To do well for myself or good for society
June 20, 2012 10:09 AM   Subscribe

Advice needed on potential career paths in the public health field: how to decide between a financially lucrative offer and holding out for potentially getting another job to do "good" for society? Way too much detail inside:

I have just finished my masters of Public Health degree with an Epidemiology focus. In an ideal world (or even just a mediocre economy) I'd like to find work in health outcomes research or health program evaluation, so probably something more like an academic or not-for-profit research institution. However, after job searching pretty seriously for the last 2 months, I haven't seen a lot of jobs in that field in my area, and the ones I have applied to have not brought me in for an interview. While other job opportunities may be available in different geographic areas, and I have applied to a few, I haven't considered them too seriously as my boyfriend is employed in our area already and we'd like to stay here long-term.

So I expanded my job search and have landed a few interviews. Now I think I am very close to getting a job offer from a private company that would basically be working for Pharma, aka going to the dark side. There are some great perks involved, like 1) better paying job to help pay back some stuent loans 2) great work environment 3) interesting projects and an array of potential skil-building opportunities and 4) they actually want me and are pursuing me. However, I feel torn emotionally because of the nature of the work (basically helping corporations make money rather than addressing health needs of the underprivaleged, etc).

That being said, I also have concerns about how this may affect my long term career prospects. While the company promises growth opportunities, if I feel they are limited or that my conscience has gotten the best of me and I want to leave "the dark side" I want to know that I'm not hurting my chances for getting a different type of job. For instance, will spending a few years working in management and analysis of large databases and client services for pharma limit my ability to do non-profit or academic research in the future? Will it look bad on my resume if I wind up applying for PhD programs in a few years, which I'm seriously considering?

On the flip side, is turning down an offer from said company stupid given that I don't have any other offers on the table currently? I have one upcoming in-person interview for an academic research job, but beyond that I haven't gotten past the phone-interview stage with any potential employers. I know that 2 months of job searching is not bad in this economy, but should I be grateful for the opportunity that I have on the table and just take it?
posted by moshimosh to Work & Money (7 answers total) 3 users marked this as a favorite
 
Best answer: This sounds like a really great opportunity - from what people in this field say, many non-profit institutions are hungry for people with the skills you'd build in the private sector, and you'll be much freer to pursue your ideal career path once you've paid off student loans and have some industry experience on your resume.
posted by hot soup at 10:19 AM on June 20, 2012 [1 favorite]


Best answer: Will it look bad on my resume if I wind up applying for PhD programs in a few years, which I'm seriously considering?

You're overthinking this. It's not like you get "tainted" by working for "big pharma" which means you're "no longer academic material." Data analysis of large databases is exactly was an epidemiology Ph.D. program would find interesting. Though it would probably be best if you were doing academic research. On the other hand, if you wanted to do that, you would have started a Ph.D. program already.

If you are considering getting a Ph.D., I'd definitely take a job that helps you pay off your loans. Get involved in the non-profit world by joining the board of trustees/directors of non-profits you feel are doing good work. This is absolutely the best way to stay abreast of what's going on in the non-profit world, make contacts, and be taken seriously when you want to reintegrate yourself with that world.

I think you're wrongly placing a lot of cultural baggage on working for a pharm company that the rest of the public health and academic epidemiology world doesn't have.
posted by deanc at 10:23 AM on June 20, 2012 [2 favorites]


You have memail :)
posted by pointystick at 11:42 AM on June 20, 2012


basically helping corporations make money rather than addressing health needs of the underprivaleged, etc).

If they don't make money, the corps won't develop new drugs or treatments. I don't think this work is "the dark side" if you're not in a position to fund the research yourself.
posted by Ideefixe at 12:24 PM on June 20, 2012 [1 favorite]


Private enterprise isn't the "Dark Side", it's just making a profit. No job experience is wasted and most non-profit, or government entities do not think of Pharma as some kind of evil enterprise sucking the good out of Public Health.

I work around the corner from the CDC here in the ATL and let me tell you, once you've got your experience behind you, you can make amazing money with the Feds.

So take a well paying job, learn a lot and don't equate money with evil. Money is awesome, it buys you pretty things and makes your life easier.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 12:43 PM on June 20, 2012 [1 favorite]


Some of your thoughts reminded me of this insightful comment from tel3path about some people's attitude towards work:
In some of my social circles it is considered rather tainted to earn money as wages imputed from production, rather than to receive minimal subsistence allowance in the form of grants or stipends from funding bodies. The unspoken assumption seems to be that it is okay to receive money in exchange for work done - as long as you don't take too much - but not to earn it per se.
Is this where you're coming from, here?

The research sector has a main advantage because, honestly, it's a heckuva lot more interesting than anything else. But those jobs are hard to find, especially without a Ph.D. As far as "addressing health needs of the underprivileged," there are two things in play you should keep in mind: first, there is no shortage of people with MPHs and MSWs working on those issues, and second, that the choice positions in those fields go to the highly qualified and highly credentialed who have a good track record in a variety of areas. And even then, the influential people are the ones running the show and being involved in the fundraising and direction-guiding of those non-profits, and much less so by the easily-replaceable cogs providing the ground-level services. So I wouldn't stress about getting involved in pharma-- obviously, pharmaceuticals are a primary means of delivering health services to all people. The experience will be valuable, and it's not going to be a dead end for you, especially if you later plan to get a Ph.D. or possibly get an M.D., like some of my other MPH friends have done.
posted by deanc at 12:48 PM on June 20, 2012


Facilitating research is still advancing healthcare for everyone. As my mom says, "it's okay to do good and do well".
posted by anonnymoose at 2:24 PM on June 20, 2012


« Older Recommend an insurance company, please.   |   educationfilter: I am becoming a teacher this... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.