UCLA Med School Under Fire: Students Assigned Readings Calling for Open Borders
Controversial course readings at UCLA Medical School advocate for abolishing borders. Critics slam the school, calling it 'social activism' rather than medicine.
A prestigious medical school is facing fierce backlash after a medical watchdog group revealed that first-year students at UCLA were assigned readings openly advocating for a world without borders.
The organization Do No Harm exposed that UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine included these politically charged materials in a mandatory class called “Structural Racism and Health Equity.”
One assigned paper, titled “Beyond Border Health: Infrastructural Violence and the Health of Border Abolition,” boldly suggests that border enforcement itself leads to health problems in migrant populations. The authors propose open borders as a radical “medical intervention” and champion global solidarity for migrants.
“A system without borders that prioritizes freedom of movement is necessary,” they write. “Medical professionals must reject attempts to soften the impacts of borders and instead work towards abolishing them.”
Another class reading features an inflammatory interview with Canadian activist Harsha Walia, a proponent of completely abolishing international borders. Walia refutes the very notion of a “border crisis,” blaming any issues on capitalism, imperialism, and climate change. She accuses politicians of fueling racism with phrases like “border surge,” claiming they aim to prevent non-white populations from entering wealthier countries.
Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, Board Chair of Do No Harm, forcefully condemned UCLA in a statement, saying, “The school is pushing social activism disguised as medical education. What do these radical theories have to do with treating patients? This is just the latest example of medical schools veering off course and failing in their fundamental mission.”
The controversy is igniting debate about the appropriate role of political ideology in medical training. Critics see this as a dangerous politicization of medicine, jeopardizing its focus on evidence-based interventions and potentially compromising patient care.
At this time, UCLA has not made an official statement in response to these accusations.
