Death Benefit Read Online Free PDF Page B

questions asked, that Pia, as a young woman emancipated from foster care, would make a valuable addition to the rich tapestry of NYU undergraduate life.
    Columbia, on the other hand, had expressed early concern about Pia’s history and its potential effects on her independence and ability to empathize with patients. They didn’t voice their concerns in such a clear fashion, but Pia had gotten the message, especially when she was asked to undergo an interview by one of the medical center’s psychiatrists. Recognizing that she wouldn’t have been asked to do the interview if they weren’t interested in her, Pia had acquiesced. To her surprise, the interview turned out to be more pleasant than she had feared. The psychiatrist had been well versed in the inequities of the New York foster care system and seemed sympathetic when he learned that she had been under its questionable aegis from age six to eighteen. Unfortunately, she had never experienced an adoption or even a final placement.
    Although the psychiatrist did not have access to her records by law, Pia was rather open with him and explained her experiences, although she downplayed some of the grittier elements. She fully admitted that in retrospect she knew that she had been abused and that she had had to grow up without a nurturing presence in her life, but she added that rather than hindering her, she believed, her experiences would make her a better doctor. She also downplayed any symptoms she’d experienced such as her mild brush with an eating disorder as a teenager and the recurrent nightmares she still experienced.
    As the interview had progressed, Pia’s openness apparently won the day as the psychiatrist was equally open with her. He actually told her that he was impressed with how she had been able to cope and that he agreed with her that her experiences might make her a better doctor, especially if she became interested in a specialty like pediatrics. He told her that he was particularly impressed by her near perfect grade point average at NYU, her near perfect MCAT scores, and the fact that she had won acclaim as an actress with the NYU theater group. He said it was all indicative of her commitment to her goal of becoming a doctor and to the adjustment she had achieved to everyday life despite her history. He also told her that he would be strongly recommending her for admittance to the class of 2011.
    After the psychiatric interview, Pia had been ecstatically hopeful that she would be accepted. But months later she found out that it had not been enough to convince the admissions committee. There had been a number of people who’d apparently demurred, thinking it was too big a risk despite the psychiatrist’s recommendation. It took an unexpected last-ditch intervention by two people to carry the day. First, the mother superior offered to become involved and sent a flurry of carefully worded, beautifully argued, and persuasive e-mails. And the second person was Dr. Rothman, who, at the time, was sitting on the admissions committee for an obligatory three-year term. Pia found out about this surprising twist of events only years later, after working with Rothman during her third-year elective. He’d brought it up suddenly at one of their typically uncomfortable meetings. He admitted to her something that he said no one else knew: that he too had suffered through the New York State foster care system because he had been a difficult, hyperactive child. He said a diagnosis was not made until he was an adult, when he himself recognized he had Asperger’s syndrome. Pia had been stunned and was still stunned. Respecting his confidence, she had told no one about the revelation.
    “The last time you made a formal appointment to see me,” the mother superior continued, “you had sad news for us here at the convent, saying you had decided against joining us by becoming a novitiate. My intuition tells me that you are here today for similar reasons. I hope that