[If this blog were a newspaper, which it isn't, this particular blog post would be an editorial -- found in the opinion section, separate from the rest of the paper. The editorial section is where the editor "puts together" what the news means to him or her, and sets out a point of view, about what we should do or feel, think or believe about something, based on what else has been in the news lately, that they've been keeping people up to speed on. It's the opinion section, essentially -- but from the editorial management's point of view.]
Here's ours:
Kathie Costos has a great series of posts over at her blog, linked here, but there's one in particular we'd like to talk about - and we'll leave you the link to it in a minute, so you can read it for yourself. First, the discussion. Kathie is conducting a question and answer session with Paul Sullivan, head of Veterans for Common Sense, clearing up "rumors" about the veterans' lawsuit against the VA. Sullivan's answers are clear and to the point, and contain some fairly galvanizing statements, pro or con.
[I should insert the caveat here, in an effort to be balanced, that I DON'T believe the VA is "all bad," nor do I imagine Costos or Sullivan does. Every once in a while you DO read about people who are extremely thankful and grateful for the care they're received through the VA - I read an item the other day where a veteran was reminding us that they have one of the best healthcare systems in the world. True. But that also brings up a question of which metric you're using, since while they are succeeding in some areas, they are clearly failing in others (and those are the areas which are making the news, frustrating veterans and families, and where they're being sued.) Highly competent, concerned and caring individuals DO work for the VA -- many of the leading lights of care in the PTSD segment in particular have come from, or worked with, or still do work with, the VA. People who are tremendously significant in the history of caring for veterans in an extremely high quality, enlightened, empathic way -- so people like that DO work for the VA, and always have. Look through the "Experts" section on this blog, and see how many people have an affiliation with the VA, past or present: Ray Scurfield, Shad Meshad, Jonathan Shay, as well as others, all come to mind. (For the record, these people were probably "born" (wonderful) not "made" (wonderful) by their association with the VA as caregivers, but still -- they worked there and in some cases, still do. And God knows, the VA heavily reads this website -- even at odd hours -- including very late at night, on weekends, on national holidays -- times when the rest of America is out grilling a hotdog with their family, throwing a ball in a park, or just snoozing the night away -- so clearly there are some very dedicated individuals there, trying to learn all they can in order to deliver better care to those who are suffering. (Though they may also be reading to keep up with public opinion, to see which way the wind blows...)
I do sometimes wonder when I see what the VA is searching for, on this site, because it either seems kinda elementary (like they should know about it already), or a little "weak" in the efficacy of treatment department (like things that are waaaaaaaaaaay down the totem pole or triage pile of things to actually try with a demographic of patients who are suffering greatly). To give you an idea of what I'm talking about, frequent searches -- and the topics change regularly -- by the VA include such things as "spirituality for PTSD," "does recreation help?" and things like that, where, really, yes, even if they do -- they're only adjuncts and pretty far down the list at that, compared to more likely things that seem worth trying or are known to have some benefit. But maybe I should just be patient, and it's more a case of "if you build it, they will come." Maybe there's a huge lag time afoot, where if the information is laid out there, eventually the searches will catch up -- on the VA's part, that is.]
(Huge digression -- but the point is, the VA's not all bad, and that's NOT the point of suggesting they change, which it certainly seems like they should.)
---
Deep in the Q&A between Costos and Sullivan is this exchange, with the comment of importance highlighted:
Do you know about the Freedom of Information request to the VA by CREW and VoteVets?(Which we blogged about earlier here, by the way.)
Yes. It is too bad that VA still plays games with FOIA. VA should be forced to turn over the information. Embarrassing information is never a reason to deny a FOIA, as VA frequently does.
Alrighty now. That was the warmup (the foregoing). Here's the pitch:
If the VA wants to control the flow of embarrassing information about it -- such as the Katz and Perez emails have provided us with -- there's one extremely simple way to do it. It's NOT hiring a PR firm that specializes in crisis management and controlling the spin. That's morally and ethically disgusting -- when contrasted with the concept of just changing -- and, it's ridiculously expensive -- a true waste of money that could be better spent on taking care of veterans and their families, with the needs the VA already knows about. And by promoting good works, like those of combat veteran Jay White, at the VA Center in Hartford, Connecticut, which we blogged about here. Those ALSO make the news and contribute to public opinion, though everyone knows, and it's unfortunate that it's true, bad news travels first. (And bad news here is definitely the Katz and the Perez emails, and the lack of putting patients first they describe, not to mention the rash of veterans suicides, etc.) Denying patients adequate care? There's just no way to put a positive enough spin on that. And the extent of the media coverage has been such, yup, we pretty much all know about it by now, if we even remotely care to. Game over. What needs to happen next is what happened with the Odwalla juice company -- what the VA desperately needs is the Odwalla effect.
Years ago, Odwalla was a new company with a great product: fresh juice, delivered nationally. I knew someone whose three college friends had started it, and because of that, I guess I paid attention to what it was, and when I had the chance, tried the juice. It was great, and for a while, everybody I saw who wasn't carrying some bottled water, seemed to be carrying a container of their juice. They had, and still have, a number of blended juices, as well as the straight-up orange and apple. And they had a novel, and in hindsight quite unwise, approach. Their juice was unpasteurized, which they felt was needed to keep the juice as fresh-tasting and delicious as possible, but which also carried some known health risks, because pasteurization kills bacteria. Children (particularly babies) and the elderly, as well as a few other groups (those recovering from illness and surgery, etc.) have weaker immunities -- in other words, are more susceptible to bacteria. And I don't remember that Odwalla plastered their juice labels with big warnings about: "Warning! Our lack of pasteurization makes this juice likely unsafe for children and the elderly!". They probably just made their juice, concentrated on getting it to market, and hoped people toasted each other with its deliciousness. But over time, the inevitable happened: a few people who tasted their fresh, delicious (and unpasteurized) juices got sick - and, horribly - died. And some of the affected were children, which the American public finds of course especially heartbreaking, and worthy of media attention.
In an instant, it seemed -- everyone turned on Odwalla, the juice and the company. It went from being a media darling, to an object of abhorrence and fear. How could they have let their juice kill people -- young children, even? Horrifying... Based on the immediate and complete backlash in the press and public opinion, I easily imagined Odwalla going under, and my friend's three college friends being put of work, and skulking away in public disgrace.
What happened next was amazing, though: and it shows you the power of good, and of doing the right thing. (There's a conflicting story on the Web, but if you read the date on it, it's from 1999, which is ridiculously old news -- before the Odwalla success story of managing its PR happened, and before the company was later sold to Coca Cola - another evidence of its success. Plus, the guy who wrote it is by no means is a PR specialist, nor does he even seem to understand how PR works. I did work in PR, though I'm no expert on crisis management - I do get how it works.) Odwalla didn't go bankrupt, didn't go out of business, didn't leave the marketplace in shame and disgrace. What DID they do? Simple as could be, and oh so powerful:
They accepted responsibility. They apologized and paid the families' bills. And they changed their process, so more people wouldn't be hurt by it. They were wrong; they admitted it; they did what it took to make it right; and they changed.
In other words -- EXACTLY what the VA needs to do.
By now, we all know what the problems are, if we've cared at all to listen and learn. They're kinda obvious. And no amount of re-spinning the truth is going to make the problem go away. All the media attention and lawsuit has done is show us the gaps in the system, the problems with care. And because most caring, compassionate, fair-minded Americans care MORE about their veterans - we "get" the price they've paid -- than we do about hearing excuses and spin -- there's only one real solution here. Admit the problem(s), apologize to those you've affected (veterans, their families, and the rest of us, who while less directly involved, are nevertheless put off by what we've learned), and fix the process. Let tomorrow be vastly different from today, because you're starting to work -- really work -- on the problem, now. The problem that we -- you, me, veterans, their families, the media, Veterans for Common Sense, the IAVA, the Disability Rights Project, Paul Sullivan, Kathie Costos -- all know exists.
Lack of pasteurization, denying veterans care -- and, if you'll allow me -- O.J. Simpson have all have been linked to killing people. But in a contest between two kinds of OJ -- Odwalla and Simpson -- please, VA, we beg of you: show yourselves to be more like Odwalla, and less like Simpson. Fess up, come clean, do what's right by veterans and their families, make it right. Now more than ever, what the VA seriously needs to re-create good public opinion is not denial, spin and blocking legitimate FOIA requests, in case something embarrassing gets revealed -- it's a simple thing called "the Odwalla Effect." Also known as, doing the right thing, for the right reason, makes public opinion bounce right back.
---
Editor's note: Kathie Costos' Q&A with Paul Sullivan of Veterans for Common Sense about the veterans' lawsuit is linked here. Kathie Costos' blog, "Wounded Times," is linked here. Veterans for Common Sense is linked here.
