Search News


Browse Archives

News

Quick Takes: Jury Awards $1.7M to Ex-Dental Student, Reforms Urged for Medical Residents, Cleveland Clinic Will Reveal Researchers' Corporate Ties, 6 Arrests for Band Hazing, Ex-Dean Cleared, Grawemeyer in Psychology, Milestone for Holocaust History

December 3, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement
  • A federal jury on Tuesday awarded $1.72 million to a former dental student at the University of Michigan who said she was kicked out of the program because of a feud between an associate dean and two professors, the Associated Press reported. The former student said she became a target when the two professors refused to allow her special testing conditions because of her attention deficit disorder. A university spokeswoman told the AP that the university was disappointed in the verdict and needed to "exercise careful and deliberate judgment about who should be permitted to graduate from its professional schools and practice in the health care professions."
  • Additional "adjustments" are needed in the rules governing the work of medical residents, according to a report issued Tuesday by the Institute of Medicine. The report notes that the system has improved since 2003 limits were imposed on the maximum hours per week that residents could work (80), and the longest consecutive period of time (30 hours). But the report says that the 30-hour shifts remain problematic. In addition, the report suggests changes involving enhanced supervision, time off for sleep, and better "handovers" of patient care to "minimize the risk of error" by residents. The Association of American Medical Colleges issued a statement praising the report but also noting -- as the Institute of Medicine did -- that changes would require "significant time and resources."
  • The Cleveland Clinic -- a major center for biomedical research -- plans to start making public the ties between its medical scientists and all drug companies or medical device producers, The New York Times reported. The move comes amid criticism from Congress and elsewhere that many medical researchers fail to adequately report such ties, and that conflicts of interest are raising doubts about important findings.
  • Six students at Southern University at Baton Rouge were arrested Tuesday on felony charges of ritualistic torture and battery for repeatedly beating new members of the marching band with a board as part of a hazing tradition, The Advocate reported. Two students were hospitalized because of the beatings. Southern issued a statement in which it said it had "zero tolerance for hazing."
  • A federal judge has found that John Soloski should be cleared of charges at the University of Georgia that he harassed an employee, the Associated Press reported. The charges against the former journalism dean were "arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable," the judge found. Soloski was accused of harassing an employee by commenting on her appearance.
  • The University of Louisville has announced that Anne Treisman is the winner of the 2009 University of Louisville Grawemeyer Award for Psychology, worth $200,000. Treisman, the James S. McDonnell Distinguished University Professor of Psychology at Princeton University, was honored for her work explaining how our brains build meaningful images from the bits of information we see.
  • The Shoah Foundation at the University of Southern California and Sun Microsystems plan today to announce that the foundation has now captured more than 100,000 hours of oral history recordings of Holocaust survivors on high quality systems that will preserve the records. The project involving the foundation and a Sun platform has been considered an important one for long-term study of the Holocaust.
See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on Quick Takes: Jury Awards $1.7M to Ex-Dental Student, Reforms Urged for Medical Residents, Cleveland Clinic Will Reveal Researchers' Corporate Ties, 6 Arrests for Band Hazing, Ex-Dean Cleared, Grawemeyer in Psychology, Milestone for Holocaust History

  • Oh look, a butterfly!
  • Posted by Richard , Administrator at eastern university on December 3, 2008 at 7:55am EST
  • i agree with the UofM position about their right and need to make a "judgment about who should be permitted to graduate from its professional schools and practice in the health care profession" and the Dental professors for not supporting extra testing time for a student with ADD. Would you want your dentist (or doctor or nurse) to lose focus in the middle of treating you? How about if it is in their 29th hour of shift work during their residency, as per the IOM report in the next story? There is enough accidental "poor care" wihtout deliberately adding more opportunites.

  • Posted by school psychologist on December 3, 2008 at 8:40am EST
  • I have recommended alternative testing and special testing situations for countless students with various LD problems. That being said, my wish was to help them just get through high school. There are some vocations that people with having limiting handicaps should not take up. Perhaps dentistry is one of them. Okay, throw rocks at me. But big, heavy boned people have to give up gymnastic dreams, too, as the saying goes "through no fault of their own" except that they can't do it as well as those slender, lightweight flexible individuals. Folks who wear glasses must give up dreams of becoming pilots through no fault of their own. At some point in time, a person needs to get square with the cards he or she has been dealt. A million dollars as compensation for not being allowed extra time on the tests, or perhaps other accommodations re: fine motor skills? I am not persuaded.

  • Guess what? We're everywhere.
  • Posted by Gabrielle H. , Assistant Professor on December 3, 2008 at 9:10am EST
  • I'm dismayed to see the ignorance about ADD displayed in the first 2 comments. There is a wide range of severity of ADD and its symptoms, and there is a major difference between taking a written exam, or a practical one for that matter, and working in a professional setting. Presumably many of us have control over our work environment that we don't always have as students in the classroom; I've learned numerous ways to compensate for my ADD by reducing known triggers. There's no reason to think that a dentist with ADD couldn't also modify his or her office environment in such ways.

    Yes, sometimes we need to play the cards we're dealt. But the analogies used so far reflect a sad misunderstanding of what it's like to live with ADD -- and the professionalism and competence that most of us bring to our careers and those we serve.

  • Posted by Cato on December 3, 2008 at 10:20am EST
  • Gabrielle,

    I understand that it can be difficult to live with ADD, but that is not actually relevant here. You make the mistake of assuming that being kind to people with ADD is more important than ensuring safe, competent medical care. Sensitivity is important, but it is not the trump card of all virtues.

  • Insight
  • Posted by Peter on December 3, 2008 at 10:35am EST
  • Thanks to Gabrielle for correctly identifying the differences between exam accommodation and success in the workplace. In any profession there are superb practitioners who earlier struggled with the hurdles within the curricula leading to their degrees.

  • Competency, not kindness, IS my point.
  • Posted by Gabrielle H. on December 3, 2008 at 11:25am EST
  • Cato, I'm not advocating extra kindness for folks with ADD or any other disability -- I'd advocate kindness towards everyone. But your comment about ADD affecting safe, competent medical care suggests that you paint all those who have ADD with the same broad brush and assume that the condition renders us incompetent or unsafe. That's unfair, it's inaccurate, and it's being disproved every day by people around you who function with all kinds of conditions, including ADD.

    I read the original article -- check it out if you haven't already -- and comments like "She's a brat" and "if you can't handle college, don't go" reflect a broader ignorance and intolerance in our culture regarding numerous issues, including who "deserves" such access and what the parameters of accommodation should be. But back to this case: the student had a B average and according to the story, the dean forced 2 professors to quit when they would not falsely attest to the student's supposed "incompetence." (If a B average is "incompetent" at UM, that's going to be mighty unpleasant news to a major portion of its student body.) That ADD was apparently used as an excuse to expel this student, who was accepted to several dental schools besides UM, shows both alarming disinterest in the law and a shrewd sense of
    what outdated, inaccurate stereotypes are most effective when inappropriately dismissing a student.

  • Reality of ADHD and ADD
  • Posted by New Prof , Assistant professor on December 3, 2008 at 3:10pm EST
  • Regardless of how you personally feel about honoring accomodations or disability in the work place the fact of the matter is that if a student has a learning disability and has taken steps usually in place at institutions of higher learning to register that LD the university is bound to honor accomodations. The Americans with Disabilities Act protects Americans, even students, with disabilities including learning disabilities. It sounds as if the university violated that act and for my part they need to pay up and re-evaluate their responsibility to disabled students. The judgement is fair and legal and really has nothing to do with whether this student can or can't be a competent dentist---they violated her civil rights.

    That said, I have ADD and got through graduate school much as Gabrielle describes by knowing myself well enough to know what I can and can't do. Clearly this student needs accomodations when it comes to exams and even licensings boards such as the AMA honor accomodations without questioning competence. I figure if the American Dental Association is willing to license this student when the time comes I'd let her fill my cavities or build me a bridde. She has a learning disability---she is neither spoiled, bratty or incompetent. She learns differently---deal with it. Sounds like her former U is going to have to via writing her a check.