Despite some concerns about U.S. Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, some Indian groups are urging her confirmation and Harvard is defending her record on Native issues.

“Elena Kagan as dean [of Harvard Law School] had such a strong interest in the issues of Indian country and Indian law that she allocated funds from her discretionary funding to support work in that area,” present dean Martha Minow tells Rob Capriccioso of Indian Country Today, here.

One concern deals with the fact that Kagan failed to appoint someone to Harvard Law’s Oneida Chair,, largely supported by the Oneida Indian Nation of New York with the understanding that a full-time tenured faculty member would be dedicated to Indian law. Still, Capriccioso talks to folks who say that shouldn’t necessarily be a decisive factor in whether to support Kagan:

But Robert Anderson, who was selected after Kagan’s tenure to hold a 5-year guest position as Oneida chair, said her actions were consistent with what she could do in her position.

“It’s not really the dean’s decision to hire a person with tenure; the faculty ultimately has to decide,” said the Minnesota Chippewa tribal citizen who directs the Native American Law Center at the University of Washington.

Anderson said he supports Kagan’s high court nomination, given her background and his knowledge of her ideology from when they both served in the Clinton administration. He’s also confident that she met many scholars at Harvard who imparted the importance of understanding Indian law.

Meanwhile, the Native American Rights Fund has circulated a briefing paper that says Kagan “offers another fresh opportunity for Indian country,” and leaders of the United South and Eastern Tribes approved a resolution supporting her.

Gwen Florio

Tags: Chippewa, Elena Kagan, Harvard Law School, Martha Minow, Native American Law Center, Native American Rights Fund, Oneida Chair, Oneida Nation, U.S. Supreme Court, United South and Eastern Tribes, University of Washington

Mark Trahant is a Kaiser Media Fellow examining the Indian Health Service and its relevance to the national health care reform debate. He is a member of Idaho’s Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and writes from Fort Hall, Idaho. Comment here.

A philosophical question: How much medical training is needed to treat patients? Some say it’s the full course as proscribed by existing medical, nursing or dental schools. But when the shortages of doctors, nurses and dentists are ginormous, does the need require a different answer?

Consider oral health. “Shortages of dental practitioners and affordable dental care are hurting the health of millions of Americans, many of whom live with pain, miss school or work, and, in extreme cases, face life-threatening medical emergencies that result from dental infections. The situation is particularly severe for poor children and families and in communities of color,” writes Burton L. Edelstein, DDS, MPH Columbia University and Children’s Dental Health Project in a Dec. 200, report for the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.

And, like most health issues, the data shows that Indian Country is at the low end of the spectrum. One study described it this way: “The American Indian / Alaska Native “population has the highest tooth decay rate of any population cohort in the United States: 5 times the US average for children 2–4 years of age. Seventy-nine percent of AIAN children, aged 2–5 years, have tooth decay, with 60% of these children having severe early childhood caries (baby bottle tooth decay). Eighty-seven percent of these children, aged 6–14 years, have a history of decay—twice the rate of dental caries experienced by the general population.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Alaska Dental Society, Alaska Native, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, Children’s Dental Health Project, Columbia University, dental care, Indian Health Care Improvement Act, Indian Health Service, Mark Trahant, merican Dental Association, University of Kentucky, University of Washington, W.K. Kellogg Foundation