Pros and Cons of Hospital Expansion

Ten years ago, my daughter and I moved here from Fort Worth, Texas. My daughter was in critical condition after recently being diagnosed with an extremely rare blood illness. I called Los Robles Medical Center, Community Memorial Hospital and Pleasant Valley Hospital looking for someone to help us. Each time I called one of these institutions, I hit a brick wall because Medi-Cal was the only insurance I had. I was told, “We can’t help you,” and I was turned away.

Finally, I was referred to the pediatric clinic at Ventura County Medical Center. When I made the call to the medical center clinic, a very friendly voice came on the other end of the phone; I felt like I was born again. What a relief--someone who cared whether my child lived or died, someone to help guide me through the system almost painlessly.

It’s unfortunate that hospitals like Community Memorial wouldn’t take the time to lend a helping hand when my child was in desperate need of help. I also find it very sad that the same Community Memorial Hospital doesn’t want to see the county hospital grow with the needs of this community. All they want to do is spend money on advertising, telling us what a good, caring hospital they are and then spending more money telling us how much we don’t need the expansion at Ventura County Medical Center.

LYNNETTE CHANDLER

Camarillo

* The California Academy of Family Physicians (CAFP) has learned of a referendum challenging the financing and construction of a new ambulatory care facility at Ventura County Medical Center. Our organization is concerned about the long-term impact of this action on the delivery of quality health care to county patients and on the family practice residency program at Ventura County Medical Center.

The proposed ambulatory care center would help level the playing field for Ventura County Medical Center and its family practice residency, which provides health care to low-income residents, regardless of insurance status. Without the new building, fierce competition for Medi-Cal patients by private facilities may result in many seeking care elsewhere, leaving the medical center without an essential payor, even while it continues to provide care to uninsured residents. This is sure to destabilize the entire facility.

The referendum threatens a valuable training site for family physicians, who are already in short supply in our state. The program at Ventura County Medical Center is nationally known for the quality of its medical education and for training many of the family physicians who go on to practice in rural areas of California.

The fact that the Ventura residency has trained residents in a less-than-ideal physical setting is to the program’s credit. In the long run, however, the quality of patient care and the existence of the Ventura residency program would be jeopardized by the passage of the referendum to halt construction of the ambulatory care facility.

The California Academy of Family Practitioners is opposed to any changes in Ventura County’s health-care delivery system that would jeopardize family practice training. The academy urges the residents of Ventura County to carefully consider the impact of a “no” decision on the county’s vulnerable population and the state’s underserved communities.

STEPHEN BRUNTON, M. D.

President, CAFP

Sacramento

* Ventura County Medical Center does have old buildings that need to be replaced. However, the scope of their present plans is, in my opinion, excessive.

The expenditure of $50 million plus is not what concerns me most, although it certainly should concern all taxpayers. The greatest threat Measure X poses, I believe, is that it would give a message to VCMC that they are given a green light to expand their services in any way they and the Board of Supervisors please.

This is a serious threat to hospitals such as Santa Paula Memorial Hospital. I was one of the founders of this hospital in the late 1950s, and the hospital has played a vital role in the quality of life and economy of Santa Paula and Fillmore.

Unfortunately, in recent years, we have not received the cooperation from VCMC to which I believe we are entitled, and we have had to absorb almost $1 million a year in uncompensated care for patients that should have been cared for at VCMC.

Not only this, but VCMC actively solicits private patients, especially Medi-Cal OB patients, that our hospital needs to be financially viable. Except for Dr. Sam Edwards, we have not found VCMC nor the Board of Supervisors to be particularly helpful in trying to work for a fair resolution of these problems.

Our not-for-profit hospital makes every effort to provide high-quality health services for the residents of our community. It takes every bit of ingenuity and effort to do so, and to meet our expenses. We are struggling, successfully so far, to stay viable, but we will probably not be able to survive if we lose any more of our patients to VCMC or other tax-subsidized competing groups.

ERNEST D. CARLSON, M. D.

Santa Paula