it or not, is a big problem. It is problem drinking. It is problem driving. Everything about it is a problem, whether cited for it or not. Is this really a hard concept? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.