I wish to submit written comments to the UNT Board of Regents regarding the decision as to whether to add an MD degree option at the UNTHSC. My comments are related both to the method by which this decision is being made/ portrayed as well as the substance of the debate.
At a UNTHSC Leadership Meeting on Monday, March 9th, Dr. Ransom, UNTHSC President, told us (his leadership team) that the UNT Board of Regents would soon visit the UNTHSC campus. He indicated that the purpose of the BOR visit was to directly hear local input in order to make a determination as to whether the BOR should continue its investigation into the possibility of adding an MD degree program to UNTHSC.
In stark contrast to this stated purpose of the BOR visit to UNTI-ISC on 3/26/O9, as soon as the two hour meeting was completed and without any discussion among board members, the Board Committee Chairwoman stated that the MD Study Group proceed to study the feasibility of implementation of an MD degree option at UNTHSC. It was clear that since no conversation was needed among board members prior to issuing this directive that the decision was predetermined. This, unfortunately, only served to fuel the concern by the local resistance to this MD degree option that their concerns continue to be given no real weight or consideration.
There was another clear indication at this March 26th meeting that the process of evaluating the possibility of an MD degree at UNTHSC is unfairly biased. The format of presentations to the UNT Board included an initial 20 minutes given to apposing sides of the issue to present their positions. 20 minutes were given to the osteopathic physicians and organizations with stated opposition to the MD degree at UNTHSC. 20 minutes were also given to the MD Study Group. Until this day (March 26), we have been repeatedly told that the MD Study Group was composed of an impartial group of community representatives with no preconceived bias toward either outcome. However on March 26th, in this public forum, the 20 minute presentation in support of the MD option was presented by the MD Study Group. Every member of the MD Study Group that spoke, including the (unbiased) Chairman, Mr. Barr, inappropriately indicated their personal bias in support of the MD degree option. This is a strong public indication of this Study Group’s bias in support of the MD option and serves to seriously undermine the credibility of this important decision making process.
Regarding the substance of this important debate, there are several key issues that were not well represented by the speakers at this BOR meeting at UNTHSC on March 26th, 2009.
1. UNTHSC in order to graduate more needed physicians for our community, an MD degree at UNTHSC will do nothing to increase total physician graduates. In fact, if the true goal is to increase the number of medical graduates in North Texas, then the solution is another independent MD medical school in Fort Worth that will build its own classrooms and help increase the number of MD graduates in Fort Worth to well over 250 per year.
2. On February 10m, 2009, Dr. Scott Ransom, President of UNTHSC, testified in front of the Texas Senate Finance Committee that, “The hospitals (potential local partners with UNTHSC in medical education, research and patient care) have supported the concept of medical education, but they are not willing to become a primary teaching hospital for our institution unless we offer an MD degree.” This testimony is official documentation of how UNTHSC has been inappropriately coerced to create an MD degree program.
The last guest speaker to present on March 26th was Mr. Barclay E. Berdan, Senior Executive Vice-President of Texas Health Resources (THR). In his 3 minutes, he repeatedly denied the accusation that THR and its major Fort Worth hospital Harris Methodist had refused to partner with UNTHSC in the creation of desperately needed GME training slots in North Texas unless UNTHSC added an MD degree. Although Mr. Berdan’s public commitment to partner with UNTHSC-TCOM is indeed welcome and appreciated, it does stand in contradiction to comments published by the MD Study Group and Dr. Ransom’s Senate testimony. The UNT Board of Regents and our state and county elected officials should help encourage THR to make good on this promise.
Finally, I submit that the UNT BOR, Chancellor and UNTHSC President could have initiated a discussion regarding creation of an MD option on the UNTHSC campus without causing such a whirlwind of conflict. The manner in which this issue was initially broached on campus was punctuated with deception. No forum was ever allowed or encouraged on campus for honest substantive debate. The public forum held by the UNT BOR on March 26th is the closest we have come to a public debate on the future of our university. I sincerely believe and am saddened to say that the majority of faculty, student, and alumni of TCOM will never become comfortable with this degree option if it comes to fruition under our current leadership.
No comments:
Post a Comment