October 16, 2008

Is Becky Nelson the Sanford internal memo leak?

Sanford Health CEO Kelby K. Krabbenhoft sent around an October 2, 2008 memo to "interested and concerned parties" regarding Initiated Measure 11. (I never noticed his initials before - the flak I've received my entire life for the name Hickey gives me a sympathy for him there.) Nice note from Kelby below - I wish that was all they had said about IM11.  You can read it and then my additional comments below.

Sanford Ltr.jpg

Note that Sanford Health reaffirms their committment to not perform elective abortions. We are left to assume that they are on the side of those of us who support IM11 in that they believe abortion should NOT be used as a form of birth control. Krabbenhoft acknowledges the need for exceptions for the "rare, sad and unfortunate" situations that occur "only in the extreme case of a life threat to the mother" and, in Sanford's view, "the terminal condition of the fetus."  So Sanford Health sees need for three not five exceptions - life/heath of mother and in case of terminal fetal anomaly. No exception noted by Sanford for rape or incest. From a medical and scientific standpoint, of course, that would fall under the elective abortion category and therefore unnecessary from Sanford's point of view.

It seems the purpose of this note is to say Sanford won't be weighing in on this issue. And that is where it is way way too late thanks to the leaked internal memo earlier this week.  They can say whatever they want now about staying impartial but the leaked "Sanford endorsement" we saw earlier this week goes against their stated policies underscored in this earlier memo.

The following is an additional internal email related to these matters that was sent out yesterday morning by Sanford's Senior Vice President and Chief Operations Officer Becky Nelson regarding the "leaked" memo.

From: NELSON,BECKY (SR VP & COO)

Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 10:11 AM

To: SC PHYSICIANS; SC EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT; SH EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT; SHN EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT; SHN CEO'S; SMC EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT; SMC DEPT DIRECTORS COMMUNICATION; SC DIRECTORS OF CLINIC OPERATIONS

Cc: JOHNSTON,MARK

Subject: Media and Initiated Measure 11

 

By now you may have heard that an internal document prepared for the executive staff at Sanford has been obtained by the media. We have received inquiries as to whether Sanford is taking a "position" on Initiative 11 and would like to clarify what has been our past and is our current policy on the issue.  As Kelby states in his internal memorandum from 2006; "Sanford, as a corporation, will neither encourage nor discourage proponent or dissent to this issue, nor will it engage, represent or be identified in legal or other activities on either side of the discussion".

 

As is commonly done with legislation that may affect the health system, Kelby had asked our legal counsel to prepare an opinion on the potential impact of Initiated Measure11 on Sanford, its patients, physicians and employees should it pass. The "white paper" found its way to the Center for Healthy Families; the group spearheading the "Vote No on 11" campaign and was released to the media.

 

Attached is the memo from Kelby for you to review and use in your discussions with your internal staff. If you have questions or need further clarification I would encourage you to contact your executive leader.

 

Becky Nelson

Sr. VP, COO

Sanford Health still has some major explaining to do. Note that Becky says the leak went directly to the Campaign for UNHealthy Families and then to the media.  BUT LET'S NOT FORGET… in 2006 Becky's husband Dave Nelson (who, at that time was the Minnehaha County State Attorney) did TV commercial for the Campaign for UNHealthy Families saying 2006's Referred Law 6 punished women who were pregnant as a result of rape or incest. In terms of identifying the one who "leaked" the memo directly to the Campaign for UNHealthy Families, at this point, the only one of the direct recipients of that internal memo with known, direct ties to UNHealthy Families is Becky Nelson herself. Perhaps she and Dave now support IM11 because it has the exceptions for rape and incest he wanted in 2006. I highly doubt it.  (Click here to read the script of Dave Nelson's 2006 UNHealthy Families ad.)  It would be an easy assumption that Sanford Dr. Maria Bell was one of the fifty others who got the memo and that she was the leak, but that's doubtful to me because I hear she's in Greece right now. What we do know is UNHealthy Families has more than just their foot in the door at Sanford Health.

Permalink Print Comment

Comments on Is Becky Nelson the Sanford internal memo leak? »

October 16, 2008

That Girl @ 4:11 pm

You're more gossippy than a teenage girl, Steve. Your attempt at uncovering some deep, dark secret in all this is completely off the mark and truly hilarious. Glad to know this is where you spend your time. Some of us have voters to contact.

friend @ 6:15 pm

Sanford and Unhealthy Families are definitely in bed together. Sanford shows absolutely NO concern that the memo was leaked. I'm surprised that Becky Nelson didn't just say, "By now you may have heard that an internal document prepared for the executive staff at Sanford has been handed to Unhealthy Families on a silver platter. We are pleased that they found it important enough to release to the media so that we could get some free media attention as well."

Also, the memo has "Privileged and Confidential" right at the top. Apparently, those are empty words in the vocabularies of Sanford executives.

momoffour @ 6:51 pm

Doesn't speak well for everyone's medical records over at Sanford. If a privileged and confidential memo can't be kept that way, how do I know my medical records can? Oh, and isn't that an argument for the pro aborts- a woman has a right to privacy. Guess not a Sanford!

Marcee @ 7:02 pm

Interesting!

My next door neighbors put up a Vote Yes on Measure 11 sign on our property line. I noticed something on the baby's forehead on the sign last week, but thought it was just part of the sign. Then I took my dog for a walk this evening, and I took a closer look at the sign. Someone has put "Vote No" stickers on the baby's forehead on both sides of the sign. I thought to myself, "Who in their right mind doesn't like babies?!" It was like the baby was marked for death. I looked across the street at the young mother, who was playing with her child in their driveway. What if someone walked up to her kid and put a "Vote No" sticker on his forehead? It's the same thing! That neighbor doesn't have any signs in their yard.

I don't know who would put those Vote No stickers on the baby's picture. Maybe some poor sorry Unhealthy Family people, who were bored and didn't know what to do with their leftover "Vote No" stickers.

I am very hopeful that this time around, the "yes"es will take it on saving babies. I have only seen one Vote No sign around town. I am also hopeful that Planned Parenthood wasted all of their funding on mass producing Vote No signs and stickers that no one wants, except those people at the Augie parade. Can they recycle those signs and stickers? Otherwise, it clutters the landfill. What a waste of money! I wouldn't want to use any recycled paper that used to be a Vote No sign or sticker!

Does anyone know if Planned Parenthood has their banner out that says, "These Doors Will Remain Open!"? I haven't driven past there in awhile.

kevin @ 9:03 pm

that girl: You obviously haven't been to the argus forums yet! Talk about gossipy girls, that's where they reside. What is off the mark here? It is easy to say but is it easy to prove? Steve is credible. Contact your voters, you need to. If you can spare a second or two, please let us know what is off the mark.

The Big B @ 9:45 pm

Friend @ 6:15……I work for Sanford in a facility that has about 10-12 doctors as well as 4-6 Nurse Practitioners. From what I can tell from previous conversations with them, they are about 60-40 prolife. I can tell you without reservation that each and every one of the doctors I work with are outraged at the memo leak. They are unanimously of the opinion that this was not an accident, and to quote one, "Someone's head needs to roll about this."

mallys @ 10:27 pm

Whoever leaked is attempting to use Sanford to intimidate voters into doing something that Sanford won't actually stand up for.

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting