Forbes Versus Sanford

There’s one unwritten rule in this city – you don’t say anything remotely negative about either of our hospitals. Well, one in particular, at least. If you do, you’re going to be bombarded with reminders of all the wonderful things their namesake has done for us. Actually, for me he has done nothing, but in their view his gifts to them is a gift to everybody.
Every now and then, though, everybody has to take a hit or two. Unfortunately, the fine people at this company take a compliment aimed at a competitor as an insult directed at them. God, I hate people like that. Have you ever casually mentioned that a girl is attractive only to find that the female you’re with somehow takes that to mean she’s not? That’s what’s I’m talking about here…
…and is exactly the attitude that Sanford Hospital has always had in regards to the physician-owned Sioux Falls Surgical Center. The couple of times I have mentioned them in the past has resulted in a deluge of hate mail, so you can imagine the reaction that came from that building when Forbes magazine issued a report that says claims “patients are being short-changed by the efforts of large community-based hospitals to stop the growth of what are referred to as ‘specialty hospitals’.”
Representatives from both Sanford and the Sioux Falls Surgical Center were a part of this report, and the fact that Forbes acknowledged the surgical center was enough for Cindy Morrison, Sanford’s Vice President of Public Policy to go running to their biggest fan – KELO. After all, that station is indeed the main source for Sanford publicity. Name one medical report that doesn’t involve some sucking up to their biggest advertiser, let alone all of the glorified infomercials that Jayne Andrews does for those fine folks. I’m sure KELO’s news room is the number one preset on Ms. Morrison’s speed dial.
Sure, the station did involve one of the doctors from the opposing side to state their side of the debate. But it was Morrison’s allegations that Forbes refused to use some of their data that “proves” the story was flawed, and as usual we heard about the conflict of interest side of the story.
Sanford would love us to believe that this supposed conflict of interest is the reason they’re trying to push Congressional legislation to stop these types of facilities. Come on, does anybody believe that? Ever since they found their benefactor, it’s been all about becoming the only health care provider in the area. They’ve bought out the majority of independently-owned clinics, and they’re constantly adding on to their main facility to have an edge over anybody else that’s left. They clearly cannot buy out this organization, so it’s up to the lobbyists and their pals in the media to go after these people. I’d rather they work on lowering patient costs, wouldn’t you?


Anonymous said…
Once again, you clearly know nothing about how a health care system works, but that doesn't stop you does it?

Popular Posts