for doctors

our strengths:

-doctors hav habit of studying for long hours n over long periods of time(our first n final yrs force us to do that).
-we got writing speed above average.
-we r habitual of taking wholistic view n analysis(like while diagnosing and treating)-this goes very well in better answer writing.
-we can do stress management wel.
-hav a reliable background to fall back to.

our specific weak areas:

-for gs, we doctors r weak in ECONOMICS and IR .the basic concepts n understanding is all too new for us.(but we r also fast at learning them, i had my full faith in kapuria sir n used to approach him with lots of questions; for IR ravindran sir's classes r very gud, though i did attend few foreign policy classes of abhay sir too,just because it was my weak area.)
-our HANDWRITING is though fast can sometimes be not very legible,we also use lots of shorthand,which cannot be used in final exam.( i tried to  write with better spacing and clearly while taking down the class notes,this was writing improvement exercise without giving any extra time)
 -our habit to write pointwise also needs a bit modification to suit this exam,better write one point as one para n connect these paras with starting words of these paras as firstly,secondly,thirdly,also,lastly etc...our long ques may hav a part as points but never whole answer in points....
-our background comes to a major scrutiny esp in interview. the interview board really grill us over this and it takes lots of effort to convince them .

medical science as optional;

about optional as medical science,i didnt prefer it coz
-i had heard that syllabus is vast n score not very extraordinary.
-it doesnt allow much innovation, answers of almost everyone will be similar.
the only advantage is u continue to maintain academic touch with medical science,wel but it adds nothing to gs ,essay or intw.

medical science -hurdle in intw:

ya,my intw stated with expected ques about my name,but sooner a more expected question took over-why being doctor u want civils?.
 i felt i was prepared for this,but NO,interviewers were better prepared to grill me. i had introspected long on this n said what really hav felt. i said 'sir my decision is more  a result of evolution of thought which was based on my experiences in MBBS'
.so next ques was what experiences- i hav seen a tribal malnourished child dying n costly ICU manouvers being done on her. if only 10% could hav been spent on her food a month ago,she may hav not died . as a doctor i may not hav preventive role which can be done basically on the policy level.sir, i wanna reach many people which i cannot do by being a doctor only,i want a bigger platform n hence i decided to come in administration n at the end of road my personal satisfaction lies here'
then some situational questions on me being DM from medical background,how will reduce girl child malnutrition'
also why doctors not going to rural areas. just i said infrastructure is a problem,them fired me with the argument that- 'why u people cant b like Dr.Binayak Sen'.here i felt i may be checkmated. i tried to put a valid argument and said- sir, everyone will not go,some exceptional people may do such work but majority needs facilities. they kind of repeated n said-ya,majority jus never leads n then this discussion almost ended to my relief.
i feel being true to interviewer,giving innovative n different answers may help here.they may insist on doctor being better choice-jus maintain though i like medical profession but still i want to do  work from other aspects too,which civils can giv me an opportunity to do.