Letter to the Editor - The Millerton News - 2-3-22

Closing of ICU at Sharon Hospital an appalling plan

Nuvance, the present owner of Sharon Hospital, planned to eliminate the Sharon Hospital Intensive Care Unit (ICU) on Feb. 1, with barely a word to the community and without approval from the Connecticut Office of Health Strategy (OHS). Fortunately, an inspection on Jan. 26 by the Connecticut State Health Department delayed the change until April. Nuvance still plans to substitute the ICU with a progressive care unit (PCU), which will be part of the medical-surgical unit in a different location staffed by medical-surgical nurses and not ICU trained nurses. 

This is a significant loss of healthcare access for our community, as this new unit would not provide the level of care typical of ICUs. In spite of the COVID epidemic, Nuvance has already eliminated half of the ICU beds. In addition, four of our 11 ICU nurses left after Nuvance administration told ICU staff its plans. Eliminating the ICU would only save about $600,000, according to an outside consultant, while the cost to the community cannot be quantified. 

Since this summer, Nuvance has implemented a new administrative policy requiring that patients sick enough to require ICU-level admission must be transferred or diverted from the Sharon Emergency Room (ER) to other institutions, instead of being admitted to our ICU. Nuvance has even institutionalized this process without formal approval by OHS. By electing to bypass the formal process, Nuvance is now asking for permission after the fact. Its petition is still under review. 

The loss of our ICU would have real-world consequences for our community. Recently, we had a patient in our emergency room with respiratory failure, requiring emergent intubation. However, intubated patients require ICU-level care, so under the new policy this patient could not be admitted here. It was only after unsuccessful attempts were made to transfer the patient to multiple institutions, and after the doctors pleaded with Sharon Hospital and Nuvance administrators, that the intubated patient was allowed an exemption to be admitted here. I am pleased to report that the patient did well, but this is only because of the strength of our hospital staff. There will be other times when it is not possible to transfer critically ill patients, but if Nuvance’s plan to close the ICU is approved by OHS, it will not be possible to admit ICU-level patients at Sharon Hospital, even when transferring a patient is not an option.

It is appalling that Nuvance is more interested in profit than providing the levels of care needed in our community. We have an incredible staff and quality of care here in Sharon Hospital, but Nuvance seems intent on diminishing this in the name of cost savings. If we do not fight, we will lose our local, quality healthcare. Hopefully, OHS and elected officials in Hartford can intervene and Save Sharon Hospital.

David R. Kurish, MD

Sharon

The views expressed here are not necessarily those of The Millerton News and The News does not support or oppose candidates for public office.

Latest News

Millerton’s 175th committee advances plans for celebration, seeks vendors and sponsors

The Millerton 175th anniversary committee's tent during the village's trunk-or-treat event on Oct. 31, 2025.

Photo provided

MILLERTON — As Millerton officially enters its 175th year, the volunteer committee tasked with planning its milestone celebration is advancing plans and firming up its week-long schedule of events, which will include a large community fair at Eddie Collins Memorial Park and a drone light show. The events will take place this July 11 through 19.

Millerton’s 175th committee chair Lisa Hermann said she is excited for this next phase of planning.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why the focus on Greenland?

As I noted here in an article last spring entitled “Hands off Greenland”, the world’s largest island was at the center of a developing controversy. President Trump was telling all who would listen that, for national security reasons, the United States needed to take over Greenland, amicably if possible or by force if necessary. While many were shocked by Trump’s imperialistic statements, most people, at least in this country, took his words as ill-considered bluster. But he kept telling questioners that he had to have Greenland (oftenechoing the former King of France, Louis XIV who famously said, “L’État c’est moi!”.

Since 1951, the U.S. has had a security agreement with Denmark giving it near total freedom to install and operate whatever military facilities it wanted on Greenland. At one point there were sixteen small bases across the island, now there’s only one. Denmark’s Prime Minister has told President Trump that the U.S. should feel free to expand its installations if needed. As climate change is starting to allow a future passage from thePacific Ocean to the Arctic, many countries are showing interest in Greenland including Russia and China but this hardly indicates an international crisis as Trump and his subordinates insist.

Keep ReadingShow less
Military hardware as a signpost

It is hard not to equate military spending and purchasing with diplomatic or strategic plans being made, for reasons otherwise unknown. Keeping an eye out for the physical stuff can often begin to shine a light on what’s coming – good and possibly very bad.

Without Congressional specific approval, the Pentagon has awarded a contract to Boeing for $8,600,000,000 (US taxpayer dollars) for another 25 F-15A attack fighters to be given to Israel. Oh, and there’s another 25 more of the F-15EX variant on option, free to Israel as well.

Keep ReadingShow less
Truth and evidence depend on the right to observe

A small group of protesters voice opposition to President Trump's administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement at Amenia's Fountain Square at the intersection of Route 44 and Route 22 on Saturday, Nov. 8, 2025

Photo by Nathan Miller

The fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, and before him Renée Good, by federal agents in Minnesota is not just a tragedy; it is a warning. In the aftermath, Trump administration officials released an account of events that directly contradicted citizen video recorded at the scene. Those recordings, made by ordinary people exercising their rights, showed circumstances sharply at odds with the official narrative. Once again, the public is asked to choose between the administration’s version of events and the evidence of its own eyes.

This moment underscores an essential truth: the right to record law enforcement is not a nuisance or a provocation; it is a safeguard. As New York Times columnist David French put it, “Citizen video has decisively rebutted the administration’s lies. The evidence of our eyes contradicts the dishonesty of the administration’s words.”

Keep ReadingShow less