International students to pay for student health service?

Breezer

OK, I realise there's already a few threads floating around about cutbacks, cancelling the Gateway project, funding to provide car parks and the (now locked) student centre levy thread. Maybe a mega-merge is in order, but for now, I feel, given the huge publicity this issue got last year, that it deserves its own thread.

So according to the Observer, fees for the student health service are back on the agenda. The paper quotes SU President, Aodhán Ó Deá, as stating that he believes UCD will propose that only international students should pay for the health service. Additionally, Vice President for Students, Dr Martin Butler, is reported to be considering several options, including setting up a health insurance company on-campus.

I'm absolutely gobsmacked at these notions. Last year, an agreement was reached between Hugh Brady and other members of staff and the SU that fees would not be introduced for the student health service. Less than a year later, they're back on the agenda. I accept that money is now in shorter supply, but apparently despite this, UCD can afford to channel €10 million into consultancy fees for the Gateway project that will not be wholly owned by UCD for a number of years.

Additionally, charging international students only strikes me as a very sinister move. Not only are these students already paying fees, accommodation costs, and most likely coping with a much higher cost of living than exists in their own countries, but they are a minority group who appear to be being singled out unfairly.

As regards setting up a private health insurance company on campus, I simply cannot believe that the 'UCD as a business' philosophy has gone this far. I would be of the opinion that students who can afford private health insurance already have it, and those that cannot afford it will not benefit from this scheme. This is a public university and its services should not be privatised beyond the fees we are already paying. What's next, membership fees for the library? Did someone forget to tell Dr Butler that the PDs have disbanded?

Brady/Butler bashing is fashionable, and I'm normally fairly hesitant to jump down their throats, but this one has got my back up big time (as is probably evidenced by the very long post, even by my usual ranty standards).

Discuss.

Pride Fighter

Brady and Butler appear to be encouraging a Corporate ethos throughout the University. It does not bode well for the future. The University appears to be money mad. They should remember that University is about the people and not the cash. Obviously money is needed but to pay for every service is just despicable IMO. This will lead to bitterness amongst the students and future graduates may be reluctant to part with cash when they have earned their corn and as a result UCD will have less money in the future. I have enjoyed my time here and I would contribute to the University in a few years if I had the cash. But if the College continues on its current money over people course I would change my mind.
I hope I am making sense, I am very tired.

Breezer

Pride Fighter wrote: »

Obviously money is needed but to pay for every service is just despicable IMO.

Especially something that should be a basic entitlement. And when money is being handed over to consultants for a project nobody asked for that will bring very little monetary benefit for many years. On top of the fact that less than 9 months ago we were promised this would not happen.

And what is the logic behind targeting international students?

Pride Fighter

Breezer wrote: »

Especially something that should be a basic entitlement. And when money is being handed over to consultants for a project nobody asked for that will bring very little monetary benefit for many years. On top of the fact that less than 9 months ago we were promised this would not happen.

And what is the logic behind targeting international students?

It could be described as racist. As soon as that word comes into play hopefully they will back down.

rainbow kirby

That's ridiculous. Completely and utterly ridiculous. Surely the point of a student health service is that it provides free/inexpensive health care to any student who needs it, not to target a vulnerable group within the college (ironically, a group containing a large number of meds...).

Stabshauptmann

Breezer wrote: »

And what is the logic behind targeting international students?

The logic has something to do with them being able to claim in back and so technically they wont be paying for it - but I dont know the ins and outs.

Breezer

Kaptain Redeye wrote: »

The logic has something to do with them being able to claim in back and so technically they wont be paying for it - but I dont know the ins and outs.

Yeah I've heard this since I posted. Still not on though, if every 3rd level institution started doing this you'd quickly see premiums rising for international students.

Apparently the Union are having none of this anyway, so I'm not going to worry for now.

Stabshauptmann

lol. Thats a lot of faith in the union

Stepherunie

I love the Way Kaptain you always have to diss the Union straight off.

I was at the meeting where Martin Butler first proposed this to Council members last year about international students being forced to use there insurance and he was firmly rebuffed by everyone there and there was talk of outright discrimination.

Everyone at that meeting was vehemently opposed to his suggestions and the mathematics presented were reminiscent of Minister O' Keeffes latest round whereby which was pointed out to him by numerous students who were there on the night.

The Union have taken a firm stand on this and aren't backing down, nor will they, they have a Union mandate and somehow I don't see the College beating them on this.

Now with the extra auxiliary services being developed like dentists and opiticians there will be a charge and I have no problem with that, but charging for basic healthcare is never going to be backed by the Union and I somehow think they'd fail to push it through without any Union help.

So stop slating people when so far they've actually achieved what they set out to achieve. Because I don't see a failure here do you????

Stabshauptmann

Stepherunie wrote: »

I love the Way Kaptain you always have to diss the Union straight off.

I needed the unions help 3 times when I was an undergrad.

I needed my class reps help when there was a serious problem with a lecturer giving exam hints to one class but not the other.
My class rep didnt see this as a problem as most people heard the hints through the grape vine and refused to bring up the issue. I raised it myself and after a few weeks got a satisfactory remedy.
The only thing my class rep did care about was a time table that didnt suit them and they kicked up a fuss over.

I needed the education offers help when UCD were being completely unreasonable about my fees. The officer in question never followed up on it, got back to me twice saying they were still looking to arrange a meeting then I never heard from them again. I had to write a dozen letters and talk to a dozen more people before finally getting it sorted, once again - without union help.

And I needed the union to help protect my rights when I had an issue with residences. This time the union kicked ass, or more to the point Mike Pat kicked ass - and he wasnt elected.

Ive sat on a few student-staff committees and seen the SU in action, Ive sat on council and seen how productive and representative it is [sic].

I think some of the people in the SU are very capable, some are very selfless and altruistic but I think as a whole the SU is inefficient, badly organised and unrepresentative of students.

So I might take some comfort in the SU taking up an issue that concerned me, but I definetly wouldnt stop worrying about it, safe in the knowledge that the SU is on the job.

It still brings a simultaneous chuckle and sense of horror to remember the SU ents officer who didnt know about VAT!

So stop slating people when so far they've actually achieved what they set out to achieve. Because I don't see a failure here do you????

The issue isnt over though is it? And what you set out to achieve is also an issue, you say you're quite content with the idea of a charge in principal its only the particulars you want to iron out.

Stepherunie

You get a free eye test every two years with PRSI payments, you can up to 2 free dental check ups per annum also with your PRSI allowances so for most that would be more that sufficient to allow them to utlise the optician and dentist for free if they were to come in.

I said that I would be happy to pay for dental and optical care on campus because these are auxillary services, unless you're on a medical card you dont' get the free in the outside world either. This is bearing in mind that more than likely these PRSI provisions would allow most to access these services for free.

I specifically said that I have no belief that there should be any cost of basic health care in UCD. Show me where I said I approved of it.

I believe in free healthcare for all. FFS I work trained in the health service. I've seen what it's like and I truly believe in a properly funded, well run health service for all. I think the fact that students are told to treat the health centre and only an adjunct for emergencies rather than a health centre they can use for there day to day healthcare for the 8/9 months of the year that they spend in college is a pile of bollox.

Breezer

Kaptain Redeye wrote: »

lol. Thats a lot of faith in the union

Yes, it is. This is something the union was very strong on last year and an agreement was reached whereby fees would not be introduced. As far as everyone was concerned, the matter was closed.

The fact that Butler is now making noises to the effect that he would like to circumvent that agreement does not mean the union failed in its objective, merely that Butler is being disingenuous. It is now up to the union to stand firm on what was agreed and based on what I've heard from its representatives so far I believe it will do that.

Stabshauptmann

Stepherunie wrote: »

Now with the extra auxiliary services being developed like dentists and opiticians there will be a charge and I have no problem with that, but charging for basic healthcare is never going to be backed by the Union and I somehow think they'd fail to push it through without any Union help.

"...what you set out to achieve is [] an issue [for me - ] you say you're quite content with the idea of a charge [for college services] in principal[,] its only the particulars you want to iron out".

I think that services provided by the university should be funded out of the university coffers. I wouldnt have a problem paying for services if it werent for the fact that we already pay an extortionate "student services fee"

Breezer

Kaptain Redeye wrote: »

I think that services provided by the university should be funded out of the university coffers. I wouldnt have a problem paying for services if it werent for the fact that we already pay an extortionate "student services fee"

You make a legitimate point about the fee we are currently paying. However, it costs a substantial amount to run a university, and the 3rd level sector is chronically underfunded by the Government. While I agree with you in principle, and I don't have an exact breakdown of figures, I accept that this money can only go so far, which is why we are currently having the fees debate.

While the idealist in me would therefore love to see a completely free student health service, complete with dental and optician services, I accept that it is not going to happen in the current circumstances. If the union stands firm and insists that the college continues to provide free basic healthcare to all students (as it agreed to do), along with running an effective information campaign on how to minimise (or in many cases eliminate) the costs of additional services, and when the time comes lobbying to ensure any charges for these services are reasonable, then I believe it will have done its job.

I also believe that a concerted effort to highlight the massive waste of money on the part of the university would not go amiss, and would lend considerable weight to the union's lobbying efforts.

Fionnanc

If the international students have a private insurance policy as part of their immigration requirements, I see no problems with them being billed for their healthcare. Does any of the student services fee go to the student health service.
Lastly the student health service is effectively a general practitioner service, so if you do not have a medical card you should pay for it, same for any GP service outside of campus. An appropriate fee would also discourage a lot of unnecessary attendances.

Stabshauptmann

It would discourage legitimate visits too imo. I think the cues in there are enough to discourage frivolous visits as it is

Fionnanc

Good point Kaptain, though in my experience working in another healthcare setting, the innappropriate attendees take up so much time, genuine sickies can be ignored. Sick people tend to stay quiet, the people with "minor" complaints shout the loudest. If a fee was introduced, I believe the Q would be shortened as people would go to their family doctor/other GP in the locality, rather than queue up for the free service in UCD. (The student Services Fee is paid anyway)

Breezer

The idea of a health care centre is to treat all patients according to need. Doctors, nurses and other health care specialists spend a long time in college and then further training in order to enable them to assess that need. The general populace is not capable of doing that. Cancerous tumours, for example, can manifest as very small, painless lumps, with no other symptoms. If one of these were to occur in your neck, and you were short on money, you may be inclined to waste precious time by giving your "swolen glands" a while to sort themselves out, instead of getting your tumour seen to.

We should not be discouraging anyone from visiting a primary care setting such as this. The place to do that is A & E, which is frequently clogged up with drunk people.

The queues in UCD are not so ridiculous as to put a genuinely sick person off going. I had a friend who needed to see the nurse a while ago, so she arrived before the place opened, was seen immediately upon opening and referred to the doctor.

And don't get me started on the inadequacies of the medical card system. A good idea in theory, but its implementation is very flawed.

Fionnanc

Fully agree with you on A+E Breezer.

Breezer

Fionnanc wrote: »

Fully agree with you on A+E Breezer.

Well that's something, but you also seem to feel we should be discouraging people from using primary care facilities? You can't make both inaccessible.