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


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.

March 20, 1987 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1987-03-20

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


Friday, March 20, 1987

Page 4

Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan


Vol. XCVII, No. 116

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board
All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily.

No code.

regents indicate their intention to
rubber-stamp an administration
code of non-academic conduct
soon, if students on University
Council do not. The University
cannot be allowed to unjustly
regulate life outside the classroom
by blackmailing students with their
transcript or career.
Though forms of the code such
as the housing lease are already in
place, a formulation of rules for
student behavior outside academia
is intolerable.
A code of non-academic conduct
would invade all aspects of student
Have you ever had sexual
intercourse in University
housing? Prohibited by the
housing lease, engaging in this
activity could be punished by the
Have you ever consumed
alcohol on University prop -
erty? The University could
prosecute students, holding the
academic records in check, even if
the individual was of legal age.
Have you ever smoked
marijuana on campus? Though
decriminalized in Ann Arbor to a
$5 citation, the University could set
its own laws which students would
have to follow. The administration
would create crimes which do not
exist in the community.
Have you ever participated
in a political protest of a
University policy? A code
would be used to create an
atmosphere of political calm.
Without student protest, the
University would be free to acquire
more controversial funding from
immoral or disreputable sources
such as Dow Chemical and the

moderator in the case of a dispute.
With the code the University could
prevent students from going to
court to resolve injustices on the
part of the landlord. Instead,
students would have to abide by
the University's decision with no
possibility for appeal unless the
individual was willing to put aside
her or his academic record.
Have you ever received a
parking ticket? The admini -
stration would have a mechanism
to enforce the thousands of parking
tickets issued to students in campus
areas. Potentially, the regents
could also collaborate with the city
in enforcing its citations. As the
regents are elected it would be in
their political interest to assist city
A code of non-academic conduct
would usurp the role of the court
system. The regulation of peoples'
behavior should only be
determined by the local legislature,
the court system, and the police.
These mechanisms, though im -
perfect, have procedures which the
community can appeal to or change
through legislation.
The danger of regental coercion
is obvious in incidents such as the
Jae Kim or Couzens eviction. The
University evicted students without
informing them of their right to
council or their right to object to the
The University is increasingly
claiming credit for its role as the
court system. In reality, it is the
power of the courts which could
make possible the evictions.
Housing acted out of its own self
interest: in both cases, a party to
the lease, a legal contract where
both the University and the
students have rights.,
Attempting to manipulate student
behavior through a code is a
fundamental violation of the right
to choose. The University will not
be allowed to act in loco parentis
or choose what individuals will do
in their non-academic lives. The
students will never accept a code.

By Duncan MacDonald
Last year a classmate and I went to the
Pregnancy Counseling Center which is
now advertising in The Daily as "Family
Life Services." We posed as a couple who
believed my partner was pregnant. We did
this as a project for our Women's Studies
240 class. There are three things which
disturbed me about this "center" that I feel
people should know.
First, is their position on Women's
Freedom of Choice. This organization and
its counselors are definitely anti-choice.
The political ramifications of this
position hae recently been the cause of
demonstrations here on campus, in
celebration of the anniversary of the
legalization of abortion. I believe the
making of abortion into a moral and
emotional issue by the Moral Majority
(which is neither) and other groups is
something the students of the University
of Michigan and society as a whole
should question.
Secondly, and more importantly, the
fact that this organization does not tell its
clients its stance on the issue of abortion
in its advertisements or initial contact is
Upon entering we were seperated while
my classmte described the time since her
last period, her religious preference, and
other limited information. After that she
was asked into the office of the counselor
I feel the separation of my classmate
and I was inappropriate. However, I do
not believe it was inappropriate because
men should decide whether their female
sexual partners should have an abortion or
not. It is, after all, a woman's decision
over her own body. However, if a woman
brings someone to support he in a
difficult decision, she should be allowed
to have them present. Also, I question the
motives.of this "clinic." Do they want to
insure a woman is making a decision on
her own, or do they wish to influence that
decision with a "divide and conquer"
technique? My classmate was offended at
Duncan MacDonald is an senior in LSA

the question of how she, a Catholic,
could be considering an abortion. She was
also offended by other irrelevant personal
questions such as, "how long she had
been seeing her boyfriend." Information
on the counselor's religious preference or
stance on abortion was not offered. My
classmate was asked if she wanted to see a
slide presentation on pregnancy and
abortion while the counselor did the
pregnancy test - again without any
ifnromation about it stance on abortion.
I was allowed to go into the office and
watch it with her.
This procedure is set up to make it
hard to refuse to watch the slides. First,
the sign on the receptionists desk says,
"Pregnancy Tests in 30 Minuts." Notice
it does not say how long the test actually
takes! It only took a matter of five
minutes at Planned Parenthood when we
did the same project there as a
comparison. Also there is a sense of
owing the "clinic" since the pregnancy
test is free.
The slide show lasted about twenty
minutes and provided inaccurate
information about, and graphic pictures
of, abortions. It used a scientific guise
and slanted studies to suggest that
abortions can result in scar tissue on the
uterus preventing future wanted
pregnancies and other problems. Barbara
Misle's 1 December 1985 article in the
Ann Arbor News about this organization,
stated that this claim is not supported by
studies of Center for Disease Control
(CDC) researcher Carol Hogue in the
medical journal Epidemiological Reviews
1982. The slide show said this scar tissue
resulted from the dilation and curettage
(D&C) procedure, which according to the
CDC study is very rarely used in
abortions now (91 percent of the 1.55
million abortions in 1980 were said to be
done in the first twelve weeks by another
procedure called vacuum aspiration).
Planned Parenthood described vacuum
aspiration only (which does not have the
D&C risks) as being used. The graphic
pictures of the presentation included a
slide of a pair of feet of a few week old

The Michigan Daily
aborted "baby" held between a pair of
fingers. The most disgusting slide was
the picture of a dead fetus in a trash can
after a hysterotomy. This procedure is for
pregnancies which cannot be aborted any
other way usually around the fifth month
of pregnancy or after. However, it is
almost never used. The CDC study stated
that only one percent of abortions are
performed after the first twenty weeks.
That fact was not provided to us by this
slide show.
Upon leaving we both felt angered and
shocked. We thought we were prepared for
this project. We had an idea about what
this place was like from Barbara Misle's
article, and we knew my classmate was
not pregnant. The women who usually go
to this "clinic" do not know these things.
We felt for those women who go to this
place for a free pregnancy test and some
counseling (which is what the
advertisements say one will get), and,
leave filled with half-truths about
abortion and right-wing extremist moral
Finally it is frustrating to still be
seeing the ads for this place in the The
Daily. On page 2 of February 4I read the
latest version. They have changed the
name of the company in the ad to
"Family Life Services," but upon calling
the number I found out this is only the
name of the grup that sponsors our local
"Pregnancy Counseling Center."
Originally I wanted to try and get the ads
pulled from The Daily until these people
accurately described the services the
"clinic" provides, as well as their stance
on Women's Reproductive Freedom. Yet,
as a friend recently pointed out, these
people have the right, to print ads that lie
if they wish. For this reason I now
propose that The Daily advertising staff
allow an opposing group to place an ad
right next to it indicating, everyday, what
the place is really all about.
Finally, I urge any and all women who
need a pregnancy test to check out the
various organization before making an


Address the root of the problem


Have you
rent from

ever withheld
a landlord or

of leases

a private housing
Currently, the majority
signed with students
the University as the

Recognizig Mandela

Board of Regents reversed its
previous decision against
conferring an honorary degree
upon imprisoned South African
Black activist Nelson Mandela at
May Commencement. While the
regents deserve commendation for
conceding to this recent demand of
UCAR and BAM III, the
University community should be
wary lest this action direct attention
away from the recent criticisms of
the University's institutional
The regents' action comes after
years of demands from campus
groups such as the Free South
Africa Coordinating Committee and
the Daily. Until yesterday, the
regents denied these requests on
the authority of a regental bylaw
which requires that all recipients of
honorary degrees be physically
present at commencement to accept
their diplomas. The University is
making a long-overdue

around the world.
While the regents claim
escalating pressure from UCAR
and BAM III had no influence on
their decision, there can be little
doubt that it precipitated
yesterday's vote. The regents state
that they acted primarily on the
recommendation of the
University's Honorary Degree
committee and some regents state
that the protests actually weighed
against degree conferral.
Acceding to demands for the
honorary degree, the regents took
no action on the other imminently
reasonable demands made by these
At least one regent dissented
from the action to grant Mandela a
degree. Deane Baker argued
vehemently that granting an
honorary degree to Mandela
constitutes an endorsement of
"killing and violence" and a choice
by the University "to side with
violence over non-violence in this

To the Daily:
Vice President Duderstadt
recently announced that he has
set aside a million dollars to
encourage innovative proposals
for the improvement of unde -
graduate teaching. That sounds
like a worthy purpose, given
the noticeable shortcomings in
undergraduate teaching and
counseling at this university.
At its meeting of 9 March,
the LSA faculty - or those
few faculty members who took
the trouble to attend it -
discussed this action. Some
faculty members noted concern
that the one million dollars
came from the departmental
budgets, i. e., from funds that
are used primarily to pay for
faculty salries. That would be
like robbing Peter to pay Paul
and could hardly be considered a
meaningful approach to the
improvement of undergraduate
After a no more than
cursory discussion, the faculty
voted by a very narrow margin
to recommend to the Vice
President that the only honest
method of improving teaching
would be to hire more teaching
faculty. Any other use of the
money was likely to turn into
mere gimmickry, and instead of
improving the quality of
teaching was likely to enrich
those who are best trained in
writing clever grant applic -
ations. One might add that ,
another honest use of this
money might also be to
provide more support for
graduate assistants and general1
counselors, counseling being
an essential part of good 3
In the discussion preceding

the vote, one professor critic -
ized the motion as "self-serving
administration bashing." One
wonders whether that was not a
very self-serving remark; and
now that Vice President
Duderstadt has announced that
he will not abide by the faculty
recommendation, one might
argue that the present
university administration needs
far more bashing than it gets.
A more sensible objection
to the motion which was raised
at the meeting was the
suggestion that hiring more
teaching personnel was not the
only method for improving the
quality of undergraduate educa -
tion. In some fields certain
kinds of equipment essential to
a good instruction program
were sorely needed. Granted. A
biology lab, say, with an
insufficient number of
microscopes is as inadequate as
an overcrowded lecture course
or an inaccessible professor.
What was not said, becaus it
must be obvious to all, is that
the motion goes against the
grain of how this university
operates and likes to see itself.
This is a major center of
learning, with an international
reputation, a great university.
But its greatness is generally
measured quality of publishable
research done by its faculty.
But its greatness is generally
measured by the number of
quality Ph.D.s it "jproduces"
and by the quantity and quality
of publishable research done by
its faculty. Given that standard
by which we measure our
excellence, we assign a
relatively unimportant place to
undergraduate instruction.
The faculty at the university

can be divided, very roughly,
into two main categories:
There are those who do research
and a substantial amount of
teaching and counseling; let us
call those men and women the
teaching faculty. Then there are
those who do research and a
minimal amoung of teaching
(and at times no counseling
whatsoever); let us call them
the research faculty.
In order to determine how
money taken from departmental
budgets ought to be used in
order to improve undergraduate
education, I would like to see
several hypotheses tested. They
are, for the time being, no
more than hypotheses. They
appear obvious to me and to
many of my colleagues, but
what may appear obvious to
some may seem false to others
and therefore we need
convincing proof.
Hypothesis No.1 In the
social sciences and humanities,
and perhaps also the natural
sciences, the research faculty
does not produce significantly
more research than the teaching
faculty. Nor is the quality of
research done by the research
faculty significantly higher
than that done by the teaching
Hypothesis No.2 Some
exceptional cases notwithstand -
ing, people in the research
faculty on the average receive
far higher salaries than those in
the teaching faculty. One
might refine this hypothesis by
stating it as follows: The total
time faculty members spend
with undergraduate students is
inversely proportional to the
pay they receive for the aca -
demic year.

Hypothesis No.3 Research
faculty members enjoy ample
support services by having at
their disposal plenty of
secretarial help, graduate
assistants, computer time, etc.,
while teaching faculty
members often do their own
filing, their own typing, and
their own preliminary library
If the above hypothesies are
confirmed, give and take some
notable exceptions, the con -
clusion would be that a
powerful disincentive to teach
is operative in this university;
and if that is so, we ought to
do some serious thinking abou
removing that disincentive. A
mere million dollars thrown at
the problem will not make
much of a dent.
-Alfred G. Meyer
March 19
An endorsement
To the Daily:
In our last weekly meeting
(3-11-87), the Latin America
Solidarity Committee voted
unanimously to endorse
UCAR's 12 demands. There
was a general consensus that
these demandscconstituted a
first step towards addressing the
problem of racism at the
University. Having been
actively involved in
combatting a racist foreign
policy that has led to the deaths
of more than 100,000 Latinos
at the hands of the Nicaruguan
Contras and the Salvadoran and
Guatemalan military and death
squads, we fully support the
efforts of those who are directly
confronting racism here at the
-Liz Gottlieb
March 12

ITA"A A.u a61

_.rEh it

li 1 I CIAJoe ftA v



Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan