18 ONS OVER THE EDGE March 14, 2007 University Won't ‘Get’ You Anywhere By Arca Larro-HALL THe Corp WEEKLY (WILFRID Laurier Universiry} WATERLOO, Ont. (CUP) -- It’s this time of year that school starts kicking us in the proverbial butt. Midterms and papers come back with less-than-stellar grades, and you think for a moment -- “Why am I doing this?” We know that being at univer- sity is “good for us.” At the same time, we’re enticed into staying because of the assurance that it will lead us to more respect, suc- cess and wealth. And it’s working: university enrollment has hit rec- ord highs for seven consecutive years, breaking one million in 2004-05. It’s been a great promotional tool for the government of On- tario, which has put full-page ads in the Economist, boasting that 56 per cent of Ontario’s workforce possesses a post-secondary edu- cation, and that its 44 universities and colleges produce grads for the tech sector who will contribute to Ontario’s “competitive economy committed to the commercializa- tion of research and innovation.” We can assume this is aimed at foreign investors who will saunter over the border with their fat wal- lets and invest in our knowledge economy. We can also infer that Ontario thinks universities prod- uce a steady supply of workers ready to serve its economy. But earnings fail to follow suit. Men between the ages of 25 and 34 with a university degree saw their average real earnings decline 2.3 per cent between 2000 and 2005, while those with blue-col- lar jobs have seen theirs increase. Those with some post-secondary education have seen their average real earnings increase 2.7 per cent for the same time period, accord- ing to Statistics Canada. The news is even better for those with fewer years of schooling behind them. __ This is surprising in our know- ledge-based economy, but the uni- versity is doing nothing to dispel the notion that a university edu- cation will undoubtedly “get you somewhere,” in the conservative, career-track sense. With snowballing enrollments, universities have responded un- expectedly: by dropping their standards. As U.S. writer and humourist Finley Peter Dunne said, ‘Ye can lead a man up to the university, but ye can’t make him think.’ For example, new students at Wilfred Laurier University are re- quired to maintain a 74 per cent average in their English classes -- although the administration was prepared to lower the require- ments to 65 per cent to meet their enrollment quota. Any student pursuing gradu- ate studies has learned that the -way to a higher level of education isn’t always hard work -- their key to success is a good student-prof relationship and a relatively easy workload. No wonder-an under- graduate degree means less than it used to. It is at this point that we have to take our learning and education into our own hands, irrespective of the minimal requirements. Realize that easy courses aren’t reward- ing, and hours upon hours in the library reading and researching contributes to our adult lives. That people who are interesting are the same ones who are interested in the world. They are the ones that will always be learning, either in- side or out of the classroom. And they’re the ones so wrapped up in the world of thought that they care less about their earnings and what university will “get” them (so long as they can afford a beer to accompany good conversation). This is the point. Although we’d love to believe that these four years -- give or take -- will help us along our way, we have to remind ourselves that the purpose of the university, for us as students, is not to “get” us anywhere. Gerard Delanty, a sociology professor at the University of Liverpool, puts it best: “Perhaps it is the role of the university to enable society to live with choice and uncertainty.” It should stop parading itself as a forum for any- thing but. ‘Post-Abortion Syndrome’ A Whole New Spin Against Choice Denise Brunspon Tre MeGit Dairy (McGiti OUNiversiry) MONTREAL (CUP) -- The anti-choice fight has been re- newed, refocused from the rights of the fetus to the rights of the pregnant. Hold onto your uterus, because it’s one masterful piece of spin. As featured in a January edi- tion of New York Times Maga- zine, “post-abortion syndrome” is the new concern that abortions cause low self-esteem, depression, suicidal tendencies, drug abuse, alcohol addiction, and more. After decades of failing to sway public, legal, and legislative opinion using the. argument that an unborn fetus has a right to life -- complete with naming symbolic dolls and bronzing toddler shoes - - anti-choice activists are switch- ing gears. Through financing and administering “abortion-recov- ery” counselling, “post-abortion syndrome” advocates hope to convince legislators, voters, and pregnant women alike that abor- tions are harmful to. a women’s health. “Post-abortion syndrome” has two glaring weaknesses. First, it’s not based on any sci- entific fact. Numerous unbiased studies have proven that the psychological ramifications of an abortion are no greater than those of carrying an unwanted baby to term. One study found 10 per cent of women experienced depres- sion or other emotional problems following an abortion; this is the same rate for women post-child- birth. Should women experience prolonged emotional fragility or distress post-abortion, doctors usually find women to have been experiencing those symptoms pre- pregnancy. American Psychiatric Associa- tion vice-president Nada Stotland concludes, “There is no evidence of an abortion-trauma syndrome.” Secondly, the “post-abortion syndrome” argument doesn’t forcefully respond to the main axiom of the pro-choice lobby: personal feelings aside, restricting a woman’s personal reproductive choices imposes an undue in- fringement on her civil liberty. At the end of the day, this de- bate isn’t about whether abortions are good or bad. Nobody denies that abortions are bad. They are costly in time and money, they are physically intrusive, sometimes they cause emotional distress, and to some they are sinful. Abortions are, by all accounts, unfortunate experiences. The true debate, however, is whether abortions are the juris- diction of the individual or the government. Abortions, while not “good” as a general concept, can be important or necessary to an individual. They are last-chance measures to end dangerous, acci- dental, or unwanted pregnancies. The pro-choice movement believes in autonomy over one’s own body. This is an instinctive argument. If an individual is re- sponsible for growing the baby, she has the right to decide whether or not she wishes to do so. The anti-choice movement seeks to do more than just inform individuals of choices and their consequences. They believe that if individuals make personally harmful-choices -- such as they claim is the case with “post-abor- tion sydrome” -- then the state ought to'remove that choice from them. To strive for this degree of UBC DAP The gateway to accounting state paternalism is significant and serious. To compel a government to systematically deny its citizens autonomy over their bodies -- and for a society to allow their govern- ment to do so -- requires proof that it is in the best interests of both in- dividuals and society as a whole. In essence, the anti-choice movement must prove that: 1. Individuals do not know what is best for their bodies and their minds; 2. The government knows what’s best for its citizens’ bodies and minds; and 3. The eth- ical, human costs of the status quo necessitate government interfer- ence. “Post-abortion syndrome” satisfies none of these conditions. The lack of scientific proof for the syndrome’s existence combined with the relationship between pre- natal mental state and negative post-abortion symptoms deems that the best person to predict how an abortion will affect an individ- ual is the individual herself. Accelerate your future with the Oiptoma in Accounting Program (DAP) at the University of British Columbia. DAP pregares university qradaates with limited or mo training in accounting for entry into a orelessional accounting designation (CA, OGA, CMA or OPA in the US), APPLICATION DEADLINES May start: Mar 1 (international applicants) Agr 1 (Canadian applicants) Sep start: = Jul 1 (international applicants) Aug 1 (Canadian applicants) Find out how DAP can accelerate your future. Visit www.sauderube. Pat UNIVERSESY © * SROTISH GOLUB cafdap