For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and
Henry L. Mencken
Did the problem result from ignorance of potential consequences? Was it insufficient preparation? Were people doing what they had always done with reasonable expectations of success and little chance of unpleasant consequences? If so, perhaps the consequences are just the price of an education, and responsibility should be shared by everyone.
If you find a way to prevent the situation from happening again, or at least find a way to keep it under control, perhaps your solution can help with the current problem.
Not all problems have an easy, fixed solution. Different starting assumptions can lead in very different directions. If there is no way to reconcile these initial assumptions, set your personal opinions aside for a moment and explore each of the variations individually. At this point, nobody needs to agree to accept any of the possible solutions. Think of it as making a complete list for further consideration. Does everyone who starts with the same assumptions, and evaluates the problem impartially, arrive at a similar solution? Are there intermediate assumptions that can be reconciled? Repeat the process at each split until everyone agrees on each of the variations. If there are more than two variants, are any solutions similar enough to be combined?
Now consider each individual solution. Are there unintended side-effects or other consequences to consider? Explore each of these new problems and possible solutions in the same way you evaluated the original problem, and continue looking for ways to combine similar solutions. Can everyone agree to shorten the list by rejecting some solutions?
Of the various possible solutions, are there any that most people can agree on? Is there a solution most people would accept as their second choice? Are there 2 possible solutions from the list that most people would be comfortable choosing between?
These questions have many possible answers, which need not be the same for every institution. Establishing some specific educational goals provides a foundation for additional questions about how best to achieve them, and how diversity might be relevant.
Is it enough that admitted students merely have the minimum skills and knowledge to get a reasonable benefit from the curriculum, or does a particular institution's educational objective require starting with only the very best students?
If diversity is a worthwhile part of a complete education, do the established admission criteria produce the needed mix? If not, can the admission requirements be modified in a way that's consistent and fair to all? Could prospective students receive additional preparation before applying?
Another point of contention is the method by which the issue should be resolved. Voting is generally considered appropriate for some issues, while other rights are considered so fundamental that no majority may revoke them.
These fundamental differences have little in common and don't provide a good starting point for a purely rational evaluation. In such a case, it can be helpful to begin at a higher level that may broaden the foundation. More people can agree that it's not desirable to kill a fetus without some compelling reason. This opens up the possibility of establishing conditions that encourage people to minimize the possibility of unwanted pregnancy, and provide positive incentives for choosing alternatives to abortion. Some possible incentives are financial help, medical care, assistance with a career, and general support in daily life.
Difficulties arise because many people believe that something more fundamental overrides normal business practices. If someone can't afford needed medical care, who is responsible for the expenses and should there be any limits on the total payments required of this third party? Should the payer have any control over provided treatment?
Regardless of who pays, reducing the cost of medical care would be helpful. Some possibilities to consider are: