Open wide: University health care program clearly needs a checkup

Two weeks ago, the administration conducted a comprehensive survey of health services at Princeton. In its eight pages, the survey covered many questions relating to the health concerns of students. There was, however, one missing set of questions that the administration should have included in its survey: Are some parts of your body more important than others? And how would you rank the importance of healthy teeth and gums – very important, somewhat important, or not important at all?

While it may seem absurd to think of some parts of our body as more important than others, the University seems to hold that very opinion. It believes that providing basic medical care does not extend to such seemingly insignificant parts of our body like our eyes or our teeth. That, at least, seems to be the rationale behind the administration's decision to deny insurance coverage for basic dental care. This lack of coverage is not just a problem for hapless graduate students; it is also a problem for faculty and staff, as well as hundreds of undergraduate students who are not covered by their parents' insurance plans.

Perhaps the administration chooses to deny coverage because it thinks that basic dental procedures do not constitute medical necessities. The University may consider procedures such as periodic cleanings, X-rays and cavity fillings to be cosmetic luxuries, but I don't know many students or faculty who would hold the same view. Being concerned about protecting our teeth and gums is not a sign of vanity. Tooth decay and gum decay are serious medical problems that affect our quality of life.

Furthermore, these are not problems that are confined to one's childhood. The risk of gum decay actually increases with age, and the risk of tooth decay does not decrease over time, according to a recent study by the government's Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. So, pushing the administration to provide basic dental care does not mean that faculty and students can finally get that set of perfectly straight, pearly-white John Elway teeth they have always dreamt of. What it does mean is that they will not have root canals by age 30, or dentures by age 40.

Another factor that may be driving the University's decision to deny dental coverage is its fear of skyrocketing costs. Such a fear, if it really does exist, is not well founded. First of all, basic dental care does not cover expensive cosmetic procedures such as laser whitening surgery. Insuring preventive dental care should not cost the University more than $200 or $300 per person. That would mean a 10 to 15 percent increase over what it currently costs the University to provide basic medical care.

It seems ridiculously surreal for the University to worry about cost increases associated with insuring basic dental care. If its multibillion dollar endowment can be used to support such worthy endeavors such as cleaning the facades of old buildings and replanting tulips in Prospect Gardens every few weeks, then surely it can afford a 10 percent increase in its health care budget to provide for preventive dental care. There are several medium-sized companies, who have operating budgets that pale in comparison to Princeton's, but who still manage to provide basic dental and eye coverage. Even supposedly "evil" corporations such as Nike and General Motors offer dental benefits to their employees.

One fact that may comfort the administration is that it is not alone in denying basic dental care to its employees. Fewer than 60 percent of Americans are covered by their employers' dental plans. The federal government, the country's largest employer and one of its worst offenders, has yet to respond to employee demands for basic dental insurance. The fact that Princeton is not alone in denying dental coverage should not, however, be a cause for complacency or inaction. A University "in the nation's service" should be at the forefront of providing basic benefits for its students and employees. It should certainly not be part of the problem. S. Karthick Ramakrishnan is a politics and Office of Population Research graduate student from Holden, Mass. He can be reached at karthick@princeton.edu.