Quick Launch

President's Blog > Posts > Response Re: For-profit Medical Education
June 18
Response Re: For-profit Medical Education

​Dr. Mychaskiw:       

Thank you for your post to the blog (see Dr. Mychaskiw's post in comments below). I want to start out by saying that a feasibility study has not been submitted by the proposed Rhode Island School of Osteopathic Medicine to the Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation (COCA) so it would be premature to say anything as to how the organizer of this projected school would structure its governance.  However, the agendas of the COCA are posted to its website approximately 60 days in advance of a meeting and list actions to come before the COCA. You are welcome to present written testimony to the COCA in support of or in opposition to any developing COM, if that is your wish. You may also request to be present for oral testimony. Instructions for submitting such testimony, due 30 days in advance of the COCA meeting, are provided on the website.

What I can say is that since Rocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine submitted a feasibility study requesting pre-accreditation from COCA six years ago, the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) has also received a request to accredit an allopathic medical school as a for-profit institution—Palm Beach Medical College in Florida. If you visit the LCME website, you’ll see it listed as an applicant school.

Regarding research and education, COCA has been clear in holding its accredited colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs) to the requirements for research. Although not all COMs are as aggressive as the profession’s leaders in research, we have seen significant development in some of the institutions. As for education, the COMs have a record of curricular innovation in the first two years and in the latter two years with focused tracking programs. Many new COMs are aggressively developing new GME opportunities.
 
Lastly, I need to reiterate that the AOA does not start nor does it operate osteopathic medical education at the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels. Given the high level of interest by the Department of Justice in reviewing anti-trust activities of professional associations (trade or individual membership-based) that may violate the anti-trust laws, using a bully pulpit to exclude one group of competitors only increases the anti-trust risks to the AOA.

Marty

Comments

Response Re: For-profit Medical Education

Dear Dr. Levine:
 
In the June 4, “This New England” blog of the Providence (RI) Journal, Stephen Rodger, Founder of the Rhode Island School of Osteopathic Medicine and President of R3 Education discusses and advocates the proposed school and addresses its for-profit status.  Frankly, the piece is well-written and one of the more cogent arguments supporting for-profit medical education.  Unfortunately, Mr. Rodger omitted some pertinent data that will have potentially negative implications for this profession, should the school be accredited.
 
Nowhere in the article does he describe the mission and motivations of R3 Education, or even make any reference to R3 Education.  His association is only mentioned by the Journal in a brief biographical signature line.  R3 Education is a Massachusetts-based holding company that acquires and manages for-profit medical schools in the Caribbean, including Saba University School of Medicine, the Medical University of the Americas and St. Matthew’s University.  Is it not curious that a company with no ties or historical relationship with osteopathic medicine, whose core business is for-profit MD (allopathic) schools, now wants to open a DO (osteopathic) school in Rhode Island, which is not most people’s idea of a state suffering from a physician shortage?  Actually, it is just good business.  The Caribbean medical school industry is facing a crisis of sorts, as their graduates are finding it increasingly difficult to match into US residency programs.  Allopathic and osteopathic school enrollments in the US have greatly increased, while federal funding for residency positions is capped at 1997 levels.  Many residency programs in the US no longer consider graduates of Caribbean schools, regardless of their qualifications, as there are ample US applicants.  I have personally seen this in multiple ACGME programs and, of course, AOA residency programs have never been open to Caribbean allopathic graduates.  So, to protect their business, the Caribbean schools need to open de facto US campuses.  The easiest way to do this is by opening osteopathic schools, which are accredited by COCA, a more permissive body than the LCME, which accredits MD schools.  The pioneer for this was the Rocky Vista College of Osteopathic Medicine in Denver, whose founder/owner, was associated with the American University of the Caribbean School of Medicine.  Its success in opening and operating as the only for-profit medical school in the industrialized world has paved the way for the “Caribbean gold rush”, as these institutions look for a way to sustain their business model.  Whether or not this is a good thing is subject to debate, but it is disingenuous to argue that the primary motivation behind this school is a humanitarian concern for the health and welfare of the people and state of Rhode Island.  Indeed, one of the Deans of Brown University has already commented that for-profit education may be inferior to not-for-profit.
 
Dr. Levine, is this the future of our profession?  Given your history in Osteopathic Medicine, you know far better than me the struggles we have undergone to become a credible and full member of the US medical community.  I am concerned that, not only does this tarnish the profession to the public eye, it puts us at jeopardy when difficult decisions are made at the Federal level regarding educational funding and support.  When Brown University competes with the Rhode Island Caribbean consortium, who do you think will be left short?  Ultimately, we will become doctors of a lesser sort, who will eventually be supplanted by nurse practitioners and other allied health professionals.  While the pro and con arguments regarding for-profit education have been discussed ad nauseam, it is basically a question of whether we are “as good as possible”, or just “good enough”.  Do we invest in research and education to the fullest or do we delegate that to the allopathic profession so that the for-profit investors can realize a greater fiscal return?
 
I well understand the role of COCA and limitations of the AOA.  It is also unquestionably true, however, that you, as our president have a bully pulpit and need only to speak out regarding for-profit medical education, as the LCME already does in their accreditation standards.  The allopathic profession quite clearly and publicly states that medical education should be non-profit.  What say you?

Fraternally,
George Mychaskiw II, DO, FAAP, FACOP
Professor of Anesthesiology
AOA #50323
Marty Levine, DO on 6/18/2012 10:54 AM
 

 Comments ‭[2]‬

 
Add Comment
*Name
 
*Email
 
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
*Comments
 
 
Refresh
Please enter the text displayed in the image.
The characters are case sensitive, so enter the text exactly as it appears.
The picture contains 6 characters.
*Characters
  
*Legal Notice
Terms and Conditions

All content provided on this blog is for informational purposes only. The AOA makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by following any link on this site. The AOA will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information. The AOA will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information. This policy is subject to change at anytime.

The AOA reserves the right to edit or delete any comments submitted to this blog without notice due to:
  1. Comments deemed to be spam or questionable spam
  2. Comments including profanity
  3. Comments containing language or concepts that could be deemed offensive
  4. Comments that attack a person individually