Discussions were seemingly idealistic, yet strove for concrete progress. One Amherst College student participating in the collaborative, Katerina Byanova, said, “We talked about using existing resources. UMass has resources,” referring to the UMass Public Health program. Still, budget issues were brought up in multiple instances — such as the potential debate over the sharing of funds. Many progressive and productive ideas were brought up, such as the creation of a public health service network of alumni available for proactive students, a model of engagement, and programs that give students responsibilities and the chance to contribute to the organization instead of just volunteering. Still, the group acknowledged the potential difficulties of initiating such a plan. A UMass representative, Dan Gerber, stated, “Because public health is interdisciplinary, it’s hard to put it in the curriculum. We pulled it off at UMass, but it took us five years.”
The collaborative also hopes to expand beyond the Five Colleges, involving students from Holyoke Community College as well, stating that it is necessary to enable people to help their own communities. The group discussed a committee in which there would be representatives from several groups: students from the Five Colleges and beyond, alumni, faculty and representatives from organizations in the community — all of which were present at the conference. They also recognized the need for administrative blessing from the College. The collaborative — passionate and full of ideas, brain power and potential — is still in its planning stages.
Notwithstanding, the group’s proactive efforts to address the key issue of health care in the community speaks to changing times not only at the College and in the Pioneer Valley but in the nation as well. Health care is one of the most important issues our nation faces at this time. Ignored for years, it, along with several other issues, is coming to a head. Indeed, it is one of the issues about which President Barack Obama spoke fervently on the campaign trail and during the presidential debates. His proposed system was one in which individuals without access to health care would be placed on a government system better than the welfare one currently available. In fact, it would be the same plan he and other government officials are on. This raised eyebrows, leading many to question the economic feasibility of such a proposal, as well as the possibility of a decline in care. Clearly, taxes would increase and the initiation of this change would be costly. Nonetheless, there are already viable models of fully functional social health care systems in most European countries that we could follow. In addition, once citizens don’t have to pay x amount of dollars for insurance, they may even save money. Doctors and health care providers would worry less about billing insurance companies and patients and more about the well being of the patient.
Indeed, the question is bigger than health policy or economics, but, as was discussed at the collaborative, it involves our values. What are our values as a nation? Is capitalism a viable ideology that can be applied to everything from school to health care? Do some things need to operate less as businesses so they can worry less about money and more about people? What are our values at Amherst? When does a privileged liberal arts education meet civic service and applicable work and life experiences? These are questions that beg answers. Apathy is not an option — for now, even silence is an answer.