It is not possible to achieve all the ambitions all the time. Can one still reach great professional heights and have a good career? an average man's answer would be a 'no'. But I warn you not to draw conclusions before reading the outstanding story of Joseph Babinski, unduobtedly a great neurologist of all time.
Babinski was born in 1857. He was a faculty of Medicine in France where the faculty was given only part time jobs and allowed to practice. A university career was possible only after defense of thesis. Aggregation (becoming an associate Professor) was the next step. This entailed complicated exams. The next would be elevation to the post of the Full Professor (which was partly by selection) and gave a status and enabled one to head the department.
The time had come after Babinski became eligible for appearing for a competitive examination after completing 2 years of residency. These exams started in 1802 when the success rate was 60%. Babinski appeared in 1877. He did fairly well in Clinicals (anatomy of trapezius 17 /20 ) and treatment (Burns 20 /20). He did not qualify for aggregation and was promoted to permanent post.in 1879.
After completing 4 years of residency, Babinski appeared for the Gold medal examination which was mandatory. He did well in the written examination (Gastric mucus membrane ). He qualified for the oral exam but could not appear due to the illness. He was not considered for the gold medal.
He got employed under Charcot a well respected neurologist at that time. In 1886 he appeared again for the Aggregate exam. He scored 16 / 20 (Hydatid cyst) which was not good enough to appear for the orals. In 1887 he appeared again with Gilles de la Tourette and Pierre Marie, scored 16 / 20 for clinicals and 14 / 20 for orals (chicken pox) and was not admitted. In 1888, in a competition held for 3 possible places Babinski scored 27 / 30 and in orals (sclerosis of the heart) he got 26 / 30 - not good enough for the next step. ,
In 1893, he competed for the aggregate and he successfully completed the exam with a score of 30 / 30 for written part ( Scarlet fever ) and 19 / 20 for orals (diphtheria with paralysis)., 17 / 20 for cliniclas,, and 30 /30 for the case (Syphilis ). The idea was to find an able successor to the then head of the chair - Charcot. The competition was between, Babinski, Landouzy, Dejerrine, Raymond and P. marie. Babiski was the preferred pupil. Unfortunately, the arch rival of Charcot - Bouchard- was at the chair of the selection committee. Babinski was intentionally ignored. This story was lapped up by the press and the media much to the discomfort of the education minister who was involved by the public in the controversy. Next opportunity was provided in 1895. Babinski never appeared. He vowed never to appear again. He joined a hospital at la p Petie where he worked for rest of his illustrious career.
Did Babinski lose anything by being unfairly denied of the opportunity? In his own words, "No" is the answer. His only regret was that he could have influenced the career if he had any. He in fact considered it an advantage not having been invited. He could work at his own pace in his own style.
What is the moral of the story? One does not necessarily have to be a professor to excel in the field of practice of Medicine.
Dear friends, do not get demotivaed if you do not achieve what you want to. Still you can do well. In fact, Babinski became world famous for his sign even without Professorship.
Babinski was born in 1857. He was a faculty of Medicine in France where the faculty was given only part time jobs and allowed to practice. A university career was possible only after defense of thesis. Aggregation (becoming an associate Professor) was the next step. This entailed complicated exams. The next would be elevation to the post of the Full Professor (which was partly by selection) and gave a status and enabled one to head the department.
The time had come after Babinski became eligible for appearing for a competitive examination after completing 2 years of residency. These exams started in 1802 when the success rate was 60%. Babinski appeared in 1877. He did fairly well in Clinicals (anatomy of trapezius 17 /20 ) and treatment (Burns 20 /20). He did not qualify for aggregation and was promoted to permanent post.in 1879.
After completing 4 years of residency, Babinski appeared for the Gold medal examination which was mandatory. He did well in the written examination (Gastric mucus membrane ). He qualified for the oral exam but could not appear due to the illness. He was not considered for the gold medal.
He got employed under Charcot a well respected neurologist at that time. In 1886 he appeared again for the Aggregate exam. He scored 16 / 20 (Hydatid cyst) which was not good enough to appear for the orals. In 1887 he appeared again with Gilles de la Tourette and Pierre Marie, scored 16 / 20 for clinicals and 14 / 20 for orals (chicken pox) and was not admitted. In 1888, in a competition held for 3 possible places Babinski scored 27 / 30 and in orals (sclerosis of the heart) he got 26 / 30 - not good enough for the next step. ,
In 1893, he competed for the aggregate and he successfully completed the exam with a score of 30 / 30 for written part ( Scarlet fever ) and 19 / 20 for orals (diphtheria with paralysis)., 17 / 20 for cliniclas,, and 30 /30 for the case (Syphilis ). The idea was to find an able successor to the then head of the chair - Charcot. The competition was between, Babinski, Landouzy, Dejerrine, Raymond and P. marie. Babiski was the preferred pupil. Unfortunately, the arch rival of Charcot - Bouchard- was at the chair of the selection committee. Babinski was intentionally ignored. This story was lapped up by the press and the media much to the discomfort of the education minister who was involved by the public in the controversy. Next opportunity was provided in 1895. Babinski never appeared. He vowed never to appear again. He joined a hospital at la p Petie where he worked for rest of his illustrious career.
Did Babinski lose anything by being unfairly denied of the opportunity? In his own words, "No" is the answer. His only regret was that he could have influenced the career if he had any. He in fact considered it an advantage not having been invited. He could work at his own pace in his own style.
What is the moral of the story? One does not necessarily have to be a professor to excel in the field of practice of Medicine.
Dear friends, do not get demotivaed if you do not achieve what you want to. Still you can do well. In fact, Babinski became world famous for his sign even without Professorship.
Thanks Raghu for this history. .You made my day as my only regret professionally has been not heading a unit as full professor
ReplyDelete