Nov 05, 2023

LETTER: Need for speedy health and social care in Kansas

Posted Nov 05, 2023 10:45 AM
Pixabay
Pixabay

As a Kansas specialty clinic nurse manager with over 17 years of experience in the healthcare fieldI have grown concerned about SB 234.

SB 234, if passed, would weaken the Kansas public's health providers’ ability to respond to state residents' healthcare needs and concerns. 

As it stands, patients may produce their consent for providers to refer them to other care professionals. However, this bill would mandate providers initially go through an overly bureaucratic, time-consuming approval process that could add several weeks of time before an individual receives the help he or she desperately needs. 

Speed is often our top concern when it comes to making referrals. Ordinarily, individuals solicit care only after they have become remarkably vulnerable and their circumstances become dire. All the referrals we make for them first require the patient’s consent, so extending another time-consuming layer of bureaucracy into an already bureaucratic process is entirely unnecessary and counterproductive. 

The federal government, coupled with the state of Kansas, already thoroughly protect patients’ personal information through HIPAA and other time-tested measures. Additionally, the current referral system has several layers of built-in security measures to prevent their documents from being viewed by those who are not privileged.

The care delays that SB 234 would belabor on this process would be subtractive, not addictive, to Kansans’ welfare. 

Today, Kansans already suffer tremendously from a lack of speedy healthcare. Kansas ranks dead last in the nation for access to mental health resources. Further, rural and metropolitan counties only have an average of 0.8 and 1.5 physicians per 1,000 people, respectively. 

A study at the National Library of Medicine, published by Kansas State University, indicates that, “Kansas public health practitioners identified several barriers to public health and marginalized populations, suggestion an important lack of public health nationally in the U.S. are reflected in local public health in Kansas.” On the authority of the Kansas care providers interviewed, affordable care access and long travel times are two of the top barriers to access.

The responsibility to navigate these barriers and sensitivities falls on the state’s care facilities and organizations working with the Kansas Health Department. Patients already have enough on their minds to worry about, and they do not have the same industry of information and knowledge that we do, which allows them to rise above these state barriers to care access.

The referrals we provide are what allow them to get the help they need. However, should SB 234 pass, it will become significantly harder for us to refer Kansans to care providers who can meet their unique circumstances.

The Kansas Association of Local Health Departments, Kansas Association of School Boards, and a slew of county governments and health departments oppose SB 234.

The bill is misguided and does not consider the current dynamics of the Kansas healthcare industry. Our elected representatives need to reject the measure while they still can. 

Rachael Rushton
Norton