Ucsf Affiliation Agreement

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has asked the University of California at the San Francisco Board of Regents to terminate or amend all membership agreements between UCSF Health and the Dignity Health Network of religious health care providers that require the university`s publicly funded medical center and its employees or students to abide by religious principles. International Teaming Agreement: These research-based agreements are often used when a funding organization needs evidence of cooperation between two or more partners before funding applications can be reviewed. The roles of each partner are usually indicated. The lead investigators or interested research teams do not have to decide whether their request for research cooperation is the best way to respond with an international team agreement. The Government Business Contracts Office takes into account the specifics of each situation and selects the corresponding category of research cooperation documents. UCSF Medical Center and the Children`s Hospital-Research Center Oakland have signed a partnership agreement that is expected to be concluded in early 2014, which would link them but leave them as largely separate units. (Burglary, San Francisco Business Times) “UCSF Health is a public body that cannot enter into an agreement requiring its staff or students to conform to certain religious beliefs. This is a fundamental violation of religious freedom,” said Richard B. Katskee, AU legal director.

“Furthermore, it is unacceptable for UCSF Health to consider an accession agreement that would advocate the use of religion as the basis for discrimination, particularly against women and the LGBTQ community.” UCSF has a number of different types of agreements that are discussed below, which are initiated with external international organizations. The CEW should support membership `if` Dignity Health is prepared under the strictest legal conditions to confirm that UCSF providers are not only allowed to discuss reproductive and end-of-life options that are not offered at this facility, but also (1) to post signs that say so, (2) provide current printed lists of services and places where patients can receive services and (3) put time and resources suppliers to make “hot hands offs.” I do not think we can support that membership ethically. According to published reports, two of the four San Francisco Bay Area hospitals that were included in the UCSF-Dignity Health Affiliate Agreement would exclude ERDs, UCSF staff and abortion students, contraceptives, fertility treatments, sterilization, end-of-life decisions and sexist treatment for transgenic patients. Two other home hospitals are subject to the “Catholic Declaration of Common Values,” which also limits abortion, fertility treatment and medically supported end-of-life decisions. I do not think that the UCSF, as a public institution, should be attached to a health organization that has religious affiliations that lead to a limitation of care. UCSF should find more compatible institutions to be part of this common mission and with our objectives. In a letter sent yesterday to UCSF Health Board of Directors and President Mark Laret, Americans United stated that all agreements that restrict the way UCSF employees or students provide health care on the basis of religious rules – including ethical and religious guidelines (ERDs) for the Catholic Health Service – are contrary to the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution. This issue requires more discussion and discussion.

So I gave up voting yes or no.