mobility
impairments,
the
accommodations
process
is
a
collaborative
effort
and
dependent on communication.
“Accommodations
are
95
percent
communications,”
Marshall said. “(We) are taking
a lot of time to make sure
(students) are being supported
in the classroom … and making
sure that everyone feels good
about everything; it’s a team
effort.”
Marshall
emphasized
each student’s needs differ.
When
evaluating
students’
accommodations,
she
looks
over their medical reports
from doctors, researches the
condition
and
meets
with
students individually.
“I believe that people with
disabilities know themselves
best,” Marshall said. “It’s an
individualistic
process
and
every student is completely
different than another.”
LSA senior Lauren Kimmel,
president of the Crohn’s and
Colitis Student Initiative, said
she needs the support of the
SSD in order to schedule her
IV infusions when she must
miss
class.
Public
Health
student Kayla Mandel, former
president of the organization,
said students with Crohn’s
may need to take an exam
in a separate room close to
a bathroom and be timed
separately.
“No
one
has
the
same
manifestation of Crohn’s, but
for me I fear... during an exam
or a pop quiz, having to run
to the bathroom and get back
and having time being called,”
Mandel said. “(I) fear that
professors are going to think
you are acting nefariously.”
According to Mandel, many
students do not know how to
receive accommodations for
their illness.
“(The possible alteration)
isn’t advertised, you have to
seek it out. It’s not like the
University emails me (about
accommodations),”
Mandel
said. “They aren’t going to pull
that information and inform
me about it.”
Polay
is
not
registered
with the SSD and said she
does not feel that she needs
the accommodations. While
taking an exam in a separate
room would be helpful if she
needs to check her blood sugar,
Polay said she is concerned the
isolated environment would
harm her performance. Rather,
she ensures she is prepared
for an exam by eating before
and making sure she has extra
supplies in her backpack.
“I definitely think it would
be helpful because it would
take off that extra worry I
have during an exam,” Polay
said. “I don’t know if it would
be beneficial (for me) because I
just know that if you are ready
and prepared for something
and are surrounded by a bunch
of people you do better than
when you are just around
yourself.”
Invisible
illnesses
often
make students worry about
how
professors
and
other
students
perceive
them
in
the
classroom.
Many
of
these students may have to
step out of class to go to the
bathroom
or
check
their
blood sugar, something that
may take more time than a
traditional bathroom break.
An illness like Crohn’s can also
deplete a student’s immune
system,
making
recovery
from a traditional cold more
challenging.
“On the outside, you can’t
tell
if
they
are
physical
disabilities,”
Mandel
said.
“They
are
called
invisible
illnesses for a reason, so a
classmate might think you are
slacking on something and
didn’t turn in the assignment
because you look hungover but
actually you are recovering
from a cold you got two weeks
ago.”
Marshall said she works
with registered students on
self-advocacy in the classroom,
a skill they can also use in
the professional world in the
future.
“I
really
think
what’s
difficult for these students
is the invisible nature of it,
and there is the feeling they
need to prove that they might
be
struggling,”
Marshall
said. “Even if they might tell
someone, there is a sense of not
quite believing the individual
…
I
work
really
closely
with my students on self-
advocacy skills, just because
it’s something you are going
to readily need from time to
time so they have those skills
readily at hand.”
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Tuesday, February 13, 2018 — 3
as early as 2008 and were accessed
up to May 17, 2017.
Hoeltzel’s lawyer, Raymond
Cassar, told The Daily he believes
the woman’s mental health played
a role in her relationship with the
doctor. He also thinks Hoeltzel
did not have sexual relationships
with any other patients.
“All we know is some tidbits in
this complaint about her,” Cassar
said. “I’m wondering what was
really going on.”
Hoeltzel is scheduled for a
detention hearing on Wednesday,
where the decision will be made of
whether to release him on bond, or
if he will continue his time in jail
until the case outcome is decided.
Cassar said he thinks it will be
more beneficial for Hoeltzel to be
out on bond.
“He’s going to be of more help
to me (in this case) if he’s out
here,” Cassar said.
Michigan Medicine was made
aware of this investigation in
early December and fired him
from his position. According to a
statement released by Marschall
Runge, executive vice president of
Medical Affairs at the University
and
the
CEO
of
Michigan
Medicine,
the
institution
is
providing
all
resources
for
patients to report any concerns,
as well as fully cooperating with
Hoetzel’s investigation.
“These are very disturbing and
serious allegations, and we have
reached out to our patients to
inform them of concerns related to
Dr. Hoeltzel, offer resources and
provide them with a way to report
any concerns,” Runge wrote.
Additionally,
Runge
reaffirmed Michigan Medicine’s
prioritization and commitment to
patient safety.
“Any behaviors we discover
that risk the safety of our patients
or employees, or violate state or
federal law, will be reviewed and
addressed with the appropriate
follow up,” the statement reads.
“In addition, we have retained
an
experienced
national
law
firm with expertise in this area
to investigate this matter. The
review is ongoing with the goals
of better understanding the facts
and circumstances surrounding
this
incident,
identifying
opportunities for improvement,
and furthering the mission of the
University to provide the safest
and the highest quality patient
care.”
where to invest their available
funds. According to the Free
Press, as much as $4 billion
of
the
University’s
nearly
$11
billion
endowment
has
been invested back into the
companies of large donors such
as alumni Sandy Robertson,
Sam Zell and Stephen Ross.
The report also claimed the
amount of oversight over the
endowment
has
decreased
while the endowment itself
has increased over the past
few years. According to the
University’s
2017
Financial
Report, the endowment has
increased from $9.7 billion
in 2016 to the current $10.9
billion.
In
response
to
the
investigation,
University
President Mark Schlissel wrote
in an op-ed article published
by the Free Press that the
claims about the endowment
are false and do not reflect
the
investment
materials
provided by the University.
The University Public Affairs
Department
also
published
an explanatory webpage to
respond to the claims made by
the Free Press.
“We have said all along that
our endowment’s purpose is to
provide
sustained
resources
to support our students and
academic programs,” Schlissel
wrote. “Without donor and
endowment
support,
annual
tuition in Ann Arbor would
be nearly $6,000 higher per
student. This success requires
that we achieve the highest
returns
through
the
best
investments.”
In response to the University
and the endowment claims, the
resolution sponsored by the
Roosevelt Institute and College
Democrats
is
particularly
concerned with how students’
tuition is being invested in
ways that will be beneficial to
the community of which they
are a part.
LSA
junior
Christopher
Olson, one of the authors of the
resolution and co-president of
the Roosevelt Institute, wrote
in an email interview that
investments in companies of
major donors limit the amount
the University can use to assist
students with rising condition
costs.
“As students we have a
vested interest in how the
endowment is used to promote
the educational excellence of
this University,” Olson wrote.
“Conflicts
of
interest
with
University endowment have the
potential to reduce the returns
of the endowment which in
turn will reduce the money
which could be used to reduce
the cost of tuition.”
Public policy junior Lauren
Schandevel,
communications
director of College Democrats,
wrote in an email interview that
allowing benefactors to serve
on the Investment Advisory
Committee is a large conflict of
interest for the University.
“Students have a right to
know where the University
invests its money, especially
if its motivation for doing so
is purely to benefit donors,”
Schandevel wrote. “It seems
like common sense that if the
University
invests
in
your
business, then you should not
be permitted to sit on the its
(sic)
Investment
Advisory
Committee. That is an obvious
conflict of interest and it not
only keeps money away from
programs that truly benefit
students — like financial aid,
housing and academic services
— but it also erodes our trust in
the institution.”
According to the webpage
published by Public Affairs,
including alumni donors in the
investment process increases
the efficiency and productivity
of the committee.
“The fact is, U-M alums are
some of the top investment
managers in the nation,” the
page stated. “We would be
foolish not to reach out to these
alumni for their high-level
advice and, when it fits with
the
University’s
investment
approach, to invest in their
well-managed funds. The key
fact is that all investment
opportunities get vetted in the
same fashion and we only invest
with funds and managers that
meet our stringent criteria.”
In
an
official
statement
published on the Roosevelt
Institute’s Facebook page, the
two organizations criticized
the 2 percent — or $218 million
— the University invests in
firms owned by members of the
advisory committee, claiming
the figure is still a large
amount
of
available
funds.
They also mentioned the lack
of specificity in regard to the
criteria by which investments
are considered and the claim
that tuition would decrease if
these endowment funds were
spent at the University instead
of through investments.
“We
call
on
the
Board
of
Regents
to
increase
transparency
on
investment
decisions and performance, to
increase their oversight of the
endowment, to appropriately
address
potential
conflicts
of interest, and to increase
annual endowment spending to
sufficiently serve the University
community,”
the
statement
read.
“The
University’s
investment
and
endowment
spending decisions have eroded
our trust in U-M. Instituting
these reforms would begin to
restore it.”
University spokesman Rick
Fitzgerald wrote in an email
interview the Regents already
publish approved investments
on their website, so a call for
more transparency from the
Regents is not a reflection of
the current situation.
“All new investments are
approved by the Board of
Regents
and
are
publicly
available as part of the board
meeting
agenda,”
Fitzgerald
wrote. “For example, later this
week Regents will consider
a $30 million investment in
Detroit area housing.”
Fitzgerald also mentioned
the segment of the Public
Affairs Q&Apertaining to the
spending of endowment funds.
The website claims endowment
funds cannot be spent on any
area the University sees fit.
“How endowment funds may
be spent is usually restricted
by
the
donor,”
the
Public
Affairs website read. “Such
funds can be used only for the
specific purpose for which the
endowment was established …
To ensure continuing support
for
future
generations,
the
funds themselves are not spent
but invested so that part of the
annual distribution can provide
a steady flow of dollars each
year.”
LSA senior Enrique Zalamea,
president of the University’s
Chapter of College Republicans,
stressed this is not a partisan
issue and that all students
should come together to ensure
there are checks and balances
to the people in power when
it comes to investing tuition
dollars.
“It’s not a partisan issue
for us, we just think that
the
University
needs
more
transparency,” Zalamea said.
LSA junior Amanda Delekta,
vice
president
of
College
Republicans, voiced concerns
about the endowment being
utilized for future investments
in
addition
to
improving
current University practices
and
lowering
costs.
She
also explained why she is in
support of a resolution asking
for more transparency from
the University on these large
investments.
“Our motivation as students
on this campus is to make
sure tuition is going toward
investments that best serve
us, that will best reap rewards
and create programs for us to
thrive in and take advantage
of,” Delekta said. “So I think it’s
really important to make a more
transparent system where the
endowment is being invested
to best serve students, and I
don’t know if that’s necessarily
happening right now.”
ENDOWMENT
From Page 1
SSD
From Page 1
HOELTZEL
From Page 1
able to carve out money in the state
budget in a time where we haven’t
had a lot of new programs so it’s
been exciting to see this as an area of
bipartisan focus.”
That money has been used to fund
individual university proposals to
reduce sexual misconduct on their
campuses.
She added that the issue went
to higher societal levels, a topic
which U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell,
D-Mich., spoke on as well, alluding
to the recent national conversation
sparked by the #MeToo movement
— a social movement encouraging
women to come forward about
sexual
harassment
and
abuse
they’ve survived.
“We’re at a crossroads in this
country,”
Dingell
said.
“When
the #MeToo movement started in
November, I said at the time that
there were consequences for too
many women (for reporting on
sexual assault). It wasn’t going to be
real until it was real for the waitress,
for the factory worker, the lawyer
trying to be partner or student on
campus.”
She went on to criticize White
House officials on all levels for not
acknowledging the movement and
the high-profile cases that have
driven national conversation.
Public Policy senior Stephanie
Gusching, the chair of government
relations
for
Central
Student
Government, said the event was
intended to bring students into
dialogue with legislators about
issues that affect them, and the
event was successful on this front.
The
Michigan
Daily
interviewed Rupert Allman, the
executive producer of NPR’s daily
radio show “1A,” prior to this
week’s recording of the show at the
University of Michigan hosted by
Wallace House. Joshua Johnson,
NPR’s host of “1A,” will talk
on “Speak Freely: Debating the
First Amendment in a Changing
America.” The recording will
be held Thursday at Rackham
Auditorium.
Here are some highlights from
the interview:
TMD: I want to talk about,
first, the background of this show.
It seems really geared toward
significant issues of our time
here in the United States — with
our current political and social
climate, how have you seen the
significance of the show change?
Allman: We’re new, we’ve
only been going a year, so it
might be a bit early for us to
make any firm conclusions about
changing dialogue. I think what
was important for us when
we launched the program was
that we felt that it was going to
be really important to try and
provide some vehicle on the air
or online where we were happy
to let it go anywhere, but the only
rule we had was the fact that it
was going to be done in a way
where we avoided just people
shouting at each other. I don’t
mean we can’t be passionate.
But it’s really important that
we wanted to make sure that
whatever we produced, people
felt that they’re heard. … I worry
a lot about the fact that, clearly
there’s always going to be any
number of shades of opinion that
people genuinely feel, no matter
what their position, they’re being
heard, and I think that’s where
we’ve come at the program, at
least in our first year.
TMD: And what do you hope
your central audience is?
Allman: It’s a challenging
one, because to a certain extent
we’re hoping that we’re part of
a movement; perhaps people
discover us really anywhere that
they choose. Typically, on one
level, we’re a very traditional
outfit, a legacy media piece — you
can hear us on the radio, you can
tune in when we’re live and all
of it. But what we’ve been trying
to do more aggressively is make
sure that we’re also in front of
audiences who would never own
a radio, they wouldn’t know how
to turn on a radio. There are
plenty of people who know what
we do because they only get us
on their phone, for example, or
they might sample some of what
we have through social media
or something like that. If we’re
more successful in that area, then
the argument from our point of
view is that we’ll hopefully bring
in people who know nothing
about public radio. It’s not really
part of their media diet, and
we’re kind of introducing them
into something which hopefully
would be some kind of area of
discovery. Through us, they
might find other things; they
might find other, different pieces
that they wouldn’t normally
consume. I think that’s part of
the mission; not just to keep us
across the news, but also feel
that we’re thinking about how
we can get our content and our
conversations in front of people
who wouldn’t be a traditional
public radio audience.
TMD:
Right,
and
that
definitely makes sense because
a lot of these issues are so
significant to the general public,
not just the news mediascape.
Allman: I think you’re right
— it’s that whole thing about
who you’re talking to. We’re very
conscious about preaching to the
choir, we love the choir; they’re
great for us, they’re hugely
supportive, they’re absolutely
valuable to what we do and are
truly important to our business
model, but I think we’re really
conscious about the idea now
that there is a very much so
fragmented media landscape. We
can’t expect them to come to us;
it’s about how we aggressively go
after them.
It’s important that we are
mobile
—
we’re
a
national
program,
we’re
based
in
Washington, D.C. — but it’s really
important for us to make sure
that we, as a new program, get in
front of new audiences, go to new
places, try different things out,
and we’re trying to start to do
that. It’s going to be a long thing
for us to successfully do but it’s
important that we’re asking to be
mobile because there’s no reason
why we have to stay in our studio
environment being comfortable
inside.
TMD: You’ll be coming to U of
M to talk about these issues, and
of course the First Amendment
and free speech has come up
quite a bit for the University of
Michigan, especially recently
— can you talk about (and this
also previews the event a bit) the
role of free speech with regard
to often controversial speakers
like Richard Spencer or – we
also hosted Charles Murray in
the fall – talk about that role and
the possibility of them coming to
campus?
Allman: I’m not here to offer
definitive answers. I think it
is a hugely important and very
complicated subject. I think
what’s important in terms of what
we’re planning for this week is I
think there are peculiarities and
sensitivities about free speech
on campus that really is worth
exploring and is worth finding a
little bit about — not just where
we are at the moment, but
perhaps the direction of travel
for some of these arguments.
Because depending where you
are on the spectrum, you can
see the debate as it happens
on campus as being a kind of
microcosm of the way this debate
will play out on a much bigger
field in the next five or 10 years’
time. I’m really intrigued to kind
of sample something which goes
beyond the little bit of academic
discourse, if you know what I
mean. It’s one of those things
where you feel perhaps there
may well be generational divides
in this particular argument,
that it goes a little bit perhaps
to what we’ve heard from some
of the #MeToo discussion, that
depending on your age and
circumstance,
you’re
clearly
looking at this in a different
way, and that thing that really
fascinates me, of course, is the
fact that some of the positions
seemed to be flipped. That those
who take a particular position
you would naturally assume
to be maybe perhaps part of
a younger demographic, and
the more conservative, kind of
intense positions, being someone
on the older range of things. That
feels at the moment, that a lot of
things we’re talking about are
on their heads, it’s been turned
topsy-turvy a little bit, and I
think that’s worthy of discussion.
… We’re very happy to expose
some of those raw nerve ends, but
hopefully push past just all the
heat and see if some of the debate
we get into can make us think
a little bit more broadly about
where the discussion is going.
PANEL
From Page 1
A sitdown with “1A” producer Rupert Allman
Ahead of show’s live recording on campus Thursday, NPR team looks at free speech, media role
ALEXA ST. JOHN
Editor-in-Chief
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com