100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

August 09, 1979 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1979-08-09

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Page 4-Thursday, August 9, 1979-The Michigan Daily
Michigan Daily
Eighty-nine Years of Editorial Freedom
420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI. 48109
Vol. LXXXIX, No. 62-S News Phone: 764-0552
Edited and managed by students
at the University of Michigan
''Hospital:
Round tWo
T HE REGIONAL health planning council's
second review of plans for a new University
Hospital could be as unproductive as the first one,
if University officials are not ready to reduce the
size and costs of the planned facility.
Ip terms of legal obligation to change the plans,
this review is no different from the first one. At
worst, the University could reject all changes and
the Comprehensive Health Planning Council
(CHPC) could repeat its negative recommen-
dation to the state department of Public Health,
which has final say on approval of the hospital
plans. The CHPC has no other ammunition in the
battle against soaring health care costs.
The regional planners should produce specific,
reasonable suggestions for the $241 million
blueprint to be pared down to a relatively cost-
effective design.
Unlike the first review, however, the University
should alter the plans in response to the CHPC's
welt-researched suggestions.
A stumbling block in the first review was
whether University Hospital should be regarded
as a community or state resource, in view of its
educational/research function.
University officials used the phrase
"educational/research mission" as a shield
during the first regional review in order to resist
cutting the hospital's size and cost. They put the
burden on the regional planners of demonstrating
that proposed cuts will not damage the hospital's
educational/research function.
The University should share this burden with
the CHPC by demonstrating that eliminating
specific programs in the hospital will harm the
state's efforts to carry out medical teaching and
research.
It is impossible to quantify the
educational/research needs of Michigan,
especially as questions about such needs surface
more frequently. The need for more doctors and
whether expensive health care technology ac-
tually results in healthier people are questions that
cannot be ignored in planning a better facility
aimed at operation in 1990.
With this obserVation in mind, the University
should put aside its pride and admit that despite
the sophistciated planning techniques it has em-
ployed, it may not have all the answers.
SUMMER EDITORIAL STAFF
ELIZABETH SLOWIE
Ediorin-Chie
JUDY RAKOWKY ........................Editorial Director
JOSHUA PECK A P .........E. ... .................ArsEditor
SPORTSSTAFF
6 OIF -LA COM S.. ...... ... ......Sports Editor

To the Da
Regeni
letter (Mi
concerni
photograj
black st
Michigan
of justifi(
formed a
to differ
other for}
Long b
letter a
editors ar
we saw a:
book. No
commun
coveredi
but few
students
Life secti
yearbook
curately
Universit
such a se
in part fi
which pla
The Ed
changed'
publicati
dividual
adequate
groups.
photogral
not thoug
photograp
the com
Arbor lift

Letters to the D
ily: tentional omission, albeit a
a Lumbard's recent serious one, and not the conscious
chigan Daily, August 2) effort to exclude black students
ng the "paucity of which Ms. Lumbardimplies.
phs or mention . . . of However, Ms. Lumbard's
udents" in the 1979 criticism is unjustified with
ensian is a combination respect to the coverage of black
ed criticism and unin- student organizations. Each Sep-
llegations. I would like tember, we contact more than 200
entiate one from the student groups (including all
your readers. those officially recognized by
iefore Ms. Lumbard's MSA) concerning coverage of
ppeared, the senior their activities in the yearbook.
nd I had discussed what As a self-supporting publication
s a major flaw in the '79 receiving no subsidies from the
t only was the black University, the Michiganensian
ity not specifically has traditionally asked each
n any meaningful way, organization to pay for the pages
photographs of black it requests in the yearbook. The
appeared in the Campus majority of fraternities and
ion, that portion of the sororities have been pictured in
which is intended to ac- the yearbook for many years, and
reflect life at the those whose photographs do not
y. The explanation for appear simply chose not to pur-
rious ommission stems chase any pages. Black student
rom editorial problems organizations are not ignored,
igued the book all year. nor does the yearbook staff
itor-in-Chief position "choose .., to believe that black
hands inthe middle of fraternities and sororities on this
on, preventing one in- campus are invisible." Rather,
from overseeing the those black organizations, along
coverage of all campus with other white and minority
In addition, organizations, chose not to
phers and editors were allocate their sometimes limited
htful enough in selecting funds for space in the yearbook.
phs and copy to convey -Trish Refo
ete gamut of the Ann Editor-in-Chief
estyle. This was an unin- 1980 Michiganensian

WEtRE NOT-COCrisTS
B3ROTHERf To the Daily:
WE'RE P FEEVOD- If Lorraine Beebe had accused
WE LO/E YOu.t those who protested against the
-execution of a man in Florida a
- TELL tiE.., few weeks ago of trying to deny
is -EE the executioner the right to em-
ANYTHlN, ployment, it would make as much
YO0 sense as her recent charge that
00t4'T pro-life advocates want to deny
LOVt? women the right to control their
own bodies. Abortion kills as
surely as the electric chair.
Unless a living, human fetus is
destroyed, there is no abortion.
This destruction of life is the
BROTgER... WE LovC
EVERYThIING THAT DM5 YOU SEE
THE LovE IN EVER)YWIN&
T HAT I S.
U H- HOH.
OH, HY CYNICAL. HAVEN T.
BROTHER..- HAVE
YOU EVER CON-
SIDERED HOWMUCH
IT COSTS rOR%
U5TO - PP5 PEAD
OUR DOCTRINE.
t 4

ally
point of objection in both instan-
ces.
The Supreme Court has erred
in other instances in denying
rights to certain segments of
humanity. Their 1973 decisioq
denying any protection under the
law to babies before birth is but
another proof of their fallibility.
When Ms. Beebe speaks of
women being denied the right to
make "this choice," let her in
fairness spell out what this choice
is: the right to destroy their un-
born children.
-Patricia Rose
To the Daily:
There's so much wrong with"
the correctional system in this
state that it isn't easy to com-
prehend.
There's very little appealing or
sympathetic about criminal
types, but if the approach to their
treatment is immoral, cruel, and
illegal, then the Department of
Corrections must share respon-
sibility for the crime committed
in Michigan.
People are sent to prison for
guilt of a crime - they must then
abide by the prison's rules and
regulations or suffer the con-
sequences. The conduct of Civil
Serviceemployees is likewise
circumscribed by statute, policy
directive, etc., but those circum-
scriptions are violated daily!
Seeing and being subjected to
that, is it any wonder there's so
little reformation in prison?
The result is a degree of human
suffering and waste of lives
paralleled only in totalitarian
societies.
It won't be corrected until those
employees of the Department of
Corrections who are cruel and
callous are prevented from prac-
ticing their anti-humanitarian
impulses on prison iesidents.
-Tom Watson
WAIT 'I'
CON F5E D
WE LOVE
TH-AT, TO.
HOW MUCH 'DO
TROBE LIGHTS
RUN THESE DAYS
FORI VE
HIM, LEST0?

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan