INSIGHT KANSAS: Roadblock for enhancing the Kansas image

With three Kansas universities receiving seeds in the NCAA men’s basketball tournament, the state has the opportunity to remind the rest of the country that our public universities have a record of excellence.

It matters not that athletic teams are carrying the banner for academic programs. What counts is that millions of basketball fans will hear repeated references to KU, K-State and WSU in what amounts to free national advertising for the Kansas Regents system.
Although it makes faculty nervous to think so, the reputation of its sports teams has a lot to do with a university’s prestige.

Public perceptions about a university’s quality have a direct impact on enrollments and giving, which rise when its teams do well.
But just as higher education in Kansas was being thrust onto the national stage, the Kansas Legislature told the world that academic excellence is not our priority.

In recent weeks Kansas has attracted a fair amount of national media attention because of the House Federal and State Affairs Committee’s consideration of the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. Of specific interest here is the dispute over a provision in the bill to prohibit obstetrics and gynecology residents at the University of Kansas Medical Center from receiving abortion training.

Med Center officials pointed out that the training, which is not conducted at the KU Hospital but at privatefacilities, is required by the Accrediting Council for Graduate Medical Education.

Although there is an opt-out for residents who have moral or religious objections to abortion, experts believe the training is essential to prepare physicians for their work.

Why does accreditation matter? Accreditation, which certifies academic programs as meeting education standards, is a requirement for federal funding, and doctors seeking specialty credentials must be graduates of accredited programs.

High-quality medical school applicantsshun programs that do not make the grade.

In short, loss of accreditation would destroy the state’s ob-gyn training program.

When the accreditation problem came to light, Kansans might have expected members of the House committee to scramble to amend the bill and decisively protect the state’s medical school, but abortion politics, the tail that wags the dog in Topeka, trumped that concern. Lawmakers responded with stalling tactics.

Moreover, posturing over the issue suggested that the ob-gyn program may have been a target rather than an incidental victim.
Kathy Ostrowski of Kansans for Life asked anti-abortion voters to contact Gov. Sam Brownback and urge him to stop abortion training at the medical school.

She also incorrectly stated that “there is no professional reason” for the training and that “state sovereignty determines standards for medical training and practice – not ACEGME.” While the state may license physicians, it does not accredit the schools that train them.

On Thursday, after media reports percolated for more than a week, the House committee’s chair, Steve Brunk, R-Wichita, finally said an amendment would be offered to protect the Med Center’s accreditation for one year, allowing lawmakers to debate the issue again in 2013.

Even if the bill advances with some protection for the medical school, the state has taken another public relations hit for its retrograde politics.

That the House committee did not jump at the first opportunity to end uncertainty about the medical school’s accreditation sent a bewildering message about the state’s commitment to educational excellence.

This is all the more puzzling because the stakes are so high.

Rural counties in Kansas face a physician shortage and the Med Center is seeking a National Cancer Institute designation for its oncology center.

So much for national image enhancement.

—Gwyn Mellinger is a professor at Baker University.