Posted on 12/27/2010 6:42:57 PM PST by John Leland 1789
During the stormy debate over his healthcare plan, President Barack Obama promised his program would not "pull the plug on grandma," and Congress dropped plans for death panels and "end of life" counseling that would encourage aged patients from partaking in costly medical procedures.
Opponents of Obama's plan, including former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin, dubbed such efforts as "death panels" that would encourage euthanasia.
But on Dec. 3, the Obama administration seemingly flouted the will of Congress by issuing a new Medicare regulation detailing "voluntary advance care planning" that is to be included during patients' annual checkups. The regulation aimed at the aged "may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment," The New York Times reported.
The new provision, which goes into effect Jan. 1, allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling to help beneficiaries deal with the complex decisions families face when a loved one is approaching death. Critics say it is another attempt to limit healthcare options for the elderly as they face serious illness.
Incoming House Speaker John Boehner said during the healthcare debate: “This provision may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia.”
Specifically, the measure was known as Section 1233 of the bill the House passed in November 2009. It was not included in the final legislation, however. It allowed Medicare to pay for consultations about advance care planning every five years. In contrast, the new rule allows annual discussions as part of wellness visits.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Pelosi told Congress to pass the bill in order to find out what is in it. It should be obvious to all that it doesn't matter what details are/are not in bills anymore. Bureacrats will re-write legislation and make rules that have the force of law.
Thus our laws are not made anymore by our elected representatives. The common man is basically without representation in Washington, D.C.
But back to the subject of how far will "end of life counseling" go, we are waiting to see what rules will be concocted by bureaucrats for, say, children born with conditions like NKH (non-ketotic hyperglycinemia), which without immediate treatment, will not make it.
And how about children born with hydacephalus (water on the brain), that without shunt installments will not make it.
I am waiting to see what kind of rules will be written, because . . .
We ourselves have a daughter that was born with acute hydracephalus. We were advised by the doctors that she could only be a severely retarded vegetable. One nerosurgeon in Coral Gables, Florida called her "useless" to our face when she was three weeks old. She is now 31. She is a teacher and a published poet.
We have a granddaughter (by a different daughter; we have four girls) who was born with NKH and not expected to live. She is now three years old, and making good progress.
So, how will doctors be "incentive-ized" to counsel parents with sick children, when doctors don't expect the children to live?
Some might reply, "Oh, John, it is only counseling---the families will still make the decisions."
But that is blindness with respect to the course government takes when unbridled. If GOVERNMENT wants people to have "end of life counseling," it can only have the purpose of conditioning the public to eventually accept the GOVERNMENT'S decisions on who lives, who dies, and when.
I am for the earliest reasonable cessation of tax payer funded medical care.
Well, Obama’s grandmother sadly passed on just at the beginning of his taking office... so it’s acceptable now.
This year it’s voluntary, so seniors should simply refuse the conseling. Let’s hope all seniors will do that. If every senior does that, it might kill this practice, rather than kill the seniors.
What an evil man!
I have heard several doctors interviewed about this on Fox today, and they supported it. None were asked exactly what it would *look* like, and I wish they had been asked. I have a number of reasons I’m not happy about this, but I wonder if what it won’t REALLY look like, for the most part, is a typical big money sucking Medicare fraud. Doctors will have patients make an appointment every year for this counseling, they will have a form that they AMA will have come up with and approved of that is *safe* (ie won’t get the doctor sued) for the patients to agree to and sign (which must be done every year in case something has changed you know!) that will be some sort of Advanced Directive. The doctor will get his chunk of Medicare $$ (and maybe insurance companies will be sucked in I don’t know) and everything will be wonderful.
I’m hoping they change the medicare “eligibility” age to 75....it will put off some of this until sanity returns, maybe? (I’m 59....I DO NOT WANT MEDICARE! I want to be responsible for my own “health CARE!”
Got a granbabie born at 1lb 9oz,shes now 10 lbs something .She’d be dead now.
Wish I could post a pic , she’s a handfull.
Evil is alive,
The movie “Logan’s Run” was prescient.
Yeah, I hate that we all get funneled into it.
Notice I didn't mention doctors or hospitals. Money and insurance companies are involved. That doesn't even get to government.
Medicare spending decisions are ALL about OPM - other people's money.
Medical services that you purchase with OPM are NOT your right. You have NO right to spend OPM without input from those who are providing the charity - in the case of Medicare, the taxpayers.
Cutting spending (which has to occur) without cutting Medicare - and cutting it "savagely" at that - is impossible.
So, once Medicare is cut - and even if it isn't - some form of taxpayer oversight of what gets spent is inevitable.
And THAT means that someone, somewhere, is going to be told - "no more OPM for you".
What's the conservative position? That anyone, anywhere, at any time, can have unlimited access to OPM if their desired commodity is medical services? That's absurd.
“What’s the conservative position? That anyone, anywhere, at any time, can have unlimited access to OPM if their desired commodity is medical services? That’s absurd.”
Yes it is and its not whats being advocated. Conservatism is about more than just money, it is also about life.
Well, your end of life decisions, like all your other decisions, should be up to you - until you ask me for money.
Then, some of your decisions come under my control.
So it is with Medicare. Medicare spends trillions upon trillions of OPM. As such, Medicare will have some say in who gets what.
Or do you think everyone should get everything?
Right.
Now suppose you fall ill when you are a week past 65. You have 20+ years of good health ahead of you if your critical illness gets treated. You need or want $150K from the taxpayers to pay the hospital and the doctors.
Do you think the taxpayers have a right to check out your request, or not?
Absolutely. And, that would be done today under the current set up. Lets don’t act like these death merchants are about saving the taxpayers money. That is NOT Obama’s ultimate goal with the Death Panels.
Most unborn babies are killed for one reason. Convenience. The same is going to happen with the elderly and disabled under this. The last thing we need is government pushing for refusing life-saving treatments under the guise of "You are old and not as productive." or "You have a disability." Kill them off for convenience? That's what is going to happen with Obamacare getting involved.
Because Congress didn’t read the health care bill . . . .
Children’s Hospitals Losing “Orphan Drug” Discount Due to Reform
Written by Molly Gamble | December 08, 2010
Nationwide, children’s hospitals are beginning to receive notification from drug companies, saying they no longer qualify for federally-mandated discounts on “orphan drugs,” which are used to treat rare medical conditions, according to a New York Times report.
This year, as part of healthcare reform, Congress blocked children’s hospitals from the price cuts when revising the discount program, which was established 18 years ago. A House Democrat called the loss an “honest mistake in drafting” and said Congress did not intend to remove the discounts children’s hospitals already had for orphan drugs, according to a citation in the report.
The discounts typically range from 30 percent to 50 percent, and the change is expected to cost children’s hospitals hundreds of millions of dollars. Orphan drugs are intended to treat diseases affecting less than 200,000 people in the country.
Hospitals have received letters from drug companies retracting discounts on orphan drugs often involved in the treatment of patients with cancer, cerebral palsy and various neurological disorders, among other conditions.
Read the New York Times report on children’s hospitals and orphan drugs.
Read more about hospitals and healthcare reform:
- Wisconsin Attorney General May File Own Suit Against Health Reform
- Big Insurers Gear Up to Cover More Medicaid Patients Under Reform Law
- Incoming House Majority Leader Plans to Keep Parts of Reform Law
There seem to be many articles on the Internet covering this. The source of this particular one is:
Shame on you for being rational. ;-)
(Obama) Administration Reverses on End-of-Life Counseling
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2651899/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.