A letter was just sent out to the UCLA Dental School from the Chief Resident of the ortho program.
November 14, 2007
To the Daily Bruin Editorial Board:
Mr. Faturechis article entitled Donations Influence Admissions, published on November 13th in the Daily Bruin, regarding the UCLA orthodontics program has unfortunately demonstrated that the Daily Bruin has the same standards for journalistic integrity as a tabloid. The article is rife with twisted facts and misinformation in hopes of giving legs to a flimsy accusation.
The article begins by stating that the orthodontics residency program has violated University of California policy and standards but then goes on to contradict itself by stating that the Chancellors office found no credible and convincing evidence to support this allegation. In another example of conflicting statements the author suggests that certain applicants were automatically advanced over other students despite their lower test scores and grades. The author later reveals this statement to be unfounded by saying that grades and national board scores were not available for all the residents in question. The author attempts to shore up his weak allegations by providing the class rankings of two residents in the following sentence. However, those are simply rankings and not grades or scores. Within the dental community it is acknowledged that class rankings are not always reliable since each school has a different way of performing the rankings and some dont rank students at all.
Mr. Faturechi also fails to get his facts straight on some very key issues. He states that in 2005, Dr. Norman Nagel pledged half a million dollars. His son was admitted the next year. This statement is untrue since Dr. Nagels son was admitted in 2005, not the next year in 2006 as the author incorrectly states. Given the accusations leveled within the article this is a very important point. The author again makes a false statement when he says that the daughter of Dr. Bales was admitted in 2003, when in reality she was admitted in 2002. The author has conveniently switched these dates thereby creating a story where previously there was none.
The author claims that with the exception of my father, none of the residents and donors implicated could be reached despite numerous attempts to contact them. This statement is also false since Mr. Faturechi did speak with Dr. Norman Nagel regarding his donation but has apparently decided to omit this and fails to quote any of their conversation.
The reporter also participated in unethical journalistic practices when on at least one occasion he called a resident and left a message failing to acknowledge that he was a journalist and instead claimed to be an old friend from college in hopes of tricking the resident into returning his call. The truth is that this resident completed their undergraduate education elsewhere and had never met Mr. Faturechi in college as he claimed in his message.
In keeping with the articles pattern of misinformation the author claims that an accepted resident with ties to a major donation was said to have applied only to UCLAs orthodontics program and goes on to call this an unusual choice. The reality is that the resident in question applied to numerous programs, not just UCLA. The author attempts to support his claim by saying that at an informational event the applicant boasted to another applicant of only applying to one program. The author goes on to supposedly quote the other applicant saying that It was almost like she knew she was going to get an interview. The problem with these last two claims is that the orthodontics program does not hold anything that could be remotely described as an informational event for prospective applicants. It should also be noted that the first time any two applicants to the program meet is at the interviews themselves. This simple fact makes the claim that one applicant said to another applicant that she knew she was going to get an interview nonsensical since the meeting of two applicants could only occur at the interviews themselves. More seriously these glaring inaccuracies call into question whether this event attributed to an anonymous applicant even occurred.
The author again mixes fact with fiction when he addresses my personal situation by stating that in 2004, Dr. Bruce Molen pledged $400,000. His son was admitted the next year. I was not admitted in 2005 as the author would have you believe, but was admitted in 2004 before any donation had been made. Let me take a moment to address my personal situation since I was never contacted by phone or email regarding this article despite the authors claim that none of the residents could be reached for comment after numerous attempts to contact them.
My father, Dr. Bruce Molen, graduated in the first UCLA dental class in 1968. While my father was in dental school my mother was also a student at UCLA. After graduating in the top of his class my older brother, Dr. Richard Molen, was the third to attend UCLA when he began his orthodontics residency in 1999. I also have a younger brother who is currently enrolled in UCLAs law school. After being admitted to the orthodontics program in 2004 I began my residency in 2005 following my graduation from Loma Linda University School of Dentistry.
Because of my familys long association with UCLA my father and mother had a desire to give back to the university via a monetary donation. This is something they had planned on doing for years but had waited to do until the last of their children who wished to attend UCLA had been accepted in order to avoid having their donations intent misinterpreted. Instead my father is now having his good name dragged through the mud for the sake of a sensationalized story. By simply flipping the date of my fathers donation and the date of my admission the author has taken my fathers gracious donation to our familys alma mater and turned it into something dirty. Shame on the Daily Bruin, its editorial board, and Mr. Faturechi for failing to check their facts in an effort to create a story where there was none. If you are going to call someones character into question you should at least check the facts of your story before publishing it.
My parents have a long history of donating to schools that they have attended and in some cases to schools theyve never attended, but whose missions they support. For example, my father has donated in the past and continues to donate to the University of Washingtons orthodontics program despite the fact that none of my siblings have attended or will attend that program.
The qualifications of an applicant are not something that should be made public since every situation is different. However, in order to reveal the truth behind these false accusations I will personally share what some of my qualifications as an applicant were. Regarding board scores I scored in the top 10% of my dental school class on both parts 1 and 2 of the national boards and was subsequently awarded the Gold Award for Academic Excellence to honor this achievement. My dental school research also received numerous awards including third place nationally at the International Association for Dental Research meeting. I was on the Deans List of my dental school each year of my attendance and was inducted into the American Dental Associations prestigious International Association of Student Clinicians. Finally, I was elected by my peers from across the entire U.S. to serve as the national Speaker of the House for the 14,000+ members of the American Student Dental Association from 2004 to 2005. These are just a few of my qualifications which I share, not to be boastful, but to show that the accusation that my resume was subpar is inaccurate at best at libel at worst.
Not surprisingly the factual mistakes in this article are not limited to the dates of the donations and admissions. The article also incorrectly identifies Dr. Darrell Spilsbury as the president of the UCLA Orthodontic Alumni Association despite the fact that his term ended in June 2007 and he is not the current president. I was disappointed to note that the Daily Bruin Editorial Boards editorial dated November 14th, and entitled State Funds at Root of Donation Controversy, perpetuated this mistake and actually called for Dr. Spilsbury to resign, which would be difficult given that he is not the current president.
The author gets his facts wrong again when he states that the Faculty Executive Committee is in the process of implementing the investigation reports recommendations where in reality the recommendations have already been implemented throughout the school. The schools admissions policy based on these recommendations can actually be found on the dental schools website and is dated July 12, 2007. After considering all of these non-factual statements and mischaracterizations one must call into question the validity of the numerous anonymous sources and quotes the author relies upon to support his accusations.
Regarding the incident involving Kent Ochiai it is well documented that a rogue alumnus, acting on his own, approached the candidate despite being instructed not to by the department. As soon as the department discovered that the candidate had regrettably received a phone call from this alumnus they contacted the applicant to reemphasize that he was already accepted into the program and that his acceptance was unconditional. This information was given to the reporter during interviews with the departments administration and was also verified by the internal investigation. This information however is blatantly missing from Mr. Faturechis article in an effort to present only one side of the story and to lead the reader to the authors desired conclusions. In fact, when asked to describe his experience with the reporter Dr. Ochiai stated that Mr. Faturechi was trying to lead me to say a lot of things. Dr. Ochiai also went on to state that his role in the initial investigation was just something you end up getting backed into.
Its unfortunate that the Daily Bruin chose to print a one-sided story with so many factual inaccuracies. In the Journalists Creed, written by Walter Williams, it states that a journalist should remember that accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism. It is my hope that in the future the Daily Bruin will more closely review their articles for accuracy and fairness and will hold itself to higher standards than have been on display in this mistake-ridden article. In light of these corrections I would also hope that the Daily Bruin will revisit their protocols to determine how an article filled with so many inaccuracies was ever allowed to go to print. To remedy this journalistic negligence and to restore integrity to our school newspaper I request that the Daily Bruin print a correction of the mistakes contained within the article on its front page, giving the facts the same exposure that was given to the misinformation within this article. I would also ask that my comments be printed in their entirety or not at all.
Respectfully,
Dr. Aaron Molen
Chief Resident
UCLA Section of Orthodontics
