LETTERS: Private medical schools part of solution
To the editor:
Dr. Mitchell Forman’s commentary was an important addition to the current dialogue surrounding the future of medical education in Nevada (“Residencies bigger key to state’s health-care future,” Tuesday Review-Journal). I applaud his efforts to raise awareness regarding not only persistent misconceptions about the impact a medical school brings to address the physician shortage in Nevada without having a concurrent commitment to fund residency programs, but also regarding the role of private, not-for-profit universities such as Touro University Nevada and my institution, Roseman University of Health Sciences.
All too often, it seems as if the two private, not-for-profit universities located in southern Nevada (Roseman and Touro), which both have established the education and training of health professionals as core competencies, are overlooked. As Dr. Forman noted, Touro’s College of Medicine, which offers the Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (D.O.) Degree, and Roseman’s College of Medicine, which will offer a Medical Doctorate (M.D.) beginning in fall 2017, will raise Nevada’s ratio of medical students per 100,000 residents to well above the national average. Neither university is supported through legislative appropriation of taxpayer dollars.
The Las Vegas Metro Chamber of Commerce’s op-ed focused on the economic impact that UNLV’s proposed medical school would bring to the community (“Full funding of medical school an imperative,” March 8 Review-Journal). While that is true, it is also true that this economic impact is not exclusive to a taxpayer supported medical school — private medical schools provide an equal boost to the economy, as well, and in fact have the potential to positively impact the economy in a greater way since there is no ongoing cost borne by the perpetual investment of tax revenues.
I applaud Dr. Forman’s efforts to broaden the dialogue and to provide an open and factual discussion of the current and future status of medical education (medical school and graduate medical education) in Southern Nevada. I also agree that any meaningful progress to be made on this front “must involve a collaboration and partnership between the private and public sectors.”
DR. RENEE COFFMAN
Henderson
The writer is president and co-founder of Roseman University of Health Sciences.
No to campus carry
To the editor:
For the past month and a half, gun advocates have dominated the legislative process in Carson City. Polls indicate that a vast majority of Nevadans favor comprehensive background checks for purchasing a gun and common-sense gun legislation. Although Gov. Brian Sandoval’s budgetary priority is clear, it appears some Republican legislators have bigger fish to fry: gun rights must be expanded to the point of absurdity and danger.
As a retired school teacher and UNLV lecturer, and the wife of a college professor, I watch aghast as Assemblywoman Michele Fiore and her allies push radical bills such as campus carry, which I and many others consider a major danger to our safety. Research shows that more guns do not equal more safety, but less.
As a professor, my husband and many of his colleagues are terrified at the prospect of gun-toting students. Some student, beset by stress or mental illness, could turn on a dime and endanger not only the professor, but fellow students. Even worse is the thought of multiple gun owners drawing their weapons at a perceived intruder and actually shooting wildly at each other as they attempt to identify the assailant.
I am asking the silent majority favoring sensible gun legislation to reject these irresponsible gun bills. Our safety demands it.
JEAN MELBY-MAUER
LAS VEGAS
