Request For Official State Of Maine Immunization Record: Fill & Download for Free

To: Madam Secretary ClintonDate: January 22, 2009Re: Political strategy, 2016Thanks to the time-travel machine that Elon and Grimes Musk let me borrow, I’ve just returned from 2016, and let me tell you, you’re in luck!Come 2015, you’re the clear front-runner choice, you’ll have the endorsement of a president with great personal popularity, your only viable primary opponent will have joined the Democratic Party at the last-minute, and is — get this — a cranky 70-year old, hunched over self-described socialist with a penchant for shouting who honeymooned in Moscow and whose most concrete legislative accomplishment is likely to be renaming a courthouse.You’ll have the entire DNC establishment leaning on the scale for you — you’ll even get a debate question or two in advance so you can really knock it out of the park!And, while sure, a few Americans might be reluctant to see a woman in the White House, that number will be dwarfed by the millions of Americans who will WANT to vote for you primarily because you’re a woman. In fact, for millions, your gender will be top of mind as to why they’re supporting you, far beyond any specific policy notions. So the fact that you’re female is a huge net positive for you. Plus, you’re a centrist Democrat, so you’ll have CNN, CBS, The New York Times, The Washington Post, the LA Times, NBC, MSNBC, NPR, PBS, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, Time, much of academia (at least those who don’t favor the socialist), Hollywood, Silicon Valley and the music industry all generally in line with your political perspectives. And even if you do happen to get yourself into some legal trouble, you’ll have the Lynch DOJ doing its level best to cover for you, handing out immunity agreements like they’re candy.As if all this weren’t enough, in the general election after the primary, you’ll also be running against the most unfavorable opponent in US history: Donald Trump! Yes, that Donald Trump! And there’s a hot mic Access Hollywood tape snippet that NBC is going to leak for you that’ll be awesome. I’m serious.So, your winning “strategy” isn’t rocket science; it’s simply a set of straightforward tactical steps, all entirely in your control:First off, why am I sending this to [email protected]? Why isn’t this a dot-gov address? Good lord, don’t set up an off-books, self-hosted email server. Just don’t. You’re a Secretary of State, and you’ve got to be aware that you’re not exactly trusted in the public eye.If you feel you have to, at the very least, ask someone in authority for official permission.Don’t mix foundation and federal workDon’t lie about it if you didDon’t joke about itDon’t correspond with the president via his pseudonym over your server. How is that not classified?Read US 18, S793(f), it’s only a paragraph. Note that it only requires gross negligence — they don’t even have to prove that you intended to do harm. So don’t be careless.Pay attention in your numerous classified information briefings: information is classified by its content, not its markings or headers.Don’t stonewall FOIA and Federal Records Act requests; it’ll look like you’re hiding somethingDon’t refuse requests to have an independent observer review ALL emailsDisclose it properly if you do set up a self hosted email serverDon’t say you did so “for convenience,” cuz pretty much everyone knows how to set up multiple email accounts on a single device, and it’ll sound like you’re trying to pull something over on peopleIf you finally do try to come clean about it, do so fully, and recognize that people feel a right to their own documents. Work related correspondence is not yours, they are the people’s records. Don’t lie repeatedly, and for god’s sake don’t stage a disingenuous non-mea-culpa under a painting of Guernica.Don’t allow team members to delete Congressionally subpoenaed archives, because that’s a felonyDon’t accept millions of dollars in foreign donations for the foundation and/or speaking fees while you are a sitting Secretary of State, because that’s a major conflict of interest. You remember that agreement that you worked out with the Obama administration about disclosure? Abide by it.If you hear that your husband is going to meet with the Attorney General while you’re being investigated by the FBI, do what you can to stop himDon’t call half of your opponent’s voters deplorableDon’t say that you’re gonna “put a lot of coal miners out of work”Don’t use lame terms like “Everyday Americans” that only confirm a negative perception that you might be a little elitist and at a minimum overly poll-drivenDon’t shout into the camera “YOU MAY ASK YOURSELF WHY AREN’T I AHEAD BY FIFTY POINTS?” because literally no one will be asking that by thenHave an authentic, consistent and inspiring message that comes from within, not pollsters. A camel is a horse designed by committee.Visit Wisconsin. I mean, you know it’s not assured, right? This is the state that elected Paul Ryan and Scott Walker.Know that in 2016, hardly any Americans are actually going to deeply care about Dorothy Rodham, whether she got on or off a train, or whatever the hell she did. But we fully understand her life was meaningful to you. But is my deceased mom’s life story going to change your vote? I thought not.Understand that while Obama was personally popular (witty, great comic timing, good orator, intelligent, fit, good looking, by all data a very good father, etc) many of his policies weren’t. A lot of people weren’t happy with the single biggest “achievement” of the Obama administration— the ACA. The American public doesn’t love being lied to, insulted or taken for fools.Understand that a lot of the public was also quite unhappy with Obama’s foreign policy results (ISIS-as-JV-team, “violent extremism”, Russian reset, Crimea, Ukraine, Blown opportunities with the Arab Spring, Syria, Libya, Iran deal, South China Sea, etc.)Don’t allow a primary to be, or even seem to be, rigged in your favor, because it’ll really piss off people if they feel the primary wasn’t fair, and many of them won’t support you in the generalIf you’ve got pneumonia, be willing to state it up front and take a week or two off the campaign trail. It’s not a big deal. But fainting and lying about allergies or something might cause people to trust you less.Don’t just rely on data. Listen to people and understand why a lot of Americans are rightly tired of identity politics, and think sometimes “political correctness” and hard-left shutdowns have gone too farSince one of your main negatives is that people think you’re elitist and aloof, don’t rope off the press, either metaphorically or literally. Travel on the same bus/plane with them.I feel silly even writing the above, because they’re not rocket science. No one seeking the trust of the American people would have any doubt about any of these, and you’re a smart, Yale-educated lawyer that’s “the most qualified presidential candidate in history*”!Anyhoo. The items above are so fundamental I’m sure I didn’t even have to write them down. But I felt I had to say it. Hell, you could probably even get by flubbing a couple of these, but for God’s sake don’t blow all of them.So good luck, Madam President, you’ve got it made.PS: Buy AMZN.*Oh and hey, sorry Thomas Jefferson! I know you were a Continental Congress delegate, that you not only signed the Declaration of Independence but wrote it, that you were a Minister to France and eventually Secretary of State who helped get the French to tip the scales to solidify our independence as a nation, served as Governor of Virginia and Vice President of the United States and all, but she traveled way more miles than you.

I don’t know whether to thank or curse you for the A2A, Neil. As a general rule, I don’t answer questions with more than 20 answers[1] , as by that point I assume that everything that can be said has been said. However, the 495 answers that the edit log says this question has received at the time of this writing are… Well, I’ll get to those; but, suffice to stay, they stopped me in my tracks[2] .The short of it is that the broad character and quality of the answers was distressing enough to keep me awake at night - so thanks for that.This answer will be far from my lengthier magna opera, but I’m going to take it in four parts. Part I will unpack the question. Part II the answers to date. Part III the core of my answer. Part IV some concluding thoughts.Part I: Unpacking the question.I’m going to be honest with you, Neil: the question as worded is confusing, and I reckon that confusion has contributed greatly to many of the dismissive answers you’ve received to-date (to be discussed in Part II). As we say in policy circles, if you get the question wrong, your solution will also be wrong[3] .Let’s look at the question.Given that nothing in the US Constitution gives citizens or the president a right to keep tax returns secret, shouldn’t Federalist Supreme Court justices agree that statutes requiring presidents or candidates to release their tax returns are valid?There are two problems. The first is that you’re leading with a fallacy (ie, that because the Constitution is silent on one thing, it is permissive of another), and the second is that you’re obscuring the main controversy (ie, statutes requiring presidents and presidential candidates to disclose their taxes) by making Supreme Court justices the subject of the question. This becomes apparent when you move the opening, dependent clause to the end of the question as such:Shouldn’t Federalist Supreme Court justices agree that statutes requiring presidents or candidates to release their tax returns are valid given that nothing in the US Constitution gives citizens or the president a right to keep tax returns secret?Which leaves as the basic, subject-verb-object simple sentence:Shouldn’t Supreme Court justices agree the statutes are valid?But then that reveals a second logical error, which is that you’ve assumed the validity of the statutes in the first place - which I’ll discuss in detail later. Between the two fallacies and the confusing phraseology, you’ve invited not just a great deal of hostility to how you’ve presented the question, but a plethora of answers which miss the mark simply because they missed the point of the question.For my purposes, the form of the question I will address in Part III will be:Would statutes requiring sitting presidents or presidential candidates to release their tax returns be valid under the Constitution?That strikes me as a fair interpretation of the intent of the question stripped of fallacies and convoluted structure.Part II: Unpacking the answersSo… I tried reading all of the answers to-date - really, because I’m going to be pretty harsh here. But I think I got about 200 deep before I got the gist of things and finally went to bed.Based on my sample, though, I confidently assert that the overwhelming majority of answers to this question are wrong.Now, just as an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of typewriters for an infinite amount of time might ultimately produce Shakespeare, the sheer volume of answers has provided the contours of a single, correct answer, but they’re lost in the morass of derisiveness and, well, wrongness that otherwise pervades the feed.Without giving air time to the answers that are wrong by virtue of their curtness, hostility, or rambling, tangential screeds, here are the main themes that the substantive answers get wrong.Over-reliance on the Fourth AmendmentIn challenging the leading assertion that there is “nothing in the Constitution [that] gives citizens or the president a right to keep tax returns secret,” many, if not the bulk of answers, point you to the Fourth Amendment, which states:The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.Using the Fourth Amendment to debunk the assertion isn’t wrong (ie, there is, in fact, something in the Constitution), but where most of these answers went on to err was asserting that the implied right to privacy contained within the Fourth Amendment is absolute.It is not.The Fourth Amendment protects “the right . . . against unreasonable searches and seizures,” and there may be (and are, as we’ll see) reasonable grounds to demand one’s “papers,” which so-far has been categorically unexplored by the answers.Over-reliance on the Ninth AmendmentEither in isolation or in combination with articulation of the Fourth Amendment, a number of answers have tried to challenge the core of your leading assertion by pointing out that the Constitution itself - through the Ninth Amendment - effectively says, “Don’t take my silence to be absolute.”The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.But as with discussion of the Fourth Amendment, the answers generally fail to go on to address the implicit question: “Why do you assume that the Ninth Amendment affords an absolute protection?”Incorrect application of the Tenth AmendmentAs with the Ninth Amendment, several answers invoked the Tenth to challenge the assertion that absence of authority is permission of conduct. But just as many answers challenged you on whether you read the Constitution, I wondered whether any who invoked the Tenth had ever read it - even when they quoted it:The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.While the Ninth Amendment concerns rights not articulated by the Constitution, the Tenth Amendment concerns powers; more specifically, it articulates that powers not given to the Federal government are retained by the States - or, if the States have not assumed such powers, then to the people.The Tenth Amendment is ultimately your best argument for defending your assertion: that is, if the States choose to legislate to mandate political candidates’ disclosure of tax returns, that may be a legitimate exercise of the States’ powers (it isn’t, as I’ll discuss in the next part, but it was your strongest argument).Asserting lack of jurisdiction and over-reliance on the Fifth AmendmentSome of the most popular answers to-date assert that your question fails because there either aren’t any such statutes in the first place; that the only relevant statutes are those which explicitly protect the privacy of a person’s tax returns, regardless of Constitutional provisions; or, no entity outside of the IRS has any scope to see a person’s tax returns, regardless of Constitutional provisions.The most popular answer to-date even contains this breathtaking assertion:States have no authority over federal taxes or returns therefore, in turn, they also have no authority to demand their release or examine them.I’m sure that would come as a shock to the many state prosecutors who have relied on persons’ federal tax returns to prove the commission of financial crimes under their state’s laws. Let the appeals begin! (cc: Andrew Weill)Of the 200-ish answers I scoped prior to writing mine, only two cited the statute governing Congress’ authority to demand and examine a person’s tax returns[4] (and one of them incompletely, thus incorrectly):(f) Disclosure to Committees of Congress(1) Committee on Ways and Means, Committee on Finance, and Joint Committee on TaxationUpon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request, except that any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure.(2) Chief of Staff of Joint Committee on TaxationUpon written request by the Chief of Staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish him with any return or return information specified in such request. Such Chief of Staff may submit such return or return information to any committee described in paragraph (1), except that any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure.(3) Other committeesPursuant to an action by, and upon written request by the chairman of, a committee of the Senate or the House of Representatives (other than a committee specified in paragraph (1)) specially authorized to inspect any return or return information by a resolution of the Senate or the House of Representatives or, in the case of a joint committee (other than the joint committee specified in paragraph (1)) by concurrent resolution, the Secretary shall furnish such committee, or a duly authorized and designated subcommittee thereof, sitting in closed executive session, with any return or return information which such resolution authorizes the committee or subcommittee to inspect. Any resolution described in this paragraph shall specify the purpose for which the return or return information is to be furnished and that such information cannot reasonably be obtained from any other source.The use of shall in those paragraphs is key[5] . It isn’t that Congress has the authority to ask for permission to see a person’s tax returns, it has the express authority to demand and examine them, and they “shall” be provided for such purpose.A number of answers - almost all without citing the above statute - have gone on to challenge Congress’ authority to enter into such examinations without a “legitimate purpose.” The Supreme Court, however, has already ruled that Congress has broad investigatory powers that includes examination of a person’s financial details[6] [7] :We are of opinion that the power of inquiry -- with process to enforce it -- is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function. It was so regarded and employed in American legislatures before the Constitution was framed and ratified. . . .A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change, and where the legislative body does not itself possess the requisite information -- which not infrequently is true -- recourse must be had to others who do possess it. Experience has taught that mere requests for such information often are unavailing, and also that information which is volunteered is not always accurate or complete, so some means of compulsion are essential to obtain what is needed. All this was true before and when the Constitution was framed and adopted. In that period, the power of inquiry, with enforcing process, was regarded and employed as a necessary and appropriate attribute of the power to legislate -- indeed, was treated as inhering in it. Thus, there is ample warrant for thinking, as we do, that the constitutional provisions which commit the legislative function to the two houses are intended to include this attribute to the end that the function may be effectively exercised.The contention is earnestly made on behalf of the witness that this power of inquiry, if sustained, may be abusively and oppressively exerted. If this be so, it affords no ground for denying the power. The same contention might be directed against the power to legislate, and, of course, would be unavailing. We must assume for present purposes that neither houses will be disposed to exert the power beyond its proper bounds, or without due regard to the rights of witnesses. But if, contrary to this assumption, controlling limitations or restrictions are disregarded . . . a witness rightfully may refuse to answer where the bounds of the power are exceeded or the questions are not pertinent to the matter under inquiry.Now, that latter statement sets up another of the most common assertions made in the answers to-date, which is reliance on the Fifth Amendment to shield someone from self-incrimination by way of illicit declarations on their tax returns.It is true that people are required to declare illicit sources of income on their taxes, and may claim protections in such returns[8] …If the form of return provided called for answers that the defendant was privileged from making, he could have raised the objection in the return, but could not on that account refuse to make any return at all.…however, that is not an absolute defence to having tax returns introduced as evidence in criminal prosecutions[9] .In combination with Congress’ declared, broad authority to make investigations in order to ascertain the adequacy of existing tax laws or, say, evidence of bribery or Emoluments Clause violations that may require impeachment and removal of Federal officials, the notion that Congress has no jurisdiction is patently false.And in combination, the government’s legitimate interests in ensuring citizens’ compliance with tax law absolutely generates reasonable grounds to demand and examine a person’s tax returns, scuttling the Fourth Amendment argument put forward in so many answers.However, that alone isn’t sufficient to answer the question.Part III: My answerOf the answers I scanned, only two came close to the Constitutional provision which actually holds over the question:No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.The Supreme Court has previously ruled that states cannot add qualifications to office beyond what’s in the Constitution[10] . While the existing ruling concerned candidates for Congressional office, there’s little question that the principles would apply to presidential candidates:[T]he power to add qualifications is not part of the original powers of sovereignty that the Tenth Amendment reserved to the States. Petitioners' Tenth Amendment argument misconceives the nature of the right at issue because that Amendment could only "reserve" that which existed before. As Justice Story recognized, "the states can exercise no powers whatsoever, which exclusively spring out of the existence of the national government, which the constitution does not delegate to them .... No state can say, that it has reserved, what it never possessed."Likewise, the Supreme Court has previously ruled that Congress also has no scope to add qualifications beyond the Constitution[11] :[A]nalysis of the "textual commitment" under Art. I, § 5 has demonstrated that, in judging the qualifications of its members, Congress is limited to the standing qualifications prescribed in the Constitution.Therefore, any statute that would require a president or presidential candidate to release their tax returns as a condition of candidacy or qualification to receive electoral votes would be patently unconstitutional.Moreover, while I dismissed the broad assertions of the Fourth Amendment’s applicability earlier, I also said that it wasn’t necessarily incorrect to cite it. Indeed, the Fourth Amendment, on its own and in combination with others, has been said to create “a zone of privacy” that cannot be violated without due process[12] .While Congress has the power to demand a person’s tax returns as an exercise of its legitimate investigatory powers, the same could not be said of the states requiring disclosures for the sake of record-keeping, nor to the public for the sake of transparency. Even in Congress’ power to examine a person’s tax returns, they must do so in closed session unless given express permission of the individual under scrutiny.And so even if the mandate were made separate from any condition of running for office, coercing someone to violate their privacy - even if given some guarantee of immunity or security in secrecy - would almost certainly be ruled to be an unconstitutional violation.Part IV: Concluding thoughtsThe most frustrating thing about this question and the answers it had so-far received was that there are engaging points to be made, but the hostility the question provoked - between its fallacious wording and, let’s be obvious now, the direct challenge to President Trump fiercely resisting any examination of his taxes[13] [14] - took priority over serious examination of those issues.More to the point: the most upvoted and distributed answers to this question are patently wrong, but they served a reinforcing tribal purpose, and succeeded solely on that merit. And yet, had they taken a pause and made serious examination of the issues, they still could have made a defence of President Trump on the facts.That was really what kept this question and the answers floating in my mind overnight.As well aware as I am of my reputation for liberally footnoting my answers[15] , I do it for a reason: So that people can, if they’re inclined, check my work and debate me on the facts.However, I could count the number of sources the hundreds of authors to-date used to answer this question on two hands, and yet they largely presumed to be authoritative without even offering the weakest of evidence.Moreover, given the tedious repetition of the arguments in the answers, it was plain that few, if any, had bothered to see if their case had already been made and could be buttressed rather than repeated, and so decided to shout for the sake of opining.But what distresses me isn’t that people are wrong, or even that people might disagree with me - it was the confidence of the wrongness, no different than the fallacies within the question as presented, and the fact that people who should know better went along with it because it served a tribal purpose.I’ve been on Quora and engaged in politics long enough that I should be neither surprised nor bothered by that - and, indeed, I generally don’t care about people holding biases[16] - but seeing literally hundreds of answers that were such a gross, obvious display of tribalism over reasoning (when, again, reasoned answers could have served the same purpose) gave me a disquieting pause.Also, Neil, now that you have almost closed in on 500 answers to the question, I would strongly encourage you to stop asking for additional answers. It’s not that I believe that I’ve provided such a commanding response that no other could have merit, but you’re now well beyond the point of diminishing returns.Footnotes[1] Carter Moore's answer to Before posting your own answer to a question on Quora, do you read what everybody else has written? Why or why not?[2] Carter Moore's answer to How do you write your Quora answers? How do you decide what questions you will answer? How long does it typically take for you to answer a question? Do you plan out your answers?[3] Carter Moore's answer to What is analytical writing?[4] 26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information[5] Carter Moore's answer to How has Donald Trump successfully blocked Congress from obtaining a copy of his tax returns?[6] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 (1927)[7] In Teapot Dome Case, Supreme Court Cemented Congressional Power to Investigate[8] United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259 (1927)[9] Garner v. United States, 424 U.S. 648 (1976)[10] U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995)[11] Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969)[12] Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)[13] The many times Donald Trump promised he was going to release his tax returns [14] President Trump asks Supreme Court to block access to his tax returns, setting up separation of powers battle[15] https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-fit-in-on-Quora/answer/Tom-Robinson-110/comment/120715406[16] Carter Moore's answer to What's wrong with being "politically biased"?

Q. Can someone do a sub-internship in the USA, being a medical graduate?A. My standard answer would have been sub-internships are reserved for medical students who have not graduated. Until I saw this listing:Postgraduate Sub-Internship ProgramOtherwise, graduated physicians can apply for observerships which may or may not allow much direct patient care. Below are programs for IMG listed with the AMA.Observership Programs for International Medical GraduatesObserverships are designed to help international medical graduates (IMGs) adapt to the practice of medicine in the United States. Review the list of observerships that have registered with the AMA.American International Integrated Observership Program (MedicalObs)New applications are being accepted for 2018 positions at this time. Scholarships now available for highly competitive candidates.At MedicalObs, our focus is on the applicant’s experience. While there are many programs to choose from to help better prepare for entry into U.S. medical residency programs, what distinguishes us is our customized, integrated and individualized program curriculum designed to formulate an action plan to set applicants apart from the competition. Our values and philosophies are centered around the importance of personal growth, innovation, communication, commitment, teamwork and reliability.Length of Program4-12 weeksPreceptorsMedical Director for Hospitalist Program, Internal Medicine Physicians, Emergency Medicine Physicians, Psychiatry, SubspecialistsProgram OverviewObserving with U.S. licensed physicians in a hospital-based settingPerformance and evaluation review with chairman/program director*Letter of recommendation from chairman/program director*Certificate of completion with honors from AIIOP-MedicalObs*Review and edit of personal statement for residency applicationLive mock interview seminarsComplex clinical case reviews and live didactic sessionsAccent reduction and dialect coaching coursesAttending colloquium guest speaker series run by U.S. physician leaders and coachesExclusive alumni membership network with U.S. physicians via MedicalObsIntegrated cultural experiences with local community groups and social events*Based on a successful performance/evaluationEligibility CriteriaForeign medical graduates (FMG) from medical school and ECFMG certifiedU.S. senior graduatesU.S. FMGsNonmatched residency graduatesRecommend completion of USMLE Step 1 and Step 2Applications for Observers/PreceptorsGo to www.MedicalObs.com, click on the “apply now” section to fill out formsFor questions and enrollment, email us at [email protected] us via phone at 1 (833) 876-3627 or 1 (833) USMDOBSApplication DeadlinesWe screen applications year round.We accept and screen applications from all countries.Tuition and fees to be paid in full prior to start.AmeriClerkships Postgraduate Subinternships With Residency ProgramsLength of ProgramMinimum 4 weeks; maximum 48 weeks. Start in as little as 2 weeks.​PreceptorsProgram Directors (PDs), Associate PDs, Residency Program Faculty, Teaching Attending Physicians and ResidentsProgram OverviewAmeriClerkships Medical Society (AMS), in partnerships with Graduate Medical Education (GME) departments offers a rare opportunity for medical graduate members of AMS to enroll in Postgraduate Subinternships (PGSIs) in over 30 specialties.PGSIs are designated as AMS-PGY1CONNECT sites, meaning that AMS members have secured residency interviews and even “matched” into such hospital(s).A typical “matched” AMS member who has matched into a PGSI residency program has:Completed 12-28 weeks of PGSISecured 2-4 letters of reference directly from PGSI supervising attendingsIs a U.S. citizen or permanent residentPassed USMLE Step 3By enrolling as an AMS PGSI, medical graduates may expect to gain first-hand exposure to the inner workings of U.S. GME and medical residencies (even in 100% inpatient settings), and develop into an effective PGY1 by learning how to:Become an integral member of U.S. medical residency teams who manage acute and chronic medical problemsRotate and collaborate with top residency program faculties, teaching attending physicians, chief residents and even program directorsParticipate in teaching rounds, and possibly present in journal clubs and residency conferencesRefine history taking and physical examination skillsFormulate problem lists, prioritize medical problems, select laboratory and ancillary tests, as well as institute drug and supportive therapiesUtilize subspecialty consultative servicesDevelop definitive plans for ongoing care and follow-up of dismissed patientsUpon satisfactory completion of each PGSI clinical block, AMS PGSI will be evaluated based on the 6 ACGME Core Competencies, and may request a performance-based letter of recommendation on official GME/teaching hospital letterhead.For questions and enrollment, please contact AmeriClerkships Medical Society directly at +1 (949) 417-8980, or visit the website.Bridgeport Family Medicine Externship/Preceptorship ProgramBridgeport Family Medicine offers real hands-on experience in family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics and urgent care medicine. The program is structured as a "mini residency program" to prepare IMGs for the U.S. medical system by using state of the art EMR/HER systems.Length of the Program:4-12 weeks, extern may start any Monday of the weekProgram OverviewThe extern interviews the patient, performs the physical exam along with attending physician and discusses differential diagnoses, management options, labs, imaging and forms a management plan. In addition, the extern will:See and manage patients with their preceptorLearn on a state-of-the-art Electronic Medical RecordImprove physical examination skillsImprove patient note taking skillsImprove history taking skillsLearn to perform EKG, Phlebotomy, PFTs and UADiscuss family medicine topics and the latest guidelines on a daily basisFor more details, visit www.usmedicalextern.com or email: [email protected] Medicine® Physician Refresher/Re-entry PreceptorshipDrexel University College of Medicine has a tuition-based structured preceptorship/observership for IMGs preparing for a U.S. residency. Preceptorships are offered in internal medicine, pediatrics, OB-GYN, surgery and anesthesia. Rotations are all on the main university campus in Philadelphia.Length of Program6-week rotations; repeatable once. The course starts on the 1st Monday of every month and is first come, first serve. The application process takes 4–6 weeks.Program OverviewAttend inpatient and outpatient rounds, core conferences, lecture and learn about medical care in the United StatesAttend didactics: morning reports, noon reports, grand rounds and clinical case discussionsHomework will be assigned to hone in on medical knowledge, clinical reasoning and communication skillsMeet weekly with preceptor to review the exercises and receive feedbackFind more details on the program or call (215) 762-2580.Griffin Medical Clinical Observership ProgramThe application process for 2017-2018 runs through Sept. 30, 2017. New applications are accepted during this time only.The program is no longer accepting applications for October 2017 - January 2018. All positions for time have been filled. Only applications for the months of February 2018 - June 2018 are being accepted.Length of Program4 weeksProgram OverviewTo familiarize yourself with the U.S. medical systemTo become proficient in presentation of history and physical examinations on daily roundsTo become proficient in ascertaining patients' acute symptoms and making a therapeutic planTo learn to write daily progress notesTo learn how to interpret basic lab tests and radiology data such as blood, urine serum, X-rays, etc.Eligibility CriteriaForeign medical student graduates must be:Graduates of a medical schoolMust be ECFMG certifiedApplicationsThe following are required to be submitted to the Committee for consideration of participation in the program:A completed application or ERAS application (for ERAS, months for which the candidate is applying should be indicated in the email. In the event that ERAS application is not available, a common application form can be substituted)A cover letter detailing desired rotationA curriculum vitaeAt least 1 letter of reference from a clinical supervisor or advisor, or an attending physicianUSMLE score reportsMedical school diplomaECFMG certificateTOEFL score report ( if available)Documentation of up-to-date immunization record (including flu shot during flu season (Oct-March)Proof of health insurance coverageA recent photograph for identificationCopy of passport and valid visaApplication DeadlineA completed application must be received no later than Oct. 1Formal start date is usually the first working day of a calendar monthTiming is at the discretion of the program coordinator and teaching service schedulesVisit Griffin Medical’s website for more details and to apply.International Observership ProgramAllegheny General and West Penn hospitals host observers from around the world. This program was designed for physicians, nurses, pharmacists, medical students, physiotherapists, technologists, technicians and health administrators.Length of Program4 weeksThe observership is a specific exchange program in which the observer accompanies the medical staff through their daily hospital routine, sharing experiences with doctors, residents, staff and students. This program is not for academic credit.Program OverviewObservation of the clinical care of patientsParticipation in lectures, grand round and other related eventsNo privileges are granted to participate in the clinical treatment of patients to assist in any medical procedures, test or surgeriesFor inquiries about international educational opportunities available through Allegheny General, call International Services (412) 359-5269 or email [email protected] Memorial HospitalIt is the policy of the Public Health Trust to accept physicians or resident physicians desiring to participate as an observer/rotator at Jackson Health System facilities. All requests for observer/rotators must be reviewed and approved by Risk Management.Length of ProgramObserverships may last up to 4 weeks (1 month), longer if written approval by the department is obtained.Program OverviewThe individual desiring to participate must provide the Office of Physician Services all required documentation as set forth in this policy in order to be considered for a rotation or observership. Jackson Health System will not provide professional liability coverage for any resident for an outside institution. If the home institution will not provide the coverage, then they will be classified as observer status only. An observer is a health care professional or student who will not provide patient care or have direct patient contact. Observers differ from students in an academic program in that the observership is not an educational requirement of any academic program (see administrative policy 389 for students).Observer may be one of the following:Physicians (foreign or domestic)Registered nurses (foreign or domestic)Other health professionals (e.g. radiology, respiratory therapy, psychology, pharmacy technicians, etc.)Students not covered under an existing affiliation agreementObserverships may be in an inpatient or outpatient setting and must be approved by the Jackson Health System facility’s department(s) director(s) of the area being observed. For physicians, approval is needed from the associate/chief medical officer. For residents, approval is needed from the GME office. For nurses, approval is needed from the director of patient care services and/or the chief nursing officer. For all other students, approval is needed from the associate/chief medical officer.For more information, view the Policy & Procedure Manual.Contact InformationGraduate Medical Education OfficeJackson Memorial HospitalInstitute 118B1611 NW 12th Avenue, Miami, Florida 33136Phone: 305-585-4310Fax: 305-585-4309For more information on visiting medical students, please visit the information page.Somerset Family MedicineHands-on externship/observership in outpatient family medicine in Michigan for FMG, international medical graduates, Caribbean medical students and Caribbean graduates. Outpatient family medicine office in Troy and Sterling Heights, Michigan.Length of ProgramMinimum 4 weeks; maximum 12 weeksPreceptorNeil Jaddou, M.D., M.S. board-certified family medicine, clinical assistant professor of family medicine and community health, Wayne State School of Medicine and Oakland Beaumont Medical School. Staff at 4 hospitals and affiliated with St. John Oakland-Macomb medical students teaching program.Program OverviewBecome efficient in electronic medical or health records.Get familiar with the health system in the United States.Practice on presenting a patient and doing history and physical examinations.Learn how to interpret basic lab tests and radiology data such as blood, urine, X-rays, EKG and PFT.Expand your medical knowledge and build on your differential diagnosis.Improve your scores on CK, CS and USMLE Step 3.Tour the hospitals and attend conferences when available.Online lectures given by Dr. Jaddou on common problems in family medicine, taken from future textbook by professor Jaddou.Opportunity to publish patient education article in the community newspaper.Receive a letter of recommendation at the end of the rotation that has a university and hospital logo.Receive a certificate of completion at the end of externship. There is also a possibility of finishing with honors and student of the month award.Opportunity to be chief extern and teach others.Volunteer in the church clinic once a week.Eligibility CriteriaUSMLE not required.Immediate availability. Start any day that is convenient for you.Must be living in U.S. to apply. We do not sponsor visas.All visas are accepted as long as you are physically present in U.S.ApplicationVisit www.americanexternship.com for details on price and submitting an application. For additional information or questions email us at [email protected].