- 13 -
schedules, reduced the management effort required of Foundation
in organizing independent physicians to work together.
When the steering committee presented its recommendation
(which had not been unanimous) to the group, it was soundly
rejected. The remaining UHMG physicians, including several of
petitioners, were vehemently opposed to any affiliation with
Foundation. Most had had unpleasant experiences with
Foundation's unwillingness to approve certain drugs and
procedures they had recommended for patients. Foundation
employed "formularies", which were approved lists of drugs the
departure from which when prescribing for patients required
substantial justification by the physician. This and other
Foundation practices, which many of petitioners attributed to
Foundation's for-profit, business-driven orientation, caused
petitioners to fear a significant loss of professional autonomy
were they to practice medicine as employees of Foundation.
IV. Acquisition by Sutter Health
A. Selection of Sutter Health
The discussions with Foundation were terminated, and after
some consideration of the remaining potential acquirers,
petitioners and the other UHMG doctors decided to pursue an
affiliation with Sutter Health.10 Sutter Health was the parent
10 Woodland Clinic had offered very little in the steering
committee's view, as negotiations revealed that it was merely
interested in the UHMG physicians' joining its organization
(continued...)
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008