Shareef on Shareef: a year of hits and misses

Check out these and all of Dr. Shareef’s 2004 columns by clicking here.

JANUARY

I received a lot of feedback about the “Smart QB, dumb jock” article concerning Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning’s prior problems with sexual harassment and libel. I thought about the column a couple weeks ago while watching the Colts and Baltimore Raven on television. Manning, on his way to breaking Dan Marino’s record for TD passes in a season, was at his masterful best against Ray Lewis and the outstanding Raven’s defense.

He would break the huddle, walk to the line of scrimmage, assess the defense, change the play, position the players where he wanted them, take the snap, and complete the pass. Smart? No, the guy is absolutely brilliant in what he does on the football field. Hopefully, the damages he paid for libeling a woman who had accused him of sexual harassment while he was at the University of Tennessee has made him more sensitive to the issue of gender equity.

Then again, maybe he won’t be any more sensitive to the issue. There are a lot of brilliant men at the U.S. Air Force Academy and they still don’t get it when it comes to sexual harassment.

Over the past two years, I have spent a good deal of time writing about the locating of a methadone clinic in Northwest Roanoke after Southwest Roanoke County residents successfully completed a “not-in-my-back-yard” political campaign to keep the facility out of their neighborhood. I’ve angered many local politicians and public administrators who, in my opinion, and unlike their counterparts in Roanoke County, have done absolutely nothing to keep the clinic from being “dumped” on Northwest Roanoke residents. It’s little wonder that those people view themselves as second-class citizens.

Yet they keep fighting. As a guy who grew up in their neighborhoods, I am very proud of the legal guerrilla war they are waging to keep an estimated 100 opiate addicts from invading their community on a daily basis. They are an excellent example of what happens when the disenfranchised dare to “Speak Truth to Power.” To date, they have kept the wolves at bay.

The “When public health becomes a nuisance” column outlined a legal strategy, approved by the federal courts, for closing a methadone clinic in a neighborhood by using public nuisance laws if the clients become a significant health and safety risk to residents.

They will. Drug addicts have very predictable behavioral patterns. That is why Southwest Roanoke County residents didn’t want the facility in their neighborhood. The only remaining question is whether Roanoke’s city manager and her police force will enforce the existing public nuisance laws for Northwest Roanoke residents.

FEBRUARY

A major theme is the academic fields of organization theory and leadership is how quickly an organization can adapt to emerging threats. University of Michigan business professor Karl Weick’s book on reliabile organizations provides leaders, and the organizational cultures they create, with strategies for adapting to rapidly changing operating environments. In “Time for a new strategy,” I use the legitimate concerns of international and national health officials about an imminent worldwide bird flu pandemic as a case study for explaining Weick’s ideas.

Last week, the Hong Kong government announced a plan to buy out all street vendors who sell live poultry and replace them with government-controlled markets where frozen chicken and duck can be purchased. The policy will dramatically reduce the likelihood of unsanitary breeding and selling conditions that are a conduit for bird influenza “jumping” to humans and mutating into a virus for which most people have no immunity.

The policy will be a culture shock for many Asians who like the taste of fresh poultry. Still, given the medical, social and economic implications of a bird flu pandemic, the Hong Kong government (at the strong urging of the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control) should be commended for acting as a “high reliability organization” for its efforts to combat this potential catastrophe.

Last year, the movie “Cold Mountain” was a box office hit. While the story revolved around a Confederate soldier’s attempt to return to his love interest in North Carolina, a subplot of the movie focused on the Battle of Petersburg (commonly known as the Battle of the Crater). Many intellectuals sharply criticized the film’s director for omitting the role that United States Colored Troops played in that pivotal battle in the American Civil War.

Even so, the movie provided an opportunity for black (and white) historians to research the “Iron Triangle” between politics, the media and war. For instance, Gen. George Meade did not want trained black troops to lead the charge at Petersburg for fear that Northern newspapers would accuse him of using them as cannon fodder. This was a fatal mistake the Union Army made in the battle. Interestingly, one has only to look at how the media continues to influence decision-making in times of war. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was leery of sending too many troops to Iraq for fear of the media saying the invasion was another Vietnam. Now he is being criticized for not having enough troops in the theater. Little has changed in the past 140 years.

There should be less griping, especially from black scholars, and more writing about the contributions and valor of U.S.C.T. in the Petersburg/Richmond campaign. More than 6,000 died there and more black soldiers won battlefield commendations for valor that in any other Civil War engagement. What a story!

Now, who is going to tell it?

MARCH

I got a lot of criticism for the “Adam and Steve: Ready for Marriage?” column and my support for President Bush’s constitutional amendment that would prohibit same-sex marriage. One of the most thoughtful letters came from a graduate student at Virginia Tech’s Center for Public Administration & Policy, the place where I earned my Ph.D. The student suggested that my religious faith (Islam) unduly influenced my views of the subject.

Well, of course it did -- as did his worldview (probably grounded in Freudian notions of human sexuality) lead to his support for gay marriage. We are all captives of our worldview.

Much of my argument was framed in the legal reality that government has long expressed a legitimate interest in regulating sexual behavior between consenting adults. Polygamy and adultery are obvious examples. As I note in the column, the Congress required anti-polygamy provisions in the constitutions of at least six states as a condition for statehood. Adultery remains a criminal offense in Virginia.

Gay rights activists fudge when implying they alone are singled out for unequal treatment when it comes to marriage. They should try selling that argument to the millions of excommunicated Mormons, other Christians and Muslims who secretly practice polygamy based on what they strongly believe are their First Amendment free exercise rights. Given this social and legal context, it is hard not to believe the accusation that gay rights marriage proponents are seeking special, not equal, rights when it comes to matrimony.

I have just finished proofing a paper my son (a second year law student) has written on antitrust and labor law. He did a good job and I learned a lot. The article also reinforced the reality that medical doctors should better utilize the services of the Federation for Doctors and Dentists as their “third party” negotiator with giant health insurance firms like Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield. This was my thesis in “Bad music for doctors.”

In a December 2001 ruling, a federal judge in Delaware found that (1) the Federation could not have all of the orthopedic surgeons in the state terminate their contracts with Blue Cross to force the insurance company to accept their fee demands (this constitutes a price-fixing cartel and thus, a violation of antitrust law) but (2) the doctors could use the Federation as a third party to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement. Importantly, these agreements are immune to antitrust charges as long as they don’t lead to doctor boycotts.

The column was written at a time when talks between 35 local anesthesiologists and Anthem Blue Cross had broken down. That meant that these doctors were no longer participants in the Anthem preferred health care network.

Physicians are outgunned when they attempt to negotiate with health insurance companies. The federal courts have provided relief and they should use it. If the managed care system is going to run smoothly, more doctors will have to use third party negotiators at contract time.

APRIL

In the “Show him the money” column, I predicted that Ohio State University running back Maurice Clarett would not be allowed to enter the NFL draft this spring. I made the prediction despite the fact that a federal judge had ruled the NFL restriction on players entering the league before they had been out of high school three years was an antitrust violation. However, this was not an antitrust case and the appeals court reversed, finding the case a labor relations issue subject to the collective bargaining agreement between the NFL and NFL Players Association.

The NFL rule is good. Young men like Clarett should remain in school, mature emotionally, and take as many classes in investments and accounting as possible. This background will prove invaluable when they become instant millionaires. Otherwise, they will end up as financially broke as the great boxer Joe Louis did in his lifetime. The difference? Louis did not have an opportunity to get a free, quality education before he earned his wealth in the boxing ring. Clarett, and others like him, have this wonderful chance. They should be encouraged by family, friends, and coaches to take full advantage of that education before someone takes cold advantage of them.

The “On trial” column looked at the case of Sami Al-Hussayen, a Saudi Arabian national and University of Idaho graduate student charged with terrorism under the USA Patriot Act. In November 2001, he was found not guilty of the terrorism charges but guilty of immigration violations. Consequently, he was deported. The jury concluded that there was no smoking gun linking him to international terrorist groups. Some government officials have dismissed the verdict to the “anti-government” people who populate northern Idaho. Tthis is the same jury pool that found Randy Weaver of Ruby Ridge fame not guilty in the killing of a U.S. Marshall.

Al-Hussayen was charged under a provision of the Patriot Act that prohibits providing “expert advice or assistance” to terrorist causes. He was the first person charged under that provision.

Since 9-11, the government’s goal has been to stop terrorists before they can attack. That is indeed a noble goal. But does it mean arresting people who use their First Amendment rights to espouse anti-American sentiments?

Federal prosecutors believed that Al_Hussayen was the Web master who created links that incited violence against the United States and raised funds for terrorist groups. That, they say, is outside the bounds of First Amendment speech protections.

On the other hand, opponents of the “expert assistance” provision believe it is too broad because it doesn’t require proof that an individual is engaged in any sort of terrorist act or even supports terrorist activity. For people in this camp, it is a resurrection of the principle of guilt by association.

Is the Patriot Act a pre-emptive strike on terrorism or pre-emptive strike on the First Amendment?

You decide!

MAY

The “Doomed to fail” column discusses the differences between leadership and management as it relates to the selection of the next superintendent of Roanoke City Public Schools. The article generated several very positive responses from school board members who have the difficult task of selecting the new head of the public schools. My notion is that they should hire both a leader and top-flight administrator who will handle the daily operations of the school system. To expect the next superintendent to successfully handle both roles is wishful thinking. In the column, I list examples from both public and private organizations where this co-leadership format has worked well.

The Pentagon is learning that wars cannot be fought on the cheap. Witness Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld’s recent problems over adding armor to Humvees in Iraq. Neither can public school systems. Implementing a co-leadership framework is only costly in the short-term. The long-term benefits -- managing problems before they become social volcanoes, improving the public image of the school system, and the prevention of organizational dysfunctions -- all outweigh the cost of paying for both a leader and quality administrator. It will be interesting to see if school board members can handle the public outcry if they do the “right thing.”

I received more feedback concerning the “White Flight/Black Indifference” column than for any other article in the five years I’ve written this column. I tried to explain how school violence (and perceptions of school violence) are interpreted differently by blacks and whites. Moreover, because interpretations differ, reactions to the issue differ.

Yet, the severe beating of a white youth (by a black student) at Woodrow Wilson Middle School two years ago has been the catalyst for affluent white parents to pull their children out of the city school system when they reach middle school. These parents are legitimately afraid for their children’s safety.

The beating incident should have been a rallying cause for black and white parents to come together and discuss the issue of violence in Roanoke’s city schools. Black parents would have literally been fighting mad if one of their children had been assaulted in such a violent manner. From a human, social, or simply self-interest perspective, the assault should have provided common cause for parents from the groups to dialogue. The worst thing, in my opinion, was for the black community to remain silent on the issue.

Yet, the silence was deafening. Maintaining this posture will virtually assure that Roanoke schools will increasingly look more like they did when I grew up here than when my children graduated from the system in 1997 and 2000.

JUNE

In the “Cosby was right” article, Cosby was right! Do I need to say more? Despite Ellis Cose’s apologetic article in the Jan. 3, 2005 issue of Newsweek ("Does Cosby Help?"), the Cos’ crusade is a no-brainer. What is so sad about this situation is that black social, political and religious leaders have so abandoned the cause of collective and ethnic self-improvement that the task has fallen to entertainers like Cosby and Chris Rock. Booker T. Washington and WEB Du Bois absolutely have to be spinning in their graves!

Anyone who reads this column knows that I am a big fan, both personally and professionally, of Columbia University Professor Mindy Fullilove. She is, in a word, cool. Very intense. But very cool.

She was in Roanoke last summer to promote her book, “Root Shock.” The book discusses the negative psychological and medical ramifications of dislocating people for urban renewal projects. Roanoke was one of her case studies. For me, the most fascinating aspect of her visit was her presentation before Roanoke City Council. Fullilove told council members that the city’s image was being tarnished because of the way urban renewal had been handled.

The contrast was startling. On the one hand, you have this intelligent, articulate and passionate scholar (who has been voted both one of the top 10 physicians and professors in the country) making a profound statement and conversely, council members politely waiting for her allotted time to be up.

Mindly Fullilove came to the mountain with her message. She may as well have been at Mount Rushmore.