1206 



a year in tuition, roughly $600 in laboratory and other fees, and at least 

 $1,800 a year for living expenses, making a total of $4,600.) ^°^ 



By including value of future earnings foregone and potential con- 

 tribution to national development, losses would understandably multi- 

 ply manyfold, far beyond strictly the educational costs. Yet, there 

 appear to be some offsetting factors ; but even they must be qualified. 

 One is the remittances from emigrants residing abroad. Lebanese send 

 home between $130 million and $200 million annually, an amount esti- 

 mated to be between 10 and 15 percent of its gross national product. 

 Remittances by Filipinos abroad amounted to $102 million for the 

 period January 1955 and July 1969."° For Cameroon, an estimated 

 $13,812 was remitted during 1965-67."^ 



Figures on remittances do not, however, classify emigrants accord- 

 ing to unskilled and professionals. Thus, for even those countries where 

 figures are available, they do not accurately reflect the true picture.^^^ 

 Moreover, laws in receiving countries like the United States encourage 

 the immigration of relatives of permanent immigrants, including not 

 only wives and children but frequently parents and other relatives. 

 And, as the U.N. report said : "This would mean, in effect, the reten- 

 tion in the developed country of the funds formerly remitted." ^" 



The same ambiguity is evident in the apparent offsetting factors of 

 American medical students studying abroad. One survey indicated 

 that 2,343 Americans were studying in 16 foreign medical schools. 

 Mexico seems to be the only country generally classified as "develop- 

 ing" where substantial numbers of American students attend medical 

 school. In 1969, there were an estimated 572 American students en- 

 rolled. For these schools, the presence of American students represents, 

 in Stevens and Vermeulen's words, "substantial benefits," particularly 

 in terms of American fees from dollar incomes.^" Yet, by accepting 

 American medical students they forego places for nationals and thus 

 sacrifice a long-term future investment. Stevens and Vermeulen con- 

 clude that each of these schools, for the most part government sub- 

 sidized, was "making a substantial contribution to American medical 

 education (or, assuming that many of the Americans did not complete 

 the courses, was wasting part of its resources)." ^^^ 



However complex and ambiguous it may be to assess investment 

 costs and losses to the LDCs, the judgment of Stevens and Vermeulen 

 on the extraordinary inflow of FMGs into the United States from the 

 LDCs supports a commonly held belief among students of brain drain 

 that ". . . this country is the recipient of substantial 'reverse foreign 

 aid.' The United States is reaping the rewards of investments made 

 by other countries in the education of physicians, and those countries 

 are suffering a long-term loss of physician services." ^^* 



609 The Nero York Times, Oct. 11, 1973, p. 7. 



MO Report of U.N. Secretary General, Outfloic of Trained Personnel from Developing to 

 Developed Countries, June 9, 1970, p. 33. 



su UNITAR, Brain Drain from Five LDCs, 1971, p. 119. 



^2 Henderson, op. clt., p. 120. 



■"^ For example, 8,907 such "preference relatives" were adjusted to permanent status In 

 the United States in 1967 alone and several thousand more appear to have entered as rela- 

 tives under other categories. (Report of U.N. Secretary General, Outflow of Trained Per- 

 sonnel from LDCs. Nov. 5, 1968, p. 46.88.) 



°* Stevens and Vermeulen, op. clt., p. 21. 



"6 Ibid., p. 22. 



6i« Ibid., p. xl. 



