Thursday morning Kansas University Medical Center Executive Vice Chancellor Barbara Atkinson told members of the Kansas Board of Regents she thought Thursday could be the day that brings to an end the months of negotiations over a new master affiliation between the KUMC and KU Hospital.

She told regents, and media members present, that seven lawyers were meeting with a three-person negotiations group in order to determine if all sides could agree to the pact.

What does it say about any agreement, particularly one between two neighboring state facilities, when it takes seven lawyers to try to hammer out an agreement which is fair to both parties? Doesn’t that indicate there are some very important issues which KU Hospital officials refuse to knuckle under in the face of intense pressures from Chancellor Robert Hemenway, KU Vice Chancellor Atkinson, a small group of the inner circle of Kansas City’s “we’re in charge group” and St. Luke’s officials?

Anyhow, contrary to Atkinson’s very positive statement, there is no agreement. Now, KUMC spokespersons are trying to make light of Atkinson’s prediction by saying, “It’s not going to be today. I think that was a bit tongue-in-cheek.” “Tongue-in-cheek?” No way!

What it was is that Atkinson and others have thought all along that they could bring enough pressure on KU Hospital president and CEO Bob Page, as well as hospital board members, that they would crumble under the intense pressures from Bill Hall, Irv Hockaday, St. Luke’s president Richard Hastings, Terry Dunn, Tom McDonnell, Don Hall Jr. and a few others.

Page and his board members are not going to agree to anything which does not create a level playing field for the hospital in its competitive position with St. Luke’s Hospital. They will not agree to a sellout, or giveaway, to the detriment of KU Hospital and the gain of St. Luke’s.

A number of KU Hospital doctors are convinced any lessening by St. Luke’s officials for a 50/50 split of any cancer center designation is merely a tactic to get an agreement. Then, they reason, “St. Luke’s will start demanding changes more favorable to them. They will not let up.” One KU Hospital official said, “Based on previous St. Luke’s health deals, oftentimes what was expressed verbally and in writing didn’t turn out to be the situation after the deal was sealed. We don’t want this game to be played with us.”

Regardless of what Hemenway, Atkinson, Roy Jensen and others may claim, KU and the State of Kansas would not be gaining anything by agreeing to the deal sought by St. Luke’s.

Atkinson and Hemenway seem proud and eager to talk about a very recent agreement with St. Luke’s. This agreement still has many details to be clarified but it really doesn’t mean much without an agreement between KU Hospital and KUMC.

KU Hospital is critical to any meaningful agreement and as yet there is no such agreement. KUMC representatives could have demanded much more from St. Luke’s, a more level playing field, if they had gone into negotiations with a firm, strong, mutually rewarding agreement between the two Kansas entities, KU Hospital and KUMC.

As has been asked before, how attractive must the incentives be that Hemenway and Atkinson would be championing a deal with St. Luke’s which weakens KU and Kansas and is a giveaway to St. Luke’s?

Why has Gov. Kathleen Sebelius become such a supporter of the deal? She has tried to pack the hospital board with individuals who would vote however the governor wishes. What is in it for the governor?

Hemenway, Atkinson, some St. Luke’s boosters, a couple of Johnson County state legislators and a few individuals who want to gain the approval and friendship of Hemenway, claim the pact with St. Luke’s is necessary if KUMC and KU Hospital are to gain the National Cancer Institute or comprehensive cancer center designation. This is not true. In fact, according to individuals actively engaged in helping secure this coveted designation for hospitals around the country, St. Luke’s brings little to the table. Their cancer research is limited and KU would be a far stronger candidate for the NIC designations if they were to hook up with the Kansas City Oncology people who handle between 60 to 70 percent of Kansas City’s outpatient cancer care.

This writer reported this situation and pointed out KU could and should work out agreements with area hospitals and gain far more cancer patient care and research information than by saying St. Luke’s was critical if KU had any chance to get the cancer center certification.

Now, Atkinson is so pleased to be able to announce an agreement is in the works with Topeka’s Stormont-Vail Hospital, Wichita hospitals and some in western Kansas. How much of this action is based on common sense or how much is an effort to gain the political and medical support of the Wichita, Topeka and Western Kansas areas for the giveaway to St. Luke’s?

There’s far too much self-serving, conflict of interests, raw politics and hardball, mean pressure tactics in this effort to tie KUMC and KU Hospital into a one-sided deal with St. Luke’s.

It’s obvious Hemenway wants to please a number of powerful individuals in Kansas City but he should be just as eager to look after the best interests of Kansas. Likewise, it still is a puzzle why members of the Kansas Board of Regents don’t want to take a closer look at the deal. Anything that requires the efforts and expense of seven attorneys certainly should merit the interest of the regents rather than just accepting the word of Hemenway and Atkinson that this is a good deal for the university.

Just how shaky the deal is is illustrated by the fact Hemenway, Atkinson and the Kansas City crowd want the agreement signed by the end of December, before Kansas lawmakers convene in Topeka for the 2008 legislative session. Time and time again, those favoring the plan have made this very clear. They do not want, nor do they think the legislators have any right to be involved in this transaction, which includes state facilities that have received hundreds of millions of dollars from state taxpayers. As a matter of fact, one member of the Kansas City group told a public audience that Kansas legislators don’t have much understanding or knowledge of modern medicine.

With that kind of an attitude about the lawmakers, it is understandable why they do not want the hospital matter to become a matter of inquiry or debate in Topeka.

Those favoring the agreement wanted the plan to be signed this past January before what was to be a big public relations show in Kansas City where Kansas and Missouri governors would meet and use this agreement as a sign of interstate cooperation for the betterment of the area. There was no agreement, the threats and false statements continued and the next target date was sometime in March. This, too, failed and another date was considered for late spring or early summer.

There still is no deal, no matter what Atkinson anticipated earlier this week.

It should be of interest the hospital board has no scheduled meeting until January 2008. So, what does this do to the order – almost demand – that the agreement be signed before the end of December?

Page and his hospital directors are not going to cave in to the pressures, although they are becoming intense. It’s clear KUMC and St. Luke’s people would like to lay the blame at the feet of the KU Hospital if there is no agreement by the end of December, but the real fault lies with those who planned the whole self-serving matter in secret and then expected KU Hospital officials to agree to a scheme that was not fair to the hospital and which strengthened its competition at St. Luke’s.

KU Hospital is the No. 1 hospital in Kansas City. What kind of diligence would KU Hospital officials and members of the hospital board be exercising if they were to agree to a plan that was not in the best interests of the hospital, would weaken the hospital and would strengthen the competition?

More people, more lawmakers, more regents and more people interested in the welfare of KU Hospital, as well as KUMC, should become more interested in what is going on.

Someday there probably will be an agreement. There should be a strong alliance between KU Hospital and KUMC, but it should not be a giveaway as originally planned by the secret group who planned the devious medical coup.