Partnering for More Than the Survival of a Catholic Presence in Healthcare

Abstract

One of the contributions to the Catholic healthcare ministry made by the late Cardinal Bernardin is a set of criteria for Catholic healthcare systems to use in choosing partners for joint ventures and affiliations (Bernardin, 1994). He based his criteria on the premise that appropriate partners are those who will ultimately strengthen and enhance the Catholic presence in healthcare in general, and the Catholic identity of the Catholic facility in particular. Hence, the preferred partner is another Catholic party. A second option is another not-for-profit system or facility that shares “in a substantive way our Catholic vision and values.” This choice of partner can be problematic in that, even if common vision and values are affirmed, the Catholic identity of the Catholic partner may be diluted. This situation could occur, for example, as a result of the shift from an exclusive Catholic sponsorship to an arrangement of co-sponsorship. It could also result from the need, in some cases at least, for material cooperation by the Catholic system in some prohibited procedures. The growing reluctance in some quarters to approve material cooperation even for the sake of a continued Catholic presence in healthcare (e.g., Smith, 1996) makes such partnerships especially troublesome. In addition to diluting the identity of the Catholic partner, choosing non-Catholic partners may, in some instances, damage the presence of Catholic healthcare by putting other Catholic facilities in the same service area at financial risk. A third partner option is a for-profit system. For-profit healthcare had been judged by the Cardinal to be inimical to Catholic identity, and is ruled out (Bernardin, 1995; Place, 1998). These criteria have proven to be helpful. They are helpful, however, only within the limited context of their grounding premise: the need to preserve and promote Catholic healthcare’s ministry. The “healthcare” ministry is not the only public ministry of the Church. Nor does the healing ministry of the Church need to be viewed solely as an end, sought for its own sake. It is also possible and legitimate to view the healthcare ministry as a vehicle through which to pursue or fulfill another Church ministry. The criteria for choosing partners in healthcare can also be premised on a desire to strengthen and preserve a different public ministry of the Church. At the very least, this could allow choices of partners being made with more enthusiasm and creativity