SAN FRANCISCO “”mdash; Talk of student wellness, academic freedom
and nuclear research dominated the discussion at last week’s
UC Board of Regents meeting in San Francisco.
On Sept. 20, the regents decided to bid for the management of
the Lawrence Livermore National Lab, which contributes to the
development of nuclear weapons.
The lab’s Web site states that Livermore is
“responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear
weapons remain safe, secure and reliable. (Livermore) also applies
its expertise to prevent the spread and use of weapons of mass
destruction and strengthen homeland security.”
Students and community members spoke out against the University
of California’s involvement in nuclear research, fearing it
could increase the country’s involvement in nuclear warfare.
But the regents decided to move ahead with the proposal
process.
“I believe competing for the Livermore management contract
is appropriate for the university,” said Robert Foley, UC
vice president of laboratory administration.
Foley said that as a research university, it is appropriate and
beneficial for the UC to conduct research at Livermore.
Recently, the UC and three corporate partners gained control of
the Los Alamos National Laboratory, which was put up for bid after
mismanagement led to several accidents.
Later in the day, the discussion shifted to more student-focused
issues.
In a presentation on a study conducted on systemwide student
mental health and the availability of counseling services, Joel
Dimsdale, co-chair of the University Student Mental Health
Committee, told the regents there are serious inadequacies in
student mental health services.
“Suicide attempts have increased at UC Santa Barbara, and
systemwide there have been increased visits to school
counselors,” Dimsdale said. “Funding has not increased
with demand for counseling services.”
UC President Robert Dynes also expressed his concern for student
well-being.
“All of us who teach and work at (the) UC are protective
of students. When we lose a student it’s like losing a member
of our family,” Dynes said.
Michael Young, the other co-chair of the University Student
Mental Health Committee, said that with an increase in diversity on
campuses, the demand for counseling services is growing.
“The student population (systemwide) is becoming more
diverse,” Young said. “International students, LGBT
students and racial minorities have magnified (psychological)
problems because of isolation they experience.”
The study states that the average student-to-psychologist ratio
is 2,300 to 1, and the average systemwide wait time for a student
to get an appointment is three to six weeks.
The report stated that in order to curb the problem, an increase
in student fees may be necessary and the university would have to
hire more staff and increase the wages of current staff.
The ideal student-to-psychologist ratio is 1,500 to 1, according
to the report.
“At UCLA there is now a limited number of free counseling
sessions, where just a few years ago when the programs were
adequately funded that was not a problem,” said Tina Park,
external vice president of the Undergraduate Students Association
Council and board member of the UC Students Association.
Also discussed at the meeting was research in the university
system funded by the tobacco industry. There were questions of
whether the UC should intervene in the censure of funding by
certain companies.
Currently there are three grants from Philip Morris funding
research at UCLA, UC Berkeley and UC Davis totaling $1.9 million.
Some research includes early oral cancer detection.
In a recent court case in which several prominent tobacco
companies were charged with and convicted of racketeering, a 2003
UCLA study funded by the tobacco industry was cited as an example
of what can go wrong when the tobacco industry funds research.
The UCLA study found that second-hand smoke does not cause lung
cancer, which is contradictory to most independent scientific
studies.
Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who is an ex-officio regent, asked the
board to discuss disallowing tobacco industry funding of research,
citing moral concerns and worries about monetary influence on
research as his reasons.
“The reputation of the UC is a valuable asset,”
Bustamante said. “We should join the 18 universities across
the nation that do not accept tobacco industry funding. … Our
150-year reputation should not be jeopardized.”
Other regents were concerned about jeopardizing the academic
freedom of researchers, stating this is a “slippery
slope” to future censure of funding.
“I would urge us not to interfere with the Academic
Senate, or with the freedom of a researcher to come to conclusions
they think are correct. This is a slippery slope and opens the door
to question funding in many different ways,” Regent Sherry
Lansing said.
Regent George Marcus said the regents may have to question more
sources of funding if they question the tobacco industry.
“We would have enormous problems with 80 percent of our
funding sources if we disagreed with what their industry had to say
““ for example, pharmaceuticals,” he said.
In May, the Academic Senate passed a resolution stating the
regents have the authority to pass regulations about research
funding. Stated in the resolution was the opinion that interfering
with sources for funding of research is a violation of academic
freedom.