• Blog
  • About
  • Contact

Another Dr. Paul Kearney Case Update

5/9/2016

24 Comments

 
Once again, for those new to this blog site, at present there are 14 posts on the blog and each has its own set of comments. To read the comments you have to hit the word "Comments" at the beginning or end of the post. Somewhat confusing is that when you bring up the comments for a specific post it eliminates the other posts from the screen. To bring the other posts back up simply go back to the top of the page and click on Blog. Finally, to understand the development of the blog it is best to read it from the bottom post (Dr. Paul Kearney Case) up. One point of note here, to read the earliest posts you have to click on the word "<<Previous" at the very bottom of the posts available.

* Note: To see PDF Documents cited in this post simply click on the underlined segment

The comment section on the previous post was getting long (but worth reading sports fans) so I thought it might be worth extending it as a new blog post.  I would tend to agree with several of the comments posted that the University’s General Council has made this Paul Kearney case into a personal matter rather than the legal matter it should be, going as far as using the Legal Office website (https://www.uky.edu/Legal/OtherDocuments.htm) to try to publically litigate the matter, and conspicuously leaving out any details that did not support his accusations. Clearly the university and hospital administrations are out to win this battle at all costs. Unfortunately, as others have pointed out, due to its impact on faculty retention and recruiting, this cost could include the quality of healthcare at the university hospital as well as the research programs throughout the College.
 
In review:
A) Paul Kearney is the only physician in the history of UK Medical Center whose patient privileges have been taken away.
B) This vendetta was initiated based upon an incident that has been recently thrown out of court (see Document 7), or as is written on the document: “IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
C) The “Medical Staff Executive Committee” instituting the very extreme sanctions against Dr. Kearney was assembled by a physician colleague (Dr. Bernard Boulanger) who not only had a negative history with Dr. Kearney, but also strangely left the University (to pursue his dream in a town, Cleveland, closer to his homeland Canada) following the backlash of these extreme measures.
D) In its effort to create a case against Dr. Kearney The Medical Staff Executive Committee in their trial in absentia, and it appears even went so far as to solicit negative documentation against Dr. Kearney.
E) The Medical Staff Executive Committee arrogantly deemed themselves not only authorities of physician matters but also College and University tenured faculty matters, and executively took away all of Dr. Kearney’s tenured faculty privileges.
F) Following his suspension, Dr. Kearney was never notified of his right to or given a hearing before this Medical Staff Executive Committee, as is stated in the UK Healthcare Medical Staff Bylaws (Article 9.4.2).
G) The administration went so far as to warn (some interpreted as threatened) College and hospital faculty, students and staff against voicing opinions in the matter (unless of course they were supportive of any of the decisions made by the committee).
H) To the dismay of the administration and the University’s General Council, the Board of Trustees acknowledged the abuse of power by the Medical Staff Executive Committee by reinstating Dr. Kearney’s University tenured professor privileges.
I) The University President subsequently attempted to override this Board’s ruling.
J) The University Legal Office then attempted to get Dr. Kearney’s physician license revoked, but failed miserably when the Board of Licensure reported: “there is insufficient evidence of a violation to warrant a complaint”.
K) The former College of Medicine Dean, Fred de Beer, instituted a program of poor faculty performance evaluations as the latest avenue for getting rid of Dr. Kearney.
 
As always, all of this begs the question of “WHY”? Well perhaps:
 
A) Prior to any of the above, the EVPHA, Dr. Michael Karpf, in a College of Medicine Faculty Council meeting, threatened Dr. Kearney following his questioning of the management of KMSF and its Practice Plan Committee.
B) Following the suspension by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, the University’s General Council, Professor/Instructor Thro offered Dr. Kearney and his lawyer some minimal deal and subsequently instructed him to ‘take the deal or they would destroy his career’.
C) Dr. Kearney filed a Whistleblower suit against the university, claiming these actions were retaliatory measures taken against him following his inquires into the possible mismanagement of hospital revenue by the EVPHA and KMSF.
D) Attempts to investigate KMSF management or mismanagement of hospital finances through open records requests have been blocked by the University General Council under the claim that KMSF is not a part of the University, in spite of the fact that 2 State Attorney Generals declared otherwise.  Having lost this battle, the current strategy is to invoke, either “no such document exists” (see Document 5), or as is suggested in the very latest reply from the Attorney Generals Office (see Document 4) the use of the terms “exception”, “information of a personal nature”, “attorney-client privilege and or work doctrine” and a number of “KRS” statutes. This latest response from the Attorney General’s Office to the University’s hired outside lawyer (Mr. Harry Dadds) is an interesting read and clearly suggests there is something they are worried about.
 
I think I will end this with a quote from one of our many commenters on the previous blog post following his/her congratulations to Dr. Blonder on her appointment as faculty representative to the Board of Trustees (BoT). 

​“Perhaps the true expense of this campaign against Paul Kearney can be brought to light as a result of the BoT meetings. In the wake of looming budget cuts, I would like to know how the President's continued support of what is clearly retaliation against a notable faculty member is an acceptable expense in terms of money, morale, and depth of talent in the eyes of the BoTs. What will it take to move the BoT to protect the reputation of this university and minimize fiscal waste?
24 Comments
BJ
5/9/2016 04:17:02 pm

Dan, thanks again for doing this. It appears that almost every day I hear someone new saying "I've got to get out of this place". The Third Reich approach they are using in managing this Kearney thing is like a cancer eating away at the morale around here. They need to find a solution.

Reply
Dan Noonan
5/10/2016 04:22:03 am

Thanks for the thoughts BJ. I think this is a good time to reiterate that I did not start this blog to sanctify Dr. Kearney. None of us are saints and as the administration has known and clearly condoned for years (15 years of outstanding performance evaluations signed off on by all of his bosses), Dr. Kearney, despite being a miracle worker at times in the trauma ward, can be outspoken and offensive to those sensitive to harsh language and subtle humor. This blog is not about the crime Dr. Kearney is being accused of but rather the penalty being imposed for that crime and perhaps the possible ulterior reasons for imposing that penalty. Beyond that, this Dr. Kearney situation appears to have become a test of authority for the administration and its legal department. If they can usurp faculty rights at will, then what is left? Their motto appears to be: “Shut up, do your job, and be happy you have that job”. In other words, we will monitor you but expect to face the consequences should you attempt to monitor us. So feel free to constructively air your thoughts (for or against the Kearney matter) on this blog.

Reply
The juicy dangler.
5/10/2016 06:35:01 am

Whatever the outcome of the lawsuit I do not think there is anything the courts can do to force UKHealthcare to allow Kearney to practice medicine in the hospital. Do you really think being able to use the hospital facilities, resources, equipment, staff etc is a "faculty right"? He's got an office, he's getting paid what else would constitute a "win"?

Reply
Dan Noonan
5/10/2016 11:50:19 am

Thanks for the comment Juicy dangler. I agree, the courts may not be able to return Dr. Kearney’s patient privileges, but the BoT and the university president could do that. It would go a long ways to rectifying this major disparity between the original crime and the resulting punishment. There are obviously financial alternative solutions to this. What exactly is the going rate for destroying a faculty physician’s reputation and career? I mean, from a practical perspective the cost of the litigation required thus far to mount this protracted vendetta as well as the financial impact it is having with respect to retention and recruiting has to be mounting up. Finally, think of all of the secrets they might be able to hide or at least negotiate into a settlement.

Beyond the above, one might also argue that Dr. Kearney’s “faculty rights” have yet to be fully restored. From what I understand, he no longer is allowed to teach medical students in the CoM.

The bottom line being, it is in the hospital and university’s best interest to get this resolved, sooner rather than later.

Reply
PM
5/10/2016 02:11:50 pm

Pretty simple juicy, a "win" would minimally entail giving the guy his original job and salary back.

Reply
The dangler
5/10/2016 04:42:57 pm

He already has his salary.

I don't think being able to practice medicine in the university hospital is a faculty "right". Can someone convince me otherwise?

Reply
Dan Noonan
5/11/2016 03:53:35 am

Thanks again dangler for the comment. I guess the point is as PM noted, a win would be the job and salary he had prior to the initiation of this vendetta. This was a trial in the absence of the accused, via a kangaroo court hand selected by a person who had personal issues with the accused and clearly orchestrated by the head of the hospital. The accused was even denied the opportunity to face his accusers, as is dictated by the bylaws of this committee. Although after a protracted battle he has been given an office outside the medical center and even the college, his salary has been reduced to close to 1/3rd of his original salary, he is no longer able to see patients and he is no longer able to teach medical students, residents and fellows. Furthermore, they are using this dictated inability to do what he was doing as a basis for generating poor faculty performance evaluations. So yes, I still view this as a violation of both his physician rights and faculty rights. The point of the blog post is that this is, as BJ noted, a cancer eating at the university, college and hospital. It is costing money, destroying morale and has contributed to the loss of faculty. These are just my opinions, but they are in part a reflection of the many emails I have received as well as contributions to this blog site.

Reply
Johnny Segment
5/11/2016 04:19:20 am

I don't understand how physicians are paid at UK but if some component of his salary was contingent on his provision of clinical services then its not surprising it has gone down.

I'm also not sure that teaching is a "faculty right" either.

The only way Kearney would ever be allowed back into the hospital is if Karpf leaves. And I don't see anyone sacking him without a suitable replacement on board. So that is not happening.

Reply
Naboo the Enigma
5/11/2016 10:37:55 am

Of course there are plenty of people with Administrative Jobs in the COM/UKHealthcare who are paid obscene amounts of money for doing nothing useful at all. Chief of these would be Kerney's surgery chair Zwishenberger. So in light of that cutting Kerney's salary does seem a little churlish.

Reply
SGT Raymond Boombox
5/11/2016 03:13:01 pm

Since the issues of Kearney's salary has come up I think its fair game to discuss the egregious disparities in salaries paid to people in the COM. Who do you think would be paid more.
A. The physician director of neonatal/intensive care services.
B. The chief of pulmonary/critical care medicine who is responsive for the hospital adult intensive care service
C. The new Ph.D director of "biomedical informatics" which is a division in internal medicine with essentially no faculty in it.

Clue: I have noticed that whenever a Ph.D scienitst is appointed in a clinical department these days its because they are getting paid more than comparable faculty are in the basic sciences departments.

Reply
Spoon Snake
5/11/2016 03:14:52 pm

Got it!

Zhang Guo-Qiang Internal Medicine-Biomedical Informatics Professor $360,000.00 Full-Time

Is paid more than Peter Giannone MD and Peter Morris MD.

Reply
Old Gregg
5/11/2016 03:16:17 pm

Thats f'in outrageous. I'm Old Gregg...

Reply
Dan Noonan
5/12/2016 04:06:53 am

Thanks folks for the comments, although I suspect much of this is the same person. The disparity in salaries in the hospital and college is pretty much no dark secret. The administrative burden in the College of Medicine is fairly enormous considering the CoM lists 22 people with the word "Dean" in their title (http://med.uky.edu/college-leadership) and well over half of those list someone else as their contact person. One also needs to add to that the many division chiefs and department chairs who have bumps in their salaries and support staff, not to mention the end of the year bonuses. Because most of these deans and deanlets are not really producers of revenue, it is easy to see where the money drain is. I found it rather humorous that Price Waterhouse Cooper never included a reduction in administrators as part of its savings program. Of course a huge savings would have been eliminating PWC expenses, but there again I am sure that was not listed also. Add to all of this the very expensive battle to eliminate Dr. Kearney from the university at all costs….well there we are, back to the blog interests.

Reply
Big Chief Woolabum Boomalackaway
5/12/2016 08:04:08 am

The other necessary financial drain is that any administrative restructuring inevitably involves bringing in outside consultants. The amount of money spent on this for, for example, the COM IBU initiative is staggering and yesterday I found out that another group of consultants have been back to develop a "plan" for research administration. Which of course makes you wonder what the Senior and regular associate deans of research in the COM actually do (aside of course from trousering massive amounts of cash for their administrative jobs..)

Reply
Tony Harrison
5/12/2016 09:28:51 am

My observation is that all of these restructuring efforts result in a few low level minions loosing their jobs with any financial savings wiped out by the inevitable salary increase for the deanlet who is then supposed to oversee the new business unit.

Reply
Dan Noonan
5/18/2016 10:20:23 am

Not much going on beyond the usual story of disenchanted hospital and College faculty and staff. Still no real word from the new Dean that I know of. I have welcomed him to the blog site, but I suspect he isn't biting on that. I notice folks still monitor the blog on a regular basis (the site provides statistics for # of views and # of unique visitors), so thanks for that. Any new developments anyone wishes to share? I will post new stuff as I receive it so keep monitoring.

Reply
DD
5/19/2016 03:38:35 am

Probably not news, but just so you are aware, some have been warned about your site.

Reply
The Hitcher
5/19/2016 11:56:09 am

I think some of you people around here are overestimating how much the "Administration" care about this web site and who reads it...

Reply
Dan Noonan
5/19/2016 02:48:06 pm

Thanks DD and Hitcher for your comments. I suspect Hitcher is probably correct about the administrations interest in the blog. They have much more to worry about than this blog. With the Kearney case, the State's Attorney General's decisions, the difficulty they are having retaining and recruiting faculty and whatever else they might be trying to hide, this blog is nothing. To those who may want to post on the blog, there is very little chance of anybody identifying you unless you simply identify yourself in some way on your post. No real name is required nor do you have to included an email address. The only information they send to my gmail account is the notification that a comment has been made.

Reply
The Mole
5/20/2016 04:30:39 am

Apparently UKHealthcare physicians participated in a Press-Ganey Physician/faculty engagement survey. The results are in and UK/UkHealthcare scored in the lowest precentile group of this survey in the entire country. My sources tell me that the administration (Karpf) are thinking about what to do with this information and how to avoid releasing it. Maybe a good start would be to take the survey seriously and think about why faculty are so disengaged.
And, of all of the units at UK that participated the absolute worst was surgery and I'm sure this has something to do with the awful leadership and the Kearney stuff thats being discussed here.

Reply
Dan Noonan
5/20/2016 10:36:34 am

Thanks for the update The Mole. I am not at all surprised by this. I suspect they will huddle up and come up with some comprehensive plan to address this problem, or better yet, they will pay some outside consultants several hundred thousand or so to solve it for them. Of course the solutions will totally avoid the true causes and include something like "reorganization", hoorah sessions, free lunches and probably raises for the administrators (this of course is over and above the bonuses they will issue themselves for doing such a great job at addressing these minor issues).

Reply
Rosie
5/20/2016 01:26:39 pm

Well we didn't win the NCAA, but we did finally come out on top in something. We are the worst of the worst when it comes to Physician/Faculty Satisfaction (where are The Rolling Stones when you need them). Maybe they can put up a banner in Rupp for us. I'm really feeling Rosie now.

Reply
El Topo
5/20/2016 02:21:10 pm

I am hearing that there may be a shake up in surgery with Zwischenberger being told that he either has to leave or he will be replaced as chair. But this is obviously all hush hush because it would suit everyone if he could find another job somewhere else. Hopefully this will happen soon.

Reply
BB King
5/20/2016 05:43:16 pm

Yeh, like that's going to happen. Who can afford the $850,000+ salary this joker is getting. Maybe comedy off Broadway could use his harmonica skills. The more likely possibility is that someone catches him swearing in the halls, they put a new Executive Committee together that votes to take away his patient privileges, kicks him out of the hospital, gives him an office in the Agriculture Isolation Barn, and reduces his salary that of an Assistant Professor.


Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    UKy College of Medicine Discussions

Proudly powered by Weebly