Home Health Care
Dear Editor: I’d like to comment on SEARHC’s decision to eliminate Sitka’s Medicare certified home health services program, run by Sitka Community Hospital for decades to benefit Sitka’s elders and others with disabilities. This was a valuable community service that helped many seniors remain in their homes for as long as possible in their declining years.
On Wednesday, Feb. 7, the SEARHC Community Health Council holds its once-a-year public meeting to allow Sitkans to comment on health care in Sitka. The 11-member Council comprises three City and Borough of Sitka representatives (John Leach, Amy Ainslee and an at-large CBS member), three SCH Board members, two Sitka Tribe of Alaska members, and three SEARHC representatives. Its purpose is to advise SEARHC “on the needs regarding the health and welfare of the CB of Sitka, and to advise SEARHC regarding the operation of SEARHC’s… Sitka Clinical facilities.”
This Council resulted from political negotiations during the sale of Sitka Community Hospital to SEARHC, driven on the community’s side by concerns about health service continuity, corporate vs. community priorities, public access to SEARHC’s decisions, and ultimately corporate accountability in a local medical monopoly. Council’s Charter is a legal document available from CBS offices.
Last November the Sitka Woman’s Club invited SEARHC to participate in a Home Health Care Listening Session that was attended by more than 150 concerned Sitkans. SEARHC declined. When asked why, Dr. Elliot Bruhl told the Assembly that it was because of SEARHC’s “commitment to process…” (emphasis added). He said that, “The avenue SEARHC provides for the public to respond and ask questions is the Community Health Council established when SEARHC merged with SCH.”
This year SEARHC has not scheduled a physical Council meeting. According to Brandi Bowles (chief medical officer liaison), the 2024 rules are that a maximum of 15 Sitkans will be allowed up to three minutes each to testify via zoom teleconference (45 minutes total). SEARHC may assert that there is no practical difference between holding an open public meeting and collecting public testimony this way, but that’s not a defensible position.
To do its job Council needs to hear what Sitkans have to say about health care, listen to SEARHC’s responses, analyze and summarize the issues, and provide clear advice. These closed and controlling meeting guidelines are guaranteed to impede Council’s fact-finding and analysis. Prescribing a set number of three-minute monologues is not the same as an open ended public discussion.
According to a Jan. 15, 2023, Raven Radio news report, Dr. Elliot Bruhl told the Assembly, “Yes SEARHC is a business. And it’s not profitable to have a Certified Home Health Agency. It doesn’t mean its not the right thing. It is the right thing. It’s just not profitable.” SEARHC’s Home Health Care replacement is not the same as the program they rejected; it is more cumbersome, constrained and expensive.
The questions I’d ask Sitkans are: “Do SEARHC’s 2024 meeting restrictions fulfil their responsibility to listen to any and all of our health care concerns?” and, “Should the Community Health Council and SEARHC hold an open public meeting to discuss these important matters?” (I would add that zoom is foreign to me, my desktop computer has no camera, and we don’t have cell phones.)
Dave Hardy, Sitka
