Sebelius: I can’t suspend the lung-transplant rules for a dying 10-year-old

Hotair ^ | 06/04/2013 | AllahPundit

[HiTech RedNeck]

Glossing over, for now, the issues with live organ donation (too often they don’t really try to make sure the donor is truly dead)... does EVERY or even MOST sets of lungs have someone to claim them? I thought there were a host of tissue matching issues. If there is competition over them that’s one story, but if most go to waste then how is that putting someone else at a disadvantage.

[montanajoe]

Bullsh*t

You undoubtedly trust the insurance company bureaucrat’s more than the government bureaucrat. I see them as the same.

Folks as old as you and I need to grow up and recognize health care resources are limited.

[chris37]

Actually, as it appears to me, she is the death panel.

She is the decider of life and death over the child of another.

She is Obama’s grim reaper.

This is the type of control Obamacare has given the us government over its citizens, and that is total control.

[RJL]

Sebelius: I can’t suspend the lung-transplant rules for a dying 10-year-old

I bet she could find a way for Obama or Hillary!

[HiTech RedNeck]

Nobody’s spelling out the story here; it seems that the more crying the story, whether in a conservative medium or a liberal one, the vaguer its details get. How the bloom did Sibelius get to be queen already over the medical transplant system.

[Frank_2001]

She was governor of Kansas, so it’s not like she just crawled out of the sewer. And HOW did she pull THAT off-Kansas is about as conservative as it gets! “Death Panels- Not just for Grandma anymore!” /sarcasm

[oincobx]

>>>Actually, as it appears to me, she is the death panel

How is she the death panel? She is leaving the decision up to the medical community and the standards that they set.

If she involves herself in the decision, then maybe that argument makes sense because she would be choosing one recipient over another.

Do we really want the Secretary to be making these decisions on a case by case basis with the ones with the most compelling back story being chosen the winner?

Keep in mind that the surgery for her with an adult lung is riskier than if it were going to an adult.

Lungs are a scarce resource and sometimes you have to play the percentages. It's harsh, but what would you say to the adult that would have been the recipient if the government steps in and makes the change?

>>>This is the type of control Obamacare has given the us government over its citizens, and that is total control.

But this is a policy set in place by the medical community back in 2005.

[chris37]

That is a very good question.

An unelected, unanswerable bureaucrat is the decider of life and death of Americans.

That is really quite astonishing to ponder, HTRN.

All I can say is, if this was my daughter...

I think I’ll leave that thought right there.

[chris37]

It doesn’t matter.

First off, weighing who is more deserving of a procedure because of X factors is dangerous to the point of insane.

I would say the only factor that really matters is how close to death a potential recipient may be. If death is very close, then by all means, give that person the surgery that will stave off death.

And to answer your other question, how long would it take for the incurable disease to destroy the transplanted lung?

Long enough for her parents to love her another day.

Sometimes in this world, even a single minute is more valuable than anything else on the face of the earth, especially if that minute is the last one you’ll ever spend with the child that you made.

[chris37]

There is a comment under the story that says the doctors said go and the government said no.

Do you know if that is actually the case or not here?

[logitech]

You are right.

We can’t make everybody well. BUT, commies don’t need to be in charge of these decisions.

[Errant]

But this is a policy set in place by the medical community back in 2005.

Thanks for putting a date on when the current policy was put in place. While relevant at the time, advancements in medicine over the past eight years, since this policy was established, make continued adherence to this policy unfair to those under 12 years of age, who now have a better chance at survival by modifying adult organs.

[marron]

if he changed the system for Sarah’s advantage, ‘there’s another patient, very likely an adolescent, who gets a disadvantage‘

Thats true. The question is, is that person 3 weeks from death, or does he have more time?

If you waive the rules and bump her up the adult list, does someone else die because they’re forced to keep waiting?

Thats not a completely unknowable question. With a life in the balance, it seems like someone could put it on their agenda to look into it.

“The policy development process is not fast,”

Not going to let a little girl hurry up the process.

[oincobx]

>>>Long enough for her parents to love her another day.

So what do you say to the children of the adult that might otherwise have been the recipient and may perhaps live another 50 years with a transplant.

>>>even a single minute is more valuable than anything else on the face of the earth, especially if that minute is the last one you’ll ever spend with the child that you made.

What basis are you using to determine that the minutes for this family more valuable than other families?

[chris37]

Here’s what bugs me about this:

“Please, suspend the rules until we look at this policy,” Rep. Lou Barletta, R-Pa., asked Sebelius during a House hearing Tuesday on behalf of Sarah Murnaghan, a 10-year-old girl who needs a lung transplant. She can’t qualify for an adult lung transplant until the age of 12, according to federal regulations, but Sebelius has the authority to waive that rule on her behalf. The pediatric lungs for which she qualifies aren’t available.

“I would suggest, sir, that, again, this is an incredibly agonizing situation where someone lives and someone dies,” Sebelius replied. “The medical evidence and the transplant doctors who are making the rule — and have had the rule in place since 2005 making a delineation between pediatric and adult lungs, because lungs are different than other organs — that it’s based on the survivability [chances].”

That quote is from the excerpt in Morgana’s recent post of this story near the top of FR:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3027413/posts

If it is federal regulation blocking this from going forward, and if indeed the parents are asking that the reg be set aside for all children, not just theirs, even though theirs would obviously likely benefit or not benefit soon considering her state, then Sebelius must decide what is more important, a chance at a child’s life or regulations.

This brings in a larger question, at least to me, does the government have any business at all in issuing medical regulations such as this or any business in medicine at all? To me the answer is no. It should be up to the child’s doctor. If there is an adult lung available, she should in the very least have a chance at getting it instead of being regged out, and especially so considering her time is almost out.

[Ranger Warrior]

It appears that Josef Mengele has been reincarnated in the form of our SS, I mean HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius. All that’s missing is an eyepatch or monocle, a lit cigarette inserted in a cigarette holder, and an armband with an embroidered Obama Fascist symbol.

[Rembrandt]

“Its issues like this that remind me of how much I hate both political parties. If I was the child’s parent I’d be doing everything possible to save my kid even if it meant taking the life from those further up in line or having the public treasury spend every last dollar to save my kid...

As a Conservative I recognize life is unfair and the public treasury is limited..”

---

OK, you hate both political parties.

It is NOT both political parties withholding this life saving operation from this young girl. It is one DEMOCRAT. It is the Secretary of Health and Human Services. It is a mother who feels she has the right to dispense life saving steps only to those she feels worthy of receiving them!

Apparently this little girl is not worthy!

[montanajoe]

The thing is someone needs to make the decision on a national basis. I don't see insurance companies as any better than the govmnt.

Leaving it to local hospitals/doctors might work if they did not have the ability to get the federal treasury cover their losses but in today's America that is not possible I'm afraid.

A parent will do anything and will spend every last cent of other peoples money to save their kid ...I understand that and would want to do it myself but I would hope that I could come to terms with the fact that its just not possible ...there is not enough money and life is just not fair.

[montanajoe]

You make my point thank you

[Errant]

I thought there were a host of tissue matching issues. If there is competition over them that’s one story, but if most go to waste then how is that putting someone else at a disadvantage.

Very good points and what a waste indeed if there was a match for someone under 12 near death, not allowed to be considered because someone over 12, and in no immediate danger, had priority due to an outdated regulation/policy.

That's the problem with allowing bureaucrats getting involved in these matters instead of charities, physicians and families.

The UK is a fine example.