{"@context":"http://iiif.io/api/presentation/3/context.json","id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/iiif/hx15m6449c/manifest","type":"Manifest","label":{"en":["Paula Binder "]},"logo":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/organizations/logo_images/000/000/246/original/CenterForHistoryFamilyMedicine_2c_RGB.png?1773344256","metadata":[{"label":{"en":["Description"]},"value":{"en":["\u003cp\u003ePaula Binder, who filled a number of supervisory and managerial roles in the AAFP news department, speaks about the history and development of the AAFP over her 25-year career at the Academy, particularly in the area of the delivery of the news to the members. She reflected on the maturation in the delivery of the news through several publications and from selectric typewriters and typesetting to computers and online delivery of news. She also chronicled, from her perspective, the transition from the \"old\" Academy, which was referred to as a party culture, to the professional culture brought on by new leaders and values. Her commitment to the AAFP and to the task of bringing academy news to the members provides an invaluable story of the AAFP development during her tenure. \u003c/p\u003e (summary)"]}},{"label":{"en":["Rights Statement"]},"value":{"en":["\u003cp\u003eThis item is protected by U.S. copyright and related rights. It is being made available by the Center for the History of Family Medicine as its rights-holder for noncommercial use, including sharing and adapting the work. No permission is required for noncommercial use so long as attribution is provided. All other uses require permission from the Center for the History of Family Medicine.  Disclaimer:  The views presented in this broadcast are the speaker’s own and do not represent those of CHFM or the AAFP Foundation. The information presented is for general, educational, or entertainment purposes and should not be considered legal, health, financial, or other advice. \u003c/p\u003e"]}},{"label":{"en":["Date"]},"value":{"en":["2008-01-18 (created)"]}},{"label":{"en":["Type"]},"value":{"en":["Interview","Oral History"]}},{"label":{"en":["Agent"]},"value":{"en":["Angela Curran (Interviewer)"]}},{"label":{"en":["Format"]},"value":{"en":["audio file"]}},{"label":{"en":["Keyword"]},"value":{"en":["American Academy of Family Physicians","family medicine","family physicians","Paula Binder","Oral History"]}},{"label":{"en":["Subject"]},"value":{"en":["Paula Binder (personal name)"]}},{"label":{"en":["Language"]},"value":{"en":["English (primary)"]}}],"summary":{"en":["\u003cp\u003ePaula Binder, who filled a number of supervisory and managerial roles in the AAFP news department, speaks about the history and development of the AAFP over her 25-year career at the Academy, particularly in the area of the delivery of the news to the members. She reflected on the maturation in the delivery of the news through several publications and from selectric typewriters and typesetting to computers and online delivery of news. She also chronicled, from her perspective, the transition from the \"old\" Academy, which was referred to as a party culture, to the professional culture brought on by new leaders and values. Her commitment to the AAFP and to the task of bringing academy news to the members provides an invaluable story of the AAFP development during her tenure.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"]},"requiredStatement":{"label":{"en":["Attribution"]},"value":{"en":["\u003cp\u003eThis item is protected by U.S. copyright and related rights. It is being made available by the Center for the History of Family Medicine as its rights-holder for noncommercial use, including sharing and adapting the work. No permission is required for noncommercial use so long as attribution is provided. All other uses require permission from the Center for the History of Family Medicine. \u0026nbsp;Disclaimer: \u0026nbsp;The views presented in this broadcast are the speaker\u0026rsquo;s own and do not represent those of CHFM or the AAFP Foundation. The information presented is for general, educational, or entertainment purposes and should not be considered legal, health, financial, or other advice.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"]}},"provider":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/aboutus","type":"Agent","label":{"en":["Center for the History of Family Medicine"]},"homepage":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/","type":"Text","label":{"en":["Center for the History of Family Medicine"]},"format":"text/html"}],"logo":[{"id":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/organizations/logo_images/000/000/246/original/CenterForHistoryFamilyMedicine_2c_RGB.png?1773344256","type":"Image"}]}],"thumbnail":[{"id":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/public/images/audio-default.png","type":"Image","format":"image/png"}],"items":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278341","type":"Canvas","label":{"en":["Media File 1 of 2 - Binder_Paul_08_a.mp3"]},"duration":3597.03508,"width":640,"height":360,"thumbnail":[{"id":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/public/images/audio-default.png","type":"Image","format":"image/png"}],"items":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278341/content/1","type":"AnnotationPage","items":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278341/content/1/annotation/1","type":"Annotation","motivation":"painting","body":{"id":"https://aviary-p-centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.s3.wasabisys.com/collection_resource_files/resource_files/000/278/341/original/Binder_Paul_08_a.mp3?1750865987","type":"Audio","format":"audio/mpeg","duration":3597.03508,"width":640,"height":360},"target":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278341","metadata":[]}]}],"annotations":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278341/transcript/81407","type":"AnnotationPage","label":{"en":["Dr. Paula Binder interview transcript  [Transcript]"]},"items":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278341/transcript/81407/annotation/1","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"Please give your name in full. \n\nI’ve actually had two names while I’ve worked at the Academy, Paula Jolly originally when I came and then Paula Binder. I have tended to go with my maiden name also, so it was Paula Haas Jolly and then Paula Haas Binder.\n\nWhat is your present title? I know you aren’t employed by the Academy anymore but it sounds as if you are getting into some other things. \n\nCurrently I am establishing a freelance writing and editing company. So actually since it is incorporated, I am now President of Haas Communications, Inc.  \n\nWhen and where were you born? \n\nI was born in Kansas City, Kansas back in 1949.\n\nWhat are your parents’ names? \n\nHerbert Frank Haas and Oma Ellen Smith Haas.  \n\nSounds very German.\n\nHe was of German extraction and my mother was Dutch Irish.\n\nWhat did your family do for a living, or your father? \n\nMy dad had a PhD in microbiology. But when he got out of school and went to work, that’s when virology was coming into play. And so he spent most of his life with viruses and mostly worked for a company that made veterinary biologicals, rabies vaccines and things like that. My mom was originally a stenographer and then when she was 49 decided she wanted to be a nurse and got licensed practical nurse training and spent the rest of her professional life as a nurse.  \n\nAre you married currently? \n\nNo.\n\n\nDo you have children? \n\nI do. I have a child, Farrell Jolly. Now Dr. Farrell Jolly, a chiropractor in Seattle. And she, I would say, is an Academy kid because I came to the Academy when she was a year and one-quarter old and she has memories of Doris Roberts letting her play on the switchboard in the old days and things like that.  \n\nWas she born here? \n\nYes, in Shawnee Mission Medical Center. We were living in Kansas City, Kansas at the time.  \n\nDid you grow up in Kansas City, Kansas?\n\nYes, in the Argentine district.\n\nDid you have any role models when you were young? \n\nMy parents and people that they worked with. Education was always stressed. Not pushed but stressed. And the advantages of an education were always important. And my brother who went to KU, flunked out, went back and ended up going to medical school and becoming an oncolo-gist. All three of the children in my family went to college, dropped out, tried to find themselves. Went back and ended up doing just fine.\n\nDid you have any special dreams or goals when you were young? \n\nI loved animals and horses and Indians and Native American culture. And I loved playing with hair. I thought about being a beautician. And my mom said go to college first and then if you really want to be a beautician, go ahead. I never did.\n\nDo you have any stories from your childhood that you would like to share with us? \n\nTwo great-uncles were physicians and one of them was a GP in the Argentine district. And I can remember going to his office as a very small child. It was up in a second floor over a drugstore. And I remember the old manual fan that was blowing the air around because there was no air conditioning and needing to show him on my belly that I had a ringworm. And I was coming into the modesty years and I didn’t want to raise my shirt. So I remember that. I was kind of scared of him because he had these really fuzzy eyebrows and everything.  \n\nDo you know if he was an Academy member?\n\nHe probably was.  \n\nWhat was his name?\n\nHis name was Karl Charles Haas. He went by K.C. Haas.\n\nOn to your education. Where did you go to high school and what were your early years in school like? \n\nI went to Argentine High School and Argentine Middle School and Franklin Grade School and Noble Prentis Grade School. It’s interesting because my family had lived in the Argentine area for a couple of generations. I’m the third generation. And I went to the same grade school and high school that my dad did. And my mom went to the same high school. We had some of the same teachers. My first grade teacher was my dad’s first and second grade teacher. And she flunked him because he was playing hooky too much. I had very, very strong teachers and I got them when they were older and he got them when they were younger. My teachers were very instrumental in the English area and other areas. I had very good instruction. And I think that helped me become a good journalist.  \n\nWhere did you complete your undergraduate work? \n\nAt the University of Kansas, William Allen White School of Journalism.  \n\nWhat year did you graduate? \n\nI think it was ‘76.  \n\nAnd obviously you majored in straight journalism? \n\nYes, with an emphasis on the news, editorial and science and medical writing.  \n\nWhat did you hope to do for a career? \n\nIt’s really interesting because in journalism school I could tell that I didn’t really want to go to work for a newspaper because what seemed to be expected and what the students tried to model was a very cynical, hard [     ], go out and report on crime journalism and I was too much of an optimist for that. So I sort of thought maybe magazine work or working for an association or something like that.  \n\nDo you have any stories from your undergraduate years that you would like to share? \n\nOne of my key professors, key teachers of my whole life was Dr. John Bender. My editing pro-fessor who used to be a Catholic priest and left that and married. He never had any children. But he was one of the finest instructors I ever had. And you either loved him or you hated him. And I loved him but I was also terrified of him. He once told me that I was a star student, which I took as one of the highest compliments I’ve ever had in my life. But I never sent him any of my pro-fessional work because I knew he would find mistakes.  \n\nDid you have him in large or smaller classes?\n\nSmaller editing classes.\n\nNow we get into the questions more about employees of family medicine organizations. Why did you apply to the Academy for a job? \n\nMy then-husband and I had just moved back from a year in Wyoming where I had stayed home with my daughter and then done some volunteer radio programming which was a lot of fun. Health programming, a talk show. And I was the talk show host and we talked about all different health things. And so I really was into health and the issues of health. And came back and went to KU Journalism School’s job assistance program. Talked to Dana Leibengood who was the professor in charge of that and he said go talk to Bill DeLay of AAFP. If anybody knows about jobs for people who are interested in science and medicine, it would be Bill. And so I called Bill and he said come on in and talk to me. So I showed up. And he was real secretive – we’re going to have an opening but we’re not publicizing it yet. Would you be interested? And I’m like well yeah, I think I would be. And it was the managing editor of the news publication. And so I talked to him about it and I was interested. But I had real misgivings because I thought they were get-ting ready to can the current editor. Then I thought oh, do I really want to be the person who comes in after somebody and I’m not sure they’re doing this right and all that? Well, as it turned out she had already told him that she was taking early retirement but it wasn’t being publicized yet. And so when I learned that and met her and talked to her, I decided it was okay. I actually took another job first. I had taken a job with a rather brilliant man who created board games for adult learning. But after I accepted that job to work with him, I had real misgivings about it. And so I basically told him I made a mistake. And called Bill and said, I think I made a mistake when I told you no and I think I would like to take that job. And he said okay. So a last-minute switch is how I ended up with the Academy. \n\nSo the job you originally applied for was? \n\nThe managing editor of what was called AAFP Reporter. A little 16-page black-and-white newsletter. It had photographs but not a whole lot.  \n\nTell us about the various positions you have had within the Academy over the years and what the duties of each position were.   \n\nI have essentially done as my core function the same job over all the years. Started out with the title Managing Editor because that’s what the previous person had. And this was, I think, only about four or five years after the publication started. Because there used to be a publication in American Family Physician and then they made it...and over time we changed both my title’s name and the name of the publication, as you know, and I know some future questions will get into that. But over the time I was Managing Editor, Editor for a brief period of time and was Executive Editor. And then Human Resources, then called Personnel, said we actually decided we can’t do that because it’s making other people nervous that you have the word “Executive” in your title. So at the very end I was Editor-in-Chief. So that was my core function, to get the news out to Academy members, news they needed to know. Over the years I would take on other re-sponsibilities in addition. And that’s really why I stayed. Because in addition to this core func-tion I got to do such things as the “Rainbow Brite, I’m A Fit Kid” coloring book. Because that was back in the days when the Academy didn’t do patient education. And I thought that was something the Academy needed to do, so started doing some projects for that. The 50th Anni-versary book, Caring For America: The Story of Family Practice. I managed that. And then The Family Doctor: Your Essential Guide To Health And Well-Being with the British publishing company, Boston Hannah. And that sort of thing really freshened the job up, when a new thing would come in. It also meant there was a lot of responsibility. The other thing I did that was added on at one point was to become the Manager not only of the News Department, which did the news publication, but the Design Department which designed everything for the Academy with the exception of AFP and FPM. And that’s because the previous manager left and they did some research about what was needed and talked to the designers about what kind of manager would help them – and asked me if I would take on that responsibility. So for a while I managed two departments and did Family Doctor. That was the busiest time I’ve ever had.  \n\nSo you had not only core editing duties, you were supervising many people. And not just people who were also writers, but designers. Plus doing other publications as well. \n\nThat’s right. The other thing is, in the very early, early years I freelanced for the [AAFP] Foundation and did some annual reviews or annual reports, whatever you want to call them. I think two or three of those. And actually did one job for the, I can’t remember the name of it but it’s the Latin American Family Medicine, or Hispanic, ICFM, International Center for Family Medicine. I did a report for them. And frankly, it was not my finest moment. They didn’t have a lot of text for it, there were not a lot of graphics and they didn’t have much money. And I did something I’ve regretted ever since. The map they provided didn’t look very good and so I took it upon myself to go find a better-looking map. And the map they had was from the Central and South American perspective of the globe. Mine was from the North American perspective and I don’t think they appreciated that. So live and learn.\n\nWith that particular project was there any language barrier? \n\nIt was purely English. Although the Family Doctor book, interestingly, we did a Spanish edition of that. And it was a real trick because I had Spanish in college but not enough to be able to do translating. So we had a Spanish editor, a family doctor who spoke Spanish, a native speaker, who was the editor. And I would review the page proofs and I reviewed the articles. And I would catch things because I knew some of the language. But I was not the person who was the final gatekeeper for that, and it made me very nervous. We also found that some of the translators were in England with Boston Hannah and I was really glad we had an American-based medical editor who spoke Spanish because she caught some things, such as the word they wanted to use for “cigarette” actually to an American Spanish speaker meant a marijuana cigarette. So I was glad we had her as the final gatekeeper.\n\nOf all those many different kinds of roles, which one did you enjoy the most and why? Or was there a time period that you were working on certain publications? \n\nThe core job was always very interesting. And I liked it because I would work with very talented writers and editors and designers. The Design Department was great to manage because it’s such a creative group of people. My heart is very much with them still. But doing things like the Rain-bow Brite coloring book in the early years, because that project really brought the Academy into being a partner with other organizations because we had two partners on that. One was Hallmark Properties which is the part of Hallmark Cards that had all of their cartoon lines. Rainbow Brite, the Hug-A-Bunch, other things like that. And, also, the President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports. And so the content of that and the illustrations and the whole concept had to meet the needs of all three organizations. And it was very time-consuming and tedious sometimes. But just to bring it all together so that all three were happy with it was really a joy.  \n\nAnd probably the final product was really a kick?\n\nIt was. And it had who actually would be a fit kid could have their name on the back cover, and it was signed by Ronald Reagan. And ironically enough, one of the new Foundation employees here is Brenda Cherpitel and she was my contact at Hallmark Properties.  \n\nI heard her speak at your retirement reception and got that connection. And how timely that that publication was with what we’re doing with the same issues.\n\nAbsolutely. You can almost take that coloring book, change the back cover to have the current President or the next President, and still use it.  \n\nAnd it would be relevant.\n\nYes.\n\nWhich job or role did you enjoy the least and why? You mentioned the challenging time when you were doing all those various things. \n\nIt was a time in my life when I wanted to be busy because I had been widowed. So I agreed to take on the Design Department and then also agreed to do Family Doctor. And we jokingly called Family Doctor my night job and the Academy’s other stuff my day job. And it truly was a time where there was horrible sleep deprivation but also high reward. And I would not want to go through that business anymore, not ever again. But the rewards or the results were worth it, I guess.  \n\nWhat were you able to accomplish in the organization? And the second part of that, what are you proudest of having accomplished? \n\nI think the core job is a very essential job for the Academy which is to get the news out to mem-bers. And Academy members as a group always have been and continue to be, and maybe more now than ever before, so time-challenged. They don’t have time. They are always so busy. And now they’re very frustrated by Medicare payments being too low and all these other things. So it’s very hard to get them to pay attention. So just to have a publication that gets reasonable member survey results, that they are paying attention, is a wonderful thing. The “Rainbow Brite, I’m A Fit Kid” coloring book, I believe a grand total of 500,000 were distributed. And probably more would have been. It went into a 2nd printing. But Hallmark really changed after that and they weren’t able to bring money to the table, which is how we were able to do so much. And so that sort of thing could have continued had we had another partner or had they continued having money to do that sort of thing. So just getting the news out to members and to be able to figure out what ways they needed to get it. I’m proud of the Rainbow Brite, I’m proud of the news pubs, I’m proud of the Family Doctor book, the 50th Anniversary book. Anything like that I felt good about because I would give it my all and hope it would come out the best, and it usually came out really well. But the recent change in how we delivered it I think is really the capstone. And what we did when we started AAFP News Now, the Academy’s current publication, is to look at the medical environment and the world at large and how people were getting news and what the trend was towards the future. And we basically bagged every news publication we had. And at the time, if you remember, we had several. We had AAFP Reporter, had worked into FP Report and had gone from being a little newsletter to being a colorful newspaper and all of that. And then we had Directors’ Newsletter which became AAFP Direct which was for leaders. And then the Academy wanted to deliver news through email and the email publication AAFP This Week was started and came to our area. And then they wanted to have news items on the home page. And so it ended up the News Department was doing all four things. And some of the con-tent was the same but we had to repurpose it, and it took time. And it just seemed insane and in-efficient and not very effective, so I proposed that we bag them all and start fresh and come up with a news publication that first was put online. And so AAFP News Now, the new news brand, and the tag line is “The family physician’s trusted source for news,” because we really want them to see it that way. The first thing that happens to an AAFP News Now story when it’s been through the editing process and if it needs to be blessed by anybody higher up, it gets blessed, it goes online to AAFP News Now online on the website. And then once a week an email goes out with the top story. And then toward the end of the month, we decide which of those stories are the most important and we put them into the tabloid which is only eight pages long. So it all is consolidated into one structure. And to my knowledge and to the knowledge of Sarah Thomas and Michael Springer, no other association that we know of is doing this. They might be putting content online but they start their planning process thinking about the print. And then the web is an also, but it’s not primary. And for us the web is primary. And when we started, I likened it to gee, I hope there’s water in the pool when we jump off the high board. Because when you’re just focusing on online, you hope you’re going to have enough news to put it into print. You know, will there be enough? Will there be something exciting for page one? There always has been. So the experiment works, and I think it is very different from what most other people are doing. So to me, I’m really glad the Academy bought into that and I think it will serve it well. I think there may be, at some point, they’ll get rid of the print. We also got it so that the yellow sheet in American Family Physician carries more Academy news. And that is something that I think helps the member because they are so busy, as you know, that no matter which they prefer, it’s like some fast food chain that says “Have it your way.”  They can have it their way. If they like print, they wait for it. It’s a month old by the time they get it, but they can read it in print or wait for the email or they can go online every day. And the other thing we’ve done is to start a pod-cast. So that’s a fairly recent addition, within the past year or so. We decided to add on audio. And so once a week we pick the top four stories that will translate well into audio, write short items based on the stories that have been online. And then we purchased audio recording equip-ment and we have a little informal studio that we call the “Prairie Home Companion Room” and we record. And then we turn the recording over to Connie Reheis in the IT Department who tags on an intro and an exit for us that’s specific to AAFP News Now. And the podcast file is posted online and then it also goes out to iTunes and other places so that anybody who wants to sub-scribe to it, it will automatically come to them each week. And we don’t have subscription num-bers per se and I don’t think that many people listen to it yet. But it’s there and we’re doing it every week. We’ve done other podcasts that are more feature-oriented or based on the Presi-dent’s speech at Assembly. People can listen to it. We’ve even posted video podcasts of the President’s speech at Assembly. So we have capabilities that we can expand in the future. And I say “we,” the news staff can expand in the future, if they want. We also have RSS – which means headlines can be delivered to a member’s computer as they are posted, so they can get the fresh news, if they want. So any way they want it, they can get the news. It’s up to them.  \n\nIt really sounds like you’ve stayed in touch with the members over the years, with what they need and trying to keep it fresh. \n\nWe have tried.  \n\nAnd that seems important for any association.\n\nRight. I think another thing that the News Department did that’s very helpful is to establish a beat reporting system. And while I have never worked for a newspaper, this is straight out of newspapers where you would have the crime beat and the education beat and things like that. AAFP News Now and the News Department divides the Academy up into beats so that somebody is covering the Socioeconomics and the Practice Support and somebody is covering the Wash-ington efficacy type of things and so on and so forth so that there are content experts on staff. And they build relationships with people in the Academy’s divisions so that they can be trusted to know okay, something is not ready to be publicized yet or how can we get the news out about this? What is newsworthy, what isn’t, and have good relationships there. So I’m proud of that.  \n\nWho were the people you worked with most closely in the organization and tell us your impression of these individuals? \n\nIn the early days, Bill DeLay who was the Communications Division Director. I worked with him for many, many years and had a very excellent working relationship with Bill. Char Martin who was the Assistant Division Director, also had a very close working relationship with her. And Beth Paulsen who was the head of PR at the time. And my own staff. I’ve always enjoyed working with the various people I’ve had over time. I think the staff we have now is one of the strongest. After Bill left and Sarah Thomas was hired, she’s been great to work with. Cynthia Stapp is our Assistant Division Director, has been great to work with. Clayton Hasser, Bill Myers and Michael Springer were my Vice Presidents. All of them had really strong points about them. Michael has brought new things to the Academy because of his background from the AMA and from being in the Internet-oriented companies and has been a real pleasure to work with. And he has also been one of our voices for the ANN podcast because he has some broadcast experience. So that’s been fun. So my closest working relationships have been with the people within my division. But because of what we do, we have contact with just about everybody. And with the Foundation. And you and I have known each other for I don’t know how long.  \n\nI think almost 15 years because that’s when I started. \n\nYes, and it’s always been fun working with you, too. And the Academy’s executives. The Executive Vice Presidents. Roger Tusken was the Executive Director when I started. And then Bob Graham, the first physician and EVP. A brilliant man, a brilliant manager. And then Doug who is the second physician in that position. And Mike Miller, the Deputy EVP.  \n\nWho most impressed you and why? And who least impressed you and why?   \n\nBob Graham really impressed me. Bob Graham had run a federal agency before he came here and he knew how to do that. And he was also very intellectual, a very bright man. There were times when he would get that look on his face, where other people weren’t quite getting it. And if you go up to the 6th floor and look at the portrait of him, he’s got that look on his face. And every time I walk by it, I have to just laugh. I love it. I can remember in the early years, he asked us to do something. I no longer can remember what it was. But Bill Myers and Bill Delay and I were working on this. And I kept asking questions, are we supposed to be doing this for this reason and how about this? And finally I said should we go back to Bob Graham and ask? No, no, we’re just going to forge on ahead. And I thought okay. And so then we went back to Bob with our proposal and he is sitting there and he had that look on his face like you idiots, you’re not getting it at all. And I’m like okay, we should have asked Bob earlier. But even when he got that look, he was still really good to work with. Still very friendly and approachable. So I think he was wonderful to work with. And Sarah and Michael and Cynthia, I think they’re just highly profess-sional people. I’ve really enjoyed working with them.\n\nWas there anyone who least impressed you? \n\nRoger Tusken, for his personal reasons, was very difficult to work with because he was, in my estimation, an alcoholic. And I can remember, back in those days the Executive Director re-viewed the page proofs of the publication before it went to press. We don’t do that anymore, thank heavens. Only if it needs to go up to that level, does it go up to that level. And I can re-member that I had to take the page proof into him in the morning. If I didn’t have them ready until afternoon, he would have had a few drinks at lunch and he would rip things to pieces. And he would pull stories out. You’re going to have to start over, you can’t use this. And it was very difficult. That was back in the days when the convention publication that we put out was a little 16-page, black-and-white newsletter. And I actually sold the ads as well as wrote a lot of the stuff and put it together. And I had to go on the Assembly planning trip and find a printer. And so I can remember going on an Assembly planning trip and Roger ripped into another staff mem-ber during a staff meeting because Roger was drunk. And that staff member was so upset, she just left in tears. And I thought oh, I think I probably need to find a job somewhere else. And had they not approached Roger and said you need treatment or you can’t keep your job, if he had kept going in the job and hadn’t gotten treatment, I probably would have left the Academy. So that was a very dark time. And I felt a lot of compassion for him because he was struggling. And he was a very bright man. I think it was difficult for someone who was not an MD. And his pred-ecessor, Mac Cahal, was a lawyer. So he was up there sort of on the level with an MD. I think Roger struggled a lot with not being a peer of the Board.  And then Bob Graham was a peer of the Board. And it was so interesting, when I would go to cover the American Medical Associ-ation meetings and I would sit in on the Academy’s Executive Committee meetings there, to watch the interactions between Bob Graham and the Board, because he treated them as if he were a peer. And they respected his opinion and it was a very good relationship.  \n\nThat’s an interesting point. Do you think in the future the Academy will always probably need to have a physician leader in order to maintain that kind of relationship? \n\nI think it’s better if it is a physician, just based on that experience.  \n\nKind of in a general sense, what was the work environment and the culture of the Academy like when you first started here? \n\nYou know, Angela, I really divide the Academy into old Academy and new Academy. Old Academy, because of the people who were in leadership positions and because of the era, I think, was more some staff worked hard and some staff, I don’t think, worked that hard. But there was more of a party culture. And you go to Assembly and the Assembly planning meetings and you would work hard but then you would go out and party. And I never could do that because of the publication we had to put out. We worked 24 hours basically to get that thing out and then did another one and then did another one. So it was pretty crazy. It was very intense. But there were some times when I would actually have enough presence of mind to go to an evening thing. And it was party central. It was a lot of fun, if you really enjoyed that kind of stuff. And then I can remember when the Academy started doing, I can’t remember what they called it at first but it was when we were supposed to learn how not to sexually harass people. And I can remember sitting in the Board room in the old 1740 West 92nd Street building. I was sitting in a folding chair behind the Board table and other staff were around the Board table. And some Grand Poo-bah was up front talking about how not to sexually harass people. And someone in a leadership position, who shall remain nameless, leaned back to me as we started a break and said does this mean I can’t pat fannies anymore? And I said yes, that’s what this means. And this person never did anything like that. I always had such a good professional working relationship with people at the Academy but I know some other people who felt harassed. And so it was a start of a change. And I think when Roger left and other people left after that, the Academy changed. I think it’s a function of the times we were in and it’s a function of what the Academy was like. It has changed over time. I think the Academy also used to hire people and then train them for jobs. And that was old Academy. And people would rise up to positions. In the new Academy, you hire someone with expertise more. And I have seen that it is sometimes difficult for people who came in the old Academy way and rose to a manager position to deal with change because they maybe don’t have broad skills, they just know what they’re doing - and it’s very scary for them. So there’s definitely old Academy and new Academy.  \n\nI’ve heard some people talk in terms of they felt like the culture changed as the buildings changed. Do you feel like that? You know, sometimes because of interaction of staff or lack or just where you’re placed in the building. So they kind of give almost a personality to the building. Do you feel that, too? \n\nYes, in the first building. I think there is some of that. I think it’s everything. All things change. Or maybe because the Academy is changing, the experience in the 8880 building felt different because the Academy...the harassment training started in the 1740 building, so in the 8880 build-ing people were changing how they dealt with people. And people had left and all that kind of stuff. But the 1740 building was a hoot sometimes because I don’t think it was terribly well-insulated. And that was back in the era of Selectric typewriters. When I started we were on Sel-ectric. And I had an enclosed office which I never had once we moved. I was in a cubie from then on. And an enclosed office was heaven for someone who wanted to write and think. But I would come in on winter mornings. My typewriter was next to the glass wall window. And I would have to turn it on and let it warm up for 20 minutes because if I didn’t, I think some grease in it or something was too thick and it couldn’t move, it was frozen. And the other thing that was really, really fun is that I was on the floor under the top floor. And Gordon Schmittling’s office was directly above me. And I had a lot of fun razzing Gordon because for unknown reasons, sev-eral times I would hear the sound of running water.  And it was nowhere near the bathrooms or anything. And so I accused Gordon, are you going in the corner of your office and peeing? He said, “What?” I said I’m hearing this noise, come on down. Maybe I’ll holler when I hear it and you can hear it. We never did figure it out.  \n\nMaybe pipes running in that area?\n\nYeah, but why would there be pipes running? And the other thing was little red bugs. There was something in the ceiling. Little tiny red bugs would drop onto your paperwork every once in a while. And if you accidentally smashed them, they would smear red all over a document. I had no idea what they were. And that was never in the 8880 building or in the current building; only in 1740.  \n\nNot to belabor the sexual harassment point but I’ve heard, and this is just hearsay, but that at some point when the women would go up to get their Christmas bonus checks, they would have to kiss Roger Tusken. Did you ever have that experience? \n\nI never had to kiss Roger Tusken.  \n\nI think that was just used as an example of here’s one way things have changed.\n\nI know of people, male managers who would say to a female subordinate things like: “Let’s go get a six-pack of beer and go sit out by your pool and let’s not work this afternoon” - and they would. I was married and had a daughter, so my day was come to work, do the work and go home.  \n\nIt wasn’t bleeding over into every part of your life.\n\nThat’s right. But that’s old Academy.\n\nLooking back over the years, what are your fondest memories and why? \n\nThe fondest memories just are dealing with people that I really, really liked who had a lot of potential and developed their skills and really did well in their professional careers. And I have always been the kind of manager that likes collaboration. Our News Department has weekly meetings even now. We started that fairly early on. And one of the things I wanted to do was to crosstrain people and develop their skills not just as journalists but as people who work together. And so the News Department to this day, in the weekly meetings, rotate who is in charge of the meeting. So that somebody who is brand new, after they’ve been there for a while, they’re in charge of the meeting and run the agenda and everything like that. And as you heard at my retire-ment party, Clayton – talking about the fact that I was probably the first person who wanted to try the team concept. And we flattened our structure and broadened it out and it worked pretty well. But it has kind of gone back to being more hierarchical now for various reasons. And it has to do with what I was trying to manage at the time and trying to make it so the workloads were more variable. But working with the people at the Academy. And, also, being part of family medicine is an overarching thing that I’ve been delighted to be associated with because family medicine is very much in agreement with my personal philosophy of what medicine should be like. I’m glad it’s getting more into alternatives and looking at other things. But the core of family medicine is sound. The core of primary care is sound. And as research is showing, it’s the best way to deliver medicine and health care. So I’ve been very proud to be associated with that. And any things that I’ve done to help advance that cause please me immensely.  \n\nThat kind of makes me wonder, you’ve had interaction with so many family physicians over the years and leaders. How rewarding has that been? Or maybe not always rewarding? \n\nSome of them are just so wonderful. Sam Nixon was one of the very first. My first Assembly and the first newsletters that I did there, I got his wife’s name wrong because she goes by her middle name and I didn’t know that. And so he could have held that against me for a long time but he didn’t. And Jack Stelmach told me once that I split an infinitive. Some of the early leaders were also very literate. And I’m sure all of the leaders, to a degree, have been, but some of the early ones impressed me in that way. And some of them have been absolute wonderful people to work with and some have been difficult. Some have a President’s message in the news publication but then they don’t know what they want to say. So you have to write it and they won’t give you a clue about it. Others have wanted to do their own thing. So there’s been such variety.\n\nWe haven’t really touched on the whole publishing process and how that must have changed for you from then to now. Obviously, computers made the biggest difference. Do you remember when you first got computers? \n\nOh, sure. The Academy was a little slow in that regard. When I came in we were doing Selectric typewriters. And so we would type and retype and retype and edit hard copy and then we would send it off to a typesetter. And the typesetter would typeset it and send back galleys. And we would correct the galleys and then they go into layouts. And we would actually give them a paste-up. We would cut up galleys, paste them down to show how we wanted things to fit and then the printer would do the layout and send it back to us and we would make corrections. Very laborious, very time-intensive. But it was back in an era when things were slower anyway. There were no fax machines. This was just the way things happened. Mail was the way you delivered things. And then it would go and be printed and then mailed. So it was a slow process. And then the Academy started looking at word processing and didn’t know...I can remember them saying, we’re not sure who should have computers. Anybody who has a secretary probably doesn’t need one. And at the time, I had convinced them we need a secretary, we need an assistant. And so PR and News shared a secretary who was Renee Campbell. I think she was the one we hired for both of us. I’m pretty sure but the memory gets fuzzy after awhile. But they finally decided to bring in word processors and they brought in a retired Marine named Joe Godek. We used to call him Joe God with an “ek.” He had done this for the Marines, so to select the system and figure out who would do it. And so the Academy got word processing machines and secretaries would use them. I was thinking this is kind of nuts, we really need computers for publishing. And so the Founda-tion, interestingly enough, got computers before the Academy did. And I swung a deal with Gary [McMahan], who was the head of the Foundation back then. I said, “Can I come in and use your computers in the evening?” because I had a computer at home by then. I said I want to show them that you can skip the typesetting stage. If we do our work on computers then we can skip that stage. And so I came in and took our typewritten stories of an evening and I keyed them into the computer and handed the disk off to the printer and the layout came back. And it sort of showed what we could do. And so eventually we did get computers. And then the next step was well, now desktop publishing is coming in, so we really don’t need to have an outside company do the layout, we can learn how to do it. So after talking about this for a couple, three years, finally we got page makers. And I was sent to train to learn how to do it. And then one issue I did the layout. I had practiced earlier and did the layout. And it was acceptable. It looked pretty dog-gone good. We trained Renee Campbell to do layout, too, because she had an artistic bent. And she became our primary layout person for many, many years. And then she eventually moved to the Design Department, which is even better to have professional design staff in charge of the way it looks. That’s made it look much better.   \n\nSo quite an evolution of change in that industry.\n\nYes. And now we have Macintosh laptops which means you can take it with you, which is even better than a desktop.  \n\nOf course, it means your work never ends, doesn’t it?\n\nThe work never ended anyway. I can remember taking my Selectric typewriter to vacation because deadlines never stop and we almost always were short-staffed. Even when we were fully staffed, there was a lot of work. Our division I think is one of the hardest working divisions in the Academy and I don’t know that that’s really recognized. There’s a lot of work that goes on.  \n\nI know some of us recognize it. But I know what you mean. I don’t think people outside of a certain field necessarily realize. They think you sit down and just type on whatever machine you’re using at the time.   \n\nAnother question was what were your darkest days here or the most difficult times for you personally and for the organization? \n\nWhen Roger was going through the alcoholism thing, that was very, very dark. When we’ve had budget reductions. The current time right now with a big budget reduction, I can tell it’s just a really bad time. I didn’t retire because of that. I retired for my own reasons. But it’s a terribly difficult time right now, I think, for people. And I don’t know what’s going to happen.  \n\nWHAT DO YOU FEEL THE ORGANIZATION OR THE ACADEMY IS DOING BETTER NOWADAYS THAN IT WAS DOING WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED HERE?\n\nI think the way we deliver news is better.  I think that there is more expertise in areas where it’s needed.  I think the Robert Graham Center was an excellent investment on the part of the Academy to do the research and to present the case for primary care.  I think they have a very important role.  And investing in technology.  The Academy’s staff has increased over time.  It’s much bigger than it used to be so that the Academy can do things that it didn’t used to do.  Supporting practices better.  The Center for Health Information Technology, these kinds of things I think are really important.  They are things to be proud of.  DEVELOPING INITIATIVES THAT ARE REALLY TIMELY AND NEEDED.  Yes.\n\nDO YOU FEEL THERE ARE THINGS THE ACADEMY IS NOT DOING AS WELL AS IT USED TO, WHETHER PROGRAMMATIC OR JUST SIMPLY MANAGING PEOPLE OR COMMUNICATING WITH MEMBERS?  NO, YOU WOULDN’T SAY THAT ...\n\nI think that members have changed over time.  And the Academy, while we’ve brought in marketing and that’s an important.  The Academy desperately needed to market itself better because in the old days “marketing” meant we have to have a story about our little projects in the news publications so people know about it.  That was considered marketing.  So bringing in people with marketing expertise and helping them to develop marketing plans and being strategic in all of that is critically, critically important.  I hope the Academy doesn’t go to the point of treating everything as marketing.  News is not marketing.  There’s a difference there.  Because what my fear is that members will say everything they send out is a sell.  It’s not the truth, it’s truth spun.  So I hope they don’t go too far in that direction.  START TO MIXING IT TOGETHER.  Yes.\n\nWHAT ADVICE WOULD YOU GIVE TO NEW EMPLOYEES HERE AT THE ACADEMY SO THEY MIGHT BE SUCCESSFUL HERE?\n\nKnow that you need to flex your style depending on who you’re dealing with.  And another change over time is that the Academy began training staff better.  The GO Program, Growth Opportunities, I think is very important.  I’ve had some disagreements with some of the individual courses.  But overall I think it’s a really good thing to train people how to manage conflict, to how to supervise people, how to coach people, how to bring them along.  To know what your personal style is and how you need to flex.  Because some people are direct, some people are indirect.  Some are urgent, some are not.  And to know that and to keep that in your mind when you’re dealing with someone.  And to say with this person, they are so direct that they come across to me as almost blunt and obnoxious.  But that’s not really what their intent is; they have this very direct personality.  And so to deal with them, I need to become a little more direct because they’re not going to understand if I’m indirect, what I mean.  So that is very, very important.  AND THAT WOULD GO IN ANY ORGANIZATION REALLY.  Yes.  So I think the Academy is doing a better job of that now.  Right now I know one of the big struggles is what does the Academy need to be.  So I think the top leadership doesn’t really know yet and they’re trying to figure it out - and it’s a difficult time.\n\nHOW DO YOU FEEL FAMILY MEDICINE HAS CHANGED OVER THE YEARS SINCE YOU STARTED WORKING HERE?\n\nWhen I came on board it still felt a little bit like counterculture.  Because family medicine started with counterculture in medical schools.  It was what was needed.  And then I think family doctors really wanted to be accepted by their peers as we’re academics, too, and all of that.  We are specialists and all of that and we want to get along with our specialty colleagues.  And now I think we’re kind of getting back to maybe we need to be the counterculture again and say okay folks, we need to base this system on primary care because it’s subspecialty based.  It’s not primary care based.  And so it’s so fragmented and it’s nutty and we need to get our priorities straight.  So I think family medicine is kind of happy to become counterculture again.  And I think that’s appropriate.  I think they need to do it.  SPEAK UP AND ALMOST THROW A FIT ABOUT IT.  Yeah, let’s be the 800-pound gorilla.  It’s been interesting to go cover American Medical Association meetings over a spectrum of years because in the early years the Academy was so nervous about seeming like an 800-pound gorilla.  You know, a lot of delegates to the AMA House are family physicians from state medical associations.  And the Academy, I can remember the early years, was nervous about even having a lunch where all of these people would come together.  Would it be seen as caucusing?   And slowly, over time, realizing we have power, let’s use it.  And doing a better job that.  It’s been very interesting to watch that evolution.  \n\nHAVE YOU SEEN FAMILY MEDICINE KIND OF INTERACT OR COOPERATE A LOT WITH OTHER SPECIALTIES OVER THE YEARS?  \n\nYes.\n\nAND DO YOU THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN THAT?\n\nI think they have developed pretty good working relationships with other primary care organizations.  The American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, ACOG - American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, or Obstetricians and Gynecologists, I never can keep that straight, has in the past wanted to be part of primary care - maybe not so much anymore.  ACEP, American College of Emergency Physicians to a little degree.  I’m very pleased that they also have developed a relationship with the American Osteopathic Association because they’re primary care, too, by and large.  And so to develop those relationships, to work with the AMA.  The AMA used to really irritate me and sometimes still do because they would take credit for things where the Academy played a big role.  And I can remember sitting in their press conferences where they would talk about how the AMA did this and I’m like the Academy played a big role and we did it first.  But what can you do?  \n\nBUT YOU SAID IT’S IMPRESSED YOU NOW, OR OVER TIME?  YOU STARTED TO SAY SOMETHING, I THINK, ABOUT THE INTERACTION WITH THE ACADEMY AND THE AMA?\n\nYes, just how the Academy has developed its relationship.  And I think they do a better job of exerting their influence within that greater umbrella organization.  AND NOT SITTING BACK AND LETTING THEM TAKE THE CREDIT.  Yes.\n\nDO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF WHERE FAMILY MEDICINE IS GOING IN THE FUTURE?  YOU KIND OF ALLUDED TO THAT A LITTLE BIT OF JUST BEING THE 800-POUND GORILLA.\n\nI think we’re at a real critical time right now because if in the next three years, or maybe it’s five years, the system doesn’t become primary care based and if there isn’t adequate reimbursement for family physicians, or payment - they don’t like to call it reimbursement.  We have other allies now.  We have IBM and others in the Patient-Centered Primary Care Collaborative that are saying primary care is important.  If these allies and the Academy aren’t able to sway the health care system and sway Congress and the President and everything to base the health care system on primary care, I’m not sure what’s going to happen to family medicine.  Because most family physicians, a lot of them are small business owners and you can’t operate at a loss and keep operating.  IT DOESN’T MATTER HOW DEDICATED YOU ARE TO THE IDEA OF IT.  Exactly.  And so it’s a danger point.  It really is.  What would happen if it didn’t turn to a primary care base?  Would the Academy need to consolidate?  Would the Academy and the ACP and AAP somehow consolidate?  I don’t know what would happen but I think it will be difficult to go it alone. \n\nARE THERE ANY VIEWS ON IMPORTANT ISSUES IN THE SPECIALTY THAT WE HAVE NOT ADDRESSED HERE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH US?\n\nNo, I think we’ve pretty much covered the real critical things.\n\nAND THIS IS KIND OF A BROADER ISSUE BUT IT’S HARD TO IGNORE: WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF THE STATE OF HEALTH CARE IN AMERICA RIGHT NOW?\n\nThat is what we just talked about.  If it doesn’t go to a primary care base, it’s going to be very difficult to deliver good health care.  There are so many things going on in America with people are more obese, they don’t exercise as much.  A lot of it comes back to how people take care of themselves.  And they need to have a primary care physician to help them with that process but there’s also a lot of personal responsibility.  There’s going to be increasing numbers of people who are getting to the older years, like me, who are not in good shape.  And it’s going to be hell to take care of them because they are going to have, as they already do, multiple medical conditions.  I’ve heard it said, you can either take care of yourself and have a wonderful senior life and then get sick and die rather quickly in your advanced years or you can go into your older years in bad health and be miserable for many, many years and then die.  BECAUSE MEDICINE CAN SUSTAIN THEM FOR SO LONG BUT NOT GIVE YOU BACK YOUR GOOD HEALTH.  Yes.  A VERY GOOD POINT.  \n\nWHAT DO YOU THINK NEEDS TO BE DONE, IF ANYTHING, IN ORDER TO FIX THE SYSTEM?\n\nI think we’ve already covered that.\n\nAND THIS QUESTION MIGHT BE TOUCHING A LITTLE ON THE INSURANCE ISSUE, TOO, WHICH IS HUGE AND HARD TO EXTRACT IT FROM EVERYTHING WE’VE SAID, TOO.  BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED, ALSO.  AND I KNOW I’VE HELPED YOU SEVERAL TIMES WITH ISSUES RELATED TO HEALTH CARE REFORM, SO YOU CAN REPORT ON THEM.  That’s right.  AND THAT’S COME UP OVER AND OVER AGAIN.  \n\nI hope that whoever is elected President really has a good handle on the fact that there needs to be change.  And I think the health insurance companies right now have way too much power and that needs to change.  And it’s profit-oriented.  Health care is not their prime objective; making money is.  And that’s scary. Will we end up with a single payer system which scares some of our members?  I don’t know.  AT THIS POINT IT DOES SEEM LIKE ANYTHING WOULD BE ... GIVE SOMETHING ELSE A TRY.  Yes.\n\nWE TOUCHED ON THIS A LITTLE BIT BEFORE, TALKING ABOUT TAKING ON DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITY, BUT THIS HAS TO DO WITH LEADERSHIP POSITIONS EITHER STAFFWISE OR EVEN ... I DON’T KNOW HOW MUCH YOU WERE INVOLVED IN COMMUNITY WORK.  BUT COULD YOU DESCRIBE YOUR STYLE OF LEADERSHIP AND YOUR PHILOSOPHY OF MANAGEMENT, WHICH YOU HAVE A LITTLE?\n\nI am very much a collaborating person.  And I like to coach people and try to help them succeed.  I think a manager’s role is to find ways to help their staff succeed. That’s not as altruistic as it sounds because if the staff succeeds the manager succeeds.  If the staff is screwing up, the manager is going to have to do a lot of correcting or will be considered a bad manager because the work’s not being done.  So it’s all interwoven.  And a manager needs to know how to manage up with their supervisor.  That sounds kind of cold and calculating but you have to have a relationship with the people you work with in all directions.  And I prefer it to be collaborative.  I prefer to be able to speak frankly but gently with people about when they are making a mistake and how to correct it.  Let’s look at what happened.  Why did it happen?  How can we keep it from happening again?  I’ve only had to fire staff once and that was very difficult but it was also very necessary. I’ve come close a couple of times.  But people can usually see the writing on the wall.  If your supervising has been good and they know they’re not doing a good job and they know they’re possibly going to go on disciplinary action then they usually will get the hint and find another job.  And that’s what they need.  They need to get on in their lives to something that they can do well or else they’re not going to feel good about themselves.  SOMETIMES YOU FEEL LIKE AN EMPLOYEE, THEY JUST DON’T HAVE THE RIGHT FIT WITH A JOB?  Exactly.  I had an employee early on who was trained at a smaller university that is very good at teaching people how to market themselves but not necessarily at giving them good journalism skills.  And this person did an adequate job but couldn’t really do feature writing very well.  And when this person left the staff, and left on very good terms because it was never bad enough for me to think about firing this individual, she went to a job that didn’t need feature writing.  It was more basic.  And she said I realize I wasn’t a good fit and that this that I’m doing now is much more what I need to be doing.  So she developed that awareness over time.  \n\nHOW DID YOU COME TO DEVELOP THIS STYLE OF LEADERSHIP?  YOU JUST KIND OF CAME FULL FORMED THAT WAY OR DID YOU LEARN FROM SOME OTHER PEOPLE WHO MANAGED YOU?\n\nI did learn from people.  My first job out of journalism school was a blessing for me.  In journalism school I was able to write for an experimental journal that KU Med Center had.  It was called Dialogue: A Kansas Journal of Health Concerns.  A federal grant made this possible.  It was part of the Kansas Preceptorship Program which in those days was not just family medicine-oriented.  Medical students could select to go out into Kansas and work with radiologists, gastroenterologists, family doctors, anybody they wanted to. And our program was cast with setting up those preceptorships.  What we also did was while the students were in the state, we would go out into the areas and hold workshops where the preceptor and the preceptee and staff from the Medical Center would get together of an evening and talk about issues.  And we were getting into the kinds of things that really need to be talked about.  Some of the ethical issues in medicine, socioeconomics, patient care, how to make it a human experience.  The whole purpose of it was to try to bridge that town and gown gap that academic places have where the people in the trenches and the academics don’t see things eye-to-eye, to try to make it so that they were having a dialogue instead of just shouting at each other.  And the Journal was part of that.  And so it was started up by an English major, Gary Wilson.  And his wife was in medical school then and went on to become a pediatrician.  And they were getting ready to move and I had written for it as a journalism student and they asked me to become the editor.  I said sure.  And so I was there until the federal grant ran out.  And at the same time, I was getting ready to give birth to my daughter.  So the timing was perfect.  And it was a great experience.  I can’t remember what our question was.  HOW DID YOU COME TO DEVELOP YOUR PHILOSOPHY OF MANAGEMENT OVER THE YEARS?  An internist was the head of that program.  And we had anthropologists, we had social scientists.  We were in the Department of Epidemiology and Community Health, headed by an epidemiologist.  But he brought all these diverse people in and sure, I had a supervisor but we worked as a team and we talked philosophy and we taught a class at KU Med Center for the students.  I actually was on the faculty as a teaching associate.  Which I thought was crazy for a journalist to be on faculty.  And it kind of scared me because I was a young pup back then.  But we had a great time.  And I think that really set me on the collaborative course, seeing work as a collaboration.  And that helped me when I came to the Academy.  IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAD A GOOD FIRST EXPERIENCE, JUST ESTABLISH THIS AS KIND OF THE IDEAL I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ALL THESE YEARS.  Yes.  \n\nWHAT WAS THE TOUGHEST DECISION YOU HAD TO MAKE IN OR ABOUT YOUR CAREER?\n\nWhen we had the Roger Tusken situation, the decision of do I want to leave.  I had never really intended to come and stay for twenty-eight years.  But the decision to stay here, sometimes it was difficult.  And sometimes I had head hunters come to me and say are you looking because we’ve got a job that we might want to put you into.  And I said no.  I decided to stay here.  It became my philosophical stand, you know.  It really became internalized.  I wanted to see the specialty succeed and I wanted to play a role with that.  Retiring was a big decision because I’m only fifty-eight years old.  I KNOW, YOU’VE GOT A LOT OF YEARS LEFT.  So that was a very difficult decision.  Deciding to take on so many things at the time I was doing the Design Department plus Family Doctor plus News, that was very, very difficult.  I’m glad I did it but I would never do it again.  \n\nWHAT WERE YOUR BIGGEST SATISFACTIONS FROM THE EXPERIENCE OF WORKING IN FAMILY MEDICINE?  \n\nJust watching the specialty grow and, to a degree, prosper.  I remember when we hit 40,000.  That was a big, hairy deal.  And then 50,000 and then 60,000.  It’s like man, how big can we get?  And now we’re 90,000 and we’ve been up in that area for a long time.  So just watching it grow.  And it went from being, I hate to say it but like a good old boy’s club.  I remember Bill Delay calling it the chowder and marching society.  Do you remember the parade of coats at the State Officers Conference?  In the banquet in the evening, they would have a parade of coats.  And the docs would wear their most outrageous, gaudy, madras plaid, bright green and they would have a parade.  MAYBE I’VE SEEN PICTURES AND DIDN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT IT WAS.  I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST PART OF A SKIT PROBABLY.  It was called the parade of coats.  So just watching family medicine develop from more of a social support as well as academic and intellectual and other support to ... It’s not as friendly and as warm and fuzzy as it used to be.  But I think physicians look on their associations differently now.  It’s not a great social network.  It’s more of a professional, meet my needs type of thing than it was.  So it’s grown and it’s matured and that’s been really enjoyable to watch over the years.\n\nDID YOU EVER HAVE ANY TRAVEL ISSUES?  WERE THERE ANY HUGE MEMORIES FOR THAT WITH JUST A LOT OF WORKING TWENTY-FOUR HOURS A DAY AT ASSEMBLY?\n\nThe thing when you said travel, the one that really stood out for me was going on the Physicians With Heart airlift to Uzbekistan back in 2002, I think.  I went along as the photographer and sort of the chronicler of the thing.  An amazing experience.  And to be in a foreign country and hear them be excited about family medicine and learning about it, it really gives you a new perspective on being here.  And it makes me want us not to throw away family medicine.  It’s too important.  \n\nLOOKING BACK OVER YOUR CAREER, WHAT ARE YOUR FONDEST MEMORIES AND WHY?  I GUESS THAT’S MAYBE NOT JUST WITHIN THE ACADEMY.  DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO WHAT YOU’VE ALREADY SAID?\n\nNo, I really don’t.  I think I really pretty much touched on it.\n\nWHAT DO YOU PLAN TO BE INVOLVED IN NOW THAT YOU HAVE RETIRED?  YOU DESCRIBED YOUR BUSINESS.  DO YOU HAVE PLANS TO TRAVEL PERSONALLY?\n\nSure, I already have.  Over the holiday break, I went to Santa Fe, New Mexico.  I had never been there before.  I’m very interested in Native American culture and spirituality and learning more about that is a real treat.  But my freelance writing and editing company, while I’m starting out I’m freelancing for the Academy.  And I have another client already and another one possible.  I will probably branch out of medicine and health care.  I’m very interested in history.  And so gee, Angela, I might come to you for some pointers on that.  And the history of my own state, Kansas.  I’m a Kansan and I’m very interested in that.  So I’ll probably branch out.  And I may go beyond writing and editing.  I may go into other things.  I’m not sure.  I don’t want to work as many hours and I want to have more control over the hours that I do work.  And so that’s one of the key reasons for retiring.  \n\nANOTHER SLIGHTLY REDUNDANT QUESTION: TELL US ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE MOST TOUCHED YOUR LIFE OVER THE YEARS.  I THINK THESE CAN BE OUTSIDE OF YOUR CAREER OR THE ACADEMY.  BUT WHO WERE THEY AND WHY AND HOW DID THEY AFFECT YOU?\n\nI’ve mentioned one, John Bender, my editing professor.  Lee Young, my magazine professor.  Del Brinkman who is the Dean of the Journalism School when I went through.  Suzanne Shaw who was my reporting and advanced reporting. The excellence of the instruction that I had in the Journalism School.  Because going to KU and going into that and doing well, and I graduated Phi Beta Kappa which amazed me.  Being a little kid from Kansas City, Kansas, that really amazed me.  But that experience and then the experience of working at KU Med and then of coming to the Academy, all of them have been such good things for professional development that I really can’t single out any one person or thing because they’ve all been incredibly important.  Ralph Reed, the internist who was the head of the Kansas Preceptorship Program, and his philosophy.  Bob Graham, his philosophy.  Bill Delay to a degree and Sarah.  Michael Springer is incredibly important to the Academy.  He’s brought such strength to it.  I could keep on naming names because nobody stands out huge, head and shoulders above everybody.  But so many people are way up there.  It’s been a great career.\n\nANY LAST THOUGHTS?  THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WITH FUTURE GENERATIONS LISTENING TO THIS TAPE.  \n\nI hope that medical students continue and increasingly see family medicine as a wonderful, helpful career to be in.  It’s hard to get students to go into family medicine now because reimbursement isn’t where it needs to be.  The fact that the system isn’t based on family medicine is almost disrespectful of it.  It’s almost like you could do without it; it’s not that important.  And it really is critically important.  Having IBM come to the Academy and say we know what it’s like to have employees in a primary care system overseas.  They do so much better.  This system sucks.  We need a better system and we want to work with you to get it.  I think that speaks volumes.  I think that’s so important.  So I hope medical students continue and increasingly see family medicine as a wonderful career choice and that it is reimbursed appropriately so that they can continue to do that and succeed and have good lives being family doctors.  \n\nThank you, Paula.","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278341#t=0.0,3597.03508"}]}]},{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278383","type":"Canvas","label":{"en":["Media File 2 of 2 - Binder_Paul_08_b.wav"]},"duration":1084.99088,"width":640,"height":360,"thumbnail":[{"id":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/public/images/audio-default.png","type":"Image","format":"image/png"}],"items":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278383/content/1","type":"AnnotationPage","items":[{"id":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278383/content/2/annotation/1","type":"Annotation","motivation":"painting","body":{"id":"https://aviary-p-centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.s3.wasabisys.com/collection_resource_files/resource_files/000/278/383/original/Binder_Paul_08_b.wav?1750873163","type":"Audio","format":"audio/wav","duration":1084.99088,"width":640,"height":360},"target":"https://centerforthehistoryoffamilymedicine.aviaryplatform.com/collections/2195/collection_resources/150935/file/278383","metadata":[]}]}],"annotations":[]}]}