Don’t sacrifice UC mission for budget
By Daily Bruin Staff
May 24, 2010 8:55 p.m.
In order to help the state cope with its ongoing budgetary problems, the governor and, subsequently, the UC Board of Regents have proposed that management of the state’s prison health-care system be overseen by University of California medical staff.
The proposal, still in preliminary stages of discussion, presents an opportunity for the university to help the state save more than $4 billion over the course of the next five years and still more over the next decade.
While the benefits of such a plan prove tempting, this board is hesitant to agree with proponents of this proposal, which at first seem feasible but is ultimately out of tune with the university’s mission as an institution of higher learning.
We agree that the current prison health care system is deeply flawed. This has become apparent in legislative decisions calling for drastic changes in the system.
What this board is concerned about is that the regents might give serious consideration to such a proposal solely because the university faces a tremendous budget shortfall.
Transferring management of prisoner’s health care to UC medical staff seems, however, seems a promising move. The state would save billions, and the UC system could potentially turn in a profit.
The regents are currently considering the proposal because it would supposedly aid underprivileged Californians who would otherwise not be receiving adequate care. Supporters argue that the overall quality of health care for state prisoners would improve dramatically. Since 2006, the state prison health care has been overseen by a federal receiver after the courts ordered that the quality of the system be improved.
Under the proposal, much of the treatment of prisoners would happen via telemedicine or over closed-circuit television, thereby cutting down on costs by reducing doctor-patient meetings. While such a move would help UC medical staff reach a larger number of patients, there remains a greater risk of misdiagnosis because physicians would not be meeting with their patients in person. Doctor-patient communication is key, and it seems like such a system would be rife with error.
A more reasonable proposal might require that only those prisons within close proximity of UC establishments be covered by a future system. Staff would be able to make individual visits, which would drastically reduce the likelihood of misdiagnosis. This would ensure that the UCs don’t become overloaded with extraneous responsibility that digresses from its founding duty to education, while potentially alleviating some of the financial stress.
Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of the editorial board.
