ILNews

Hospital general counsel enjoys diverse workload

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
In-House Counsel

After spending 12 years in the health-care field as an X-ray technician, an in-house counsel for a hospital network in Indianapolis seems to be in the right place.

Shelley Fraser has been at Community Health Network for almost two years after hearing about the job from a neighbor of someone who worked in Community’s legal department. At that time, she’d been working for the firm now known as Taft Stettinius & Hollister for about five years, where she practiced health-care law.

shelley fraser Shelley Fraser, in-house counsel for Community Health Network in Indianapolis, went to law school to pursue a practice in health-care law after being an X-ray technician for 12 years. (IBJ Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Her main interest in going to law school was to practice something in the field of health care, so she enjoyed that job where she had experience with transactional and regulatory work in the health-care field.

But she was also excited for a new opportunity and ready for a change where she could focus on just one client. She also saw potential of being able to spend more time with her family – she was pregnant at the time – and spend less time worrying about billable hours and business development. She added this doesn’t mean she has any less work – if anything she might have more work – but it’s also faster paced and more focused because she only has the one client.

Today, as assistant general counsel to Community Health Network, she splits her time between an office at Community Hospital East and another office at Visionary Enterprises Inc.

“VEI is essentially the innovative development arm of the network – it owns and manages numerous ambulatory surgery centers, manages physician practices, and owns and manages real estate in addition to many other business ventures,” she said.

Each of those offices also has a member of the legal department who is there full time – Karen Ann Lloyd is at Community Hospital East, and Karen Turner is at VEI. The three of them oversee the legal issues of the network that includes 11,000 employees around central Indiana. She also said the three attorneys work well together, and she never feels isolated.

“It’s more of a team environment,” she said. “We don’t collaborate on everything, but we always support each other.”

There are five hospitals, plus more than 90 sites of care, which have a wide range of legal issues, she said.

In her role, she continues to work on transactional and regulatory compliance, but she and other general counsels also address tax, employment, mental health issues, and even criminal questions. She said the work is diverse and no two days are ever alike.

While she doesn’t often use her clinical background in her day-to-day work, she said it does help her understand how a hospital works, including the importance of focusing on the needs of patients.

She also said as a member of the risk-management team for the hospital network, even though things have changed since she was in the field, when she works with nurses she at least has an understanding of what they do because of her background.

While it doesn’t happen every day, from time to time she is able to affect patients’ lives directly – something she misses from her time as an X-ray technician. This usually only happens when she receives a call from the intensive care unit regarding a patient who is incapacitated and a decision needs to be made about the patient’s treatment, even if there’s no clearly defined person who can speak on behalf of the patient.

They’re never easy choices to make, she said. She can tell the physician the ethical or legal ways to handle the situation, but there isn’t always a clear answer one way or the other.

She has also learned about mental-health legal issues as the network has a number of patients with these concerns. For instance, the legal aspects of the commitment process, such as when someone can be constrained; what happens if the person needs medication but cannot give consent and who can give that consent; guardianship and power of attorney issues; the network’s role in cases involving child protective services and adult protective services; when mental-health records can be released; what records can be released when it comes to alcohol and substance abuse; duty to warn issues when it comes to issues like HIV reporting; and what can or can’t be shared in therapy sessions involving support groups.

While most of the physicians and others in the network have seen a lot of these firsthand and know many of the answers themselves, she said, “They already know the easy answers. By the time the question gets to me, there’s some kind of twist to it that’s unusual from what they usually see.”

She said among the issues she’s seen, some of the harder ones to address involve forced medication and consent issues, including controversial procedures or even when the issue of patient sterilization arises.

The hospital network has also worked with court programs. While those programs run on their own, she said the legal department has reviewed some of the forms to make them in compliance with what can and can’t be disclosed to the court regarding mental-health issues.

She added a number of people who work for the hospital have been there 20 or 30 years, and can also provide institutional knowledge when needed. Or when changes need to take place – as they have under health-care reform over the past couple years since Fraser started – others in the hospital can serve as a good reference when it comes to what has or hasn’t worked in the past.

“As the health-care industry is being revamped and redesigned, it’s a great opportunity to improve processes,” she said. “Our goal is to have better patient care and better access, and we’re analyzing how to make those changes over the next couple years.”

Among those changes are how to make records more high tech and in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, but because the hospital network is already connected, one concern is if the requirements are somehow different from what the network already does.

Fraser remains in touch with her mentor, Dave Bromund, a partner at Taft Stettinius & Hollister.

“Shelley was an important member of our health and life sciences group,” he said via e-mail. “We were sorry to see her move on, but understood that she was getting a great opportunity at Community. While she was here, she had a quiet confidence and maturity beyond her years in practice that clients loved. Some of that was due to her background in the health-care industry, but much of it was her great personality. She was a great problem-solver and saw issues from the client’s perspective. Again, this may be due, in part, to her prior industry experience. Her success and rapid progress to more significant and complex work came from her own hard work, solid critical thinking skills and good sense to ask the right questions.

“Shelley also showed her own initiative to get involved in the leadership of the American Bar Association’s task force on women’s issues,” he added. “She was passionate about helping women with breast cancer and focused her pro bono efforts on this cause.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT