I thought it only applied to RCC child rape apologia, but I see no reason why we can't expand the original scope.

Out with the bath water. UC is not going to let Catholicism dictate medicine.
I was lucky to have surgery at Mercy hospital in SF. Nurses and doctors of all faiths there or none. Catholicism not pushed, but a spiritual place in the compassion that every single medical professional from lab tech on up showed.
Yes, the problem could come in reproductive health planning, but it need not.

As soon as the Catholic Church gets in the healthcare mix, they move to restrict treatment options and try to make everyone else live by their religious mandates. This has been the case everywhere they've taken over local hospitals.

You mention reproductive health issues, and those are a real concern. If I were a woman with a difficult problem with pregnancy, I would specifically never enter a Catholic-run hospital, because of my concern for my own life. If saving my life required termination of the pregnancy, I would not be confident that option would be offered to me. If I were a young woman, I would not seek reproductive health counseling at such a facility, due to the built-in bias of the people who own it.

If I were an LGBTQ person, I would choose a different hospital due to biases against LGBTQ people by the RCC.

Now, if I were none of those things, which is the case for me, I would have no concerns for myself, but concerns for the welfare of others would cause me to choose a secular hospital, because I am an atheist.

It might not bother you, because you are unaffected by the RCC's biases. It's important to think about others, however, and how they would be affected. Attitudes matter, whether those biases are applied or not.

The State of California and the University of California should form no relationship with a church-owned hospital. That would be unconstitutional.