UCI Chancellor and the Clinic Scandal : Only a full and detailed explanation can clear up the nagging questions

UC Irvine Chancellor Laurel Wilkening has belatedly discussed the scandal at the school’s fertility clinic. Unfortunately, her comments leave many questions unanswered.

A key one is how the university, without the knowledge of UC regents, was able to come up with nearly $1 million to give to whistle-blowers who had suffered retaliation.

The university says the money came from a self-insurance fund. Whatever the source, that’s a large amount to pay at a time when the University of California system is strapped for cash and is raising student fees. It also fuels a suspicion that many taxpayers hold about public entities: that they claim to need more public money when actually they have plenty stashed away or have misused large sums. There are also questions about Wilkening’s leadership and her relationship with the UCI faculty, which understandably complained about her tardiness in briefing teachers and others on how she was handling the scandal.

Wilkening insisted that the payments were not “hush money.” She said that the requirement that the whistle-blowers maintain silence about the payments was to ensure patients’ confidentiality and not impede the investigation. But several regents suggested that the condition stopped the public from learning about the clinic’s problems sooner. The university needs to see that the regents are told about any large payments, and Wilkening agreed that a change in procedure is needed.

The chancellor’s firing of the medical center’s top two directors, both of whom deny wrongdoing, and the selection of a new director represented a good start. The actions came after weeks of allegations that fertilized eggs had been taken from women and implanted in other women without the donors’ consent, as well as claims of financial irregularities and improper dispensing of fertility drugs. The three doctors who operated the clinic have denied any wrongdoing. UCI has filed a civil lawsuit against them.

Wilkening noted that the scandal began before her arrival at UCI two years ago. But the question of why it took so long for word of the problems to reach her desk remains; former medical center employees reported notifying administrators of their concerns much earlier.

The chancellor must recognize the damage UCI has suffered. She needs to detail for the public, which finances the school, her plans to restore UCI’s credibility and end the “climate of fear” that investigators found among medical center employees.