Skip to comments.The Elite Are Attempting To Convince Us That Killing Off Our Sick Grandparents Is Cool And Trendy
Posted on 06/13/2012 9:13:03 PM PDT by JohnKinAK
What should be done with elderly Americans when they become very seriously ill? Should we try to save their lives or should we just let them die? Unfortunately, there is a growing consensus among the "intellectual elite" that most elderly people are not going to have a high enough "quality of life" to justify the expense of costly life saving procedures. This philosophy is now being promoted very heavily through mainstream news outlets, in our television shows and in big Hollywood movies. The elite are attempting to convince us that killing off our sick grandparents is cool and trendy. We are being told that "pulling the plug" on grandma and grandpa is compassionate (because it will end their suffering), that it is good for the environment and that it is even good for the economy. We are being told that denying life saving treatments to old people will dramatically reduce health care costs and make the system better for all of us. We are being told that it is not "efficient" for health insurance companies to shell out $100,000 for an operation that may extend the life of an elderly person by 6 months. But the truth is that all of this is part of a larger agenda that the elite are attempting to advance. As I have written about previously, the elite love death, and they truly believe that reducing the population is good for society and good for the planet. Sadly, population control propaganda has reached a fever pitch in recent months.
Time Magazine has just come out with a very shocking cover story entitled "How To Die". The article goes on and on about how wonderful and compassionate it is to remove life saving treatment from sick relatives.
A recent article by Mike Adams summarized the message of this disgusting article....
Inside, the magazine promotes a cost-saving death agenda that encourages readers to literally pull the feeding tubes from their dying elderly parents, causing them to dehydrate and die. This is explained as a new cost-saving measure that drastically reduces return hospital visits by the elderly yeah, because dead people dont return to the hospital, of course.
Many of you also probably remember the Newsweek cover story from a couple years ago that was entitled "The Case for Killing Granny".
Underneath that shocking title was the following phrase: Curbing excessive end-of-life care is good for America.
According to the author of that article, spending less money on the elderly is the key to successful health care reform....
The idea that we might ration health care to seniors (or anyone else) is political anathema. Politicians do not dare breathe the R word, lest they be accusedhowever wronglyof trying to pull the plug on Grandma. But the need to spend less money on the elderly at the end of life is the elephant in the room in the health-reform debate. Everyone sees it but no one wants to talk about it. At a more basic level, Americans are afraid not just of dying, but of talking and thinking about death. Until Americans learn to contemplate death as more than a scientific challenge to be overcome, our health-care system will remain unfixable.
Sadly, articles like that one are becoming quite frequent in mainstream media sources.
Just a few days ago, a Bloomberg article entitled "How 'Death Panels' Can Prolong Life" declared that we must "deny treatment to people who want it" in order to hold down costs....
In short, all the Republican talk during the health-care- reform debate about death panels was melodramatic and unfair, but not ridiculous. One way or another, holding down health-care costs will require policies that deny treatment to people who want it. And want it because it will extend their lives.
This goes on already, all the time. Health insurance companies have been known to deny payment for treatments deemed unnecessary. Age limits for organ transplants are another example. All policies that involve denying care because of quality of life considerations are, in effect, death panels. But no society can afford to give every citizen every possible therapy. Medicare is going broke trying.
So who are we supposed to deny treatment to?
The elderly of course.
According to that Bloomberg article, we are supposed to kill off our sick grandparents because the "quality of life" they would be expected to have if they recover would not be enough to warrant spending so much to save them....
A $200,000 operation can add a year or two to the life of an octogenarian, or it can save decades of life for younger people. In a country like the U.S., with an average life expectancy of 78.5, it takes 10 septuagenarians who get an extra five years from the health-care system to balance a single 30- year-old who gets 50 extra years. Or save the life of a newborn, who then enjoys a normal life span and dies at 78.5, and you have the same impact on national life expectancy as 16 operations on septuagenarians. The average national life expectancy can increase even as the cost goes down.
This is the kind of thinking that starts happening in a society that dramatically devalues life.
If human life has little value, then it is easy to start justifying things that would have once been unthinkable.
For example, one surgeon is now suggesting that we should start harvesting organs from patients before they die....
Dr. Paul Morrissey, an associate professor of surgery at Brown University's Alpert Medical School, wrote in The American Journal of Bioethics that the protocol known as donation after cardiac death -- meaning death as a result of irreversible damage to the cardiovascular system -- has increased the number of organs available for transplant, but has a number of limitations, including the need to wait until the heart stops.
Because of the waiting time, Morrissey said that about one-third of potential donors end up not being able to donate, and many organs turn out to not be viable as a result.
Instead, he argues in favor of procuring kidneys from patients with severe irreversible brain injury whose families consent to kidney removal before their cardiac and respiratory systems stop functioning.
Do you want your organs harvested before you are dead?
Sadly, those that often do need organ transplants the most these days are often denied for "quality of life" issues as well.
For example, at one U.S. hospital a 3-year-old girl named Amelia was denied a kidney transplant that she desperately needed simply because she is considered to be "mentally retarded".
These are the kinds of decisions that are being made by doctors and by health insurance companies all over America every day.
And did you know that life-ending drugs are going to be 100% free under Obamacare?
I did not know this until I read a Christian Post article the other day....
A Christian-based legal defense alliance is warning Americans who already believe that President Barack Obama's health care plan is a bad idea that the "ObamaCare mandate is worse than you think."
"Everyone likes a good surprise, but no one likes a bad surprise. So, you're really not going to like the surprises buried in the 2,700 pages of this document," says the narrator of a short video produced by the Alliance Defense Fund.
"Did you know that with ObamaCare you will have to pay for life-saving drugs, but life-ending drugs are free. One hundred percent free. If this plan were really about health care wouldn't it be the other way around?"
Apparently they want to make it as easy to off yourself and your relatives as possible.
So where is all of this headed?
Are we eventually going to become like the Netherlands?
In the Netherlands, mobile euthanasia teams are now going door to door to help elderly patients end their lives in the comfort of their own homes.
Is that what we want?
Do we want government agents going door to door to help people die?
As I have written about previously, the elite believe that the world is massively overpopulated and they believe that all of us are ruining their planet.
So they love euthanasia, abortion and pretty much anything else that will result in more people ending up dead.
How are they currently "free"? Someone's paying for them somewhere along the line.
I agree! I think as adults we should be allowed to make decisions when it comes to “if” I’m (or family member) critically ill. I have stipulated my wishes to family and my doctor. I want to die with dignity not kept alive cause of someone else’s ideals. I won’t allow either side make this decision for me.
There was a great article in the Prevention magazine back in April with regards to dying with dignity called “Safe Passage.” It sounds better than average nursing homes.
The sad fact is we don’t have the money or resources to give everyone gold plated care. But we shouldn’t be killing them off just to save costs.
As the boomer bubble starts to age into their twilight years, you will see a big push to kill them off to save costs. And with the moral formation of the average person these days, they will start killing them off.
how about all the feds get in line first who is over 40!
Good point there. Wonder how long before the powers that be start ignoring our written wishes or even our personally designated powers of attorney.
Thank you! :)
We’ve already got mobile euthanasia teams—it’s called the modern commercial hospice.
My mother is Catholic, and although she hadn’t attended Mass in quite a few years, mostly due to illness, her nursing home has a large lounge about four doors down from her room and in the corner is a small Catholic alter, with a small organ, that is pulled out when a Priest comes once or twice a week for Mass. She’s been wheeling herself down there a few times lately! She made my kids laugh when I said “oh, your calendar says they had mass today, how was it?” and she got a smirk on her face and her eyes going back and forth like a little kid who had been caught skipping going to church! I said Mom, you don’t have to go, but it’s only 4 doors down! She said well, I can stay in my bed, sleep in late, and still
hear most of the Mass! I’ll admit my family should go more often to church, but the kids thought it was great Grandma could stay in bed AND say she attended Mass!
I LOVE your feisty attitude!
Here in NY, at present, if you have a DNR order only a hospital and doctor can accept it and declare life saving measures to be stopped, but who knows if this is always the case?
It’s a tough thing because my husband is a ff/Paramedic who has been in the middle of performing CPR on a patient when a family member will literally stick the DNR order in his face as he tries to work. Others on the scene attempt to explain the situation. It’s tough all around, because there are different out comes. In some cases, the person may never come to, lay in the hospital unconscious for a period of time and then pass away. Maybe a long period of time. Yes, that’s costly. But other times the person
has been revived and twice my husband has received mayoral life saving awards and the person he saved has been there to thank him in person. One had a DNR and said “Thank God you didn’t let me die!” So my husband always feels if you error, error on the side of life. He’d be so mad at me for posting this because he’s a pretty humble guy. But none of you know me so I don’t care!
“A nation that kills its own children is a nation without hope.” Pope John Paul II
Glad to be back, thank you!
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
Thanks for the ping.
I watched a loved one die - and saw the parade of doctors walking the the room - glancing at the chart and walking out.
A doctor friend once told me (this was many years ago) that a morning ‘hospital walk’ was worth about $2,000. They waltz in, sign the chart and charge for an office visit or more. 30 seconds of their time... And now those wasted dollars are being used as an excuse to 'off' the elderly? Where are teh doting court eunuchs of the MSM? Why aren't they looking into this on their own? Do they always have to wait for a democrat to spoon feed them what to cover?
Death panels have to be part of any long term plans to make SS and Medicare viable. The govt just isn’t making that fact widely known.
Excellent graphic. Thanks for posting.
You sure didn’t mind taking their money while they were working. Now that they’re retired and ready to collect what they paid for, all of a sudden it’s your money. If you’re fortunate enough to live long enough to join the group you now say are not worthy of life, how quickly will you jump into the grave?
The same liberal elite democrats who want to kill off the elderly are the same folks who want to tell everyone what to eat and what do drink so they CAN LIVE A LONG TIME.
Control freak dems are going to kill of us if they can, we might as well eat, drink and be merry... Oh, and give ‘em the finger while we’re at it...
I only post it when I come across someone saying the same thing. After all the times I’ve seen people parroting that Nazi propaganda poster, it still shocks me every time. Especially here. I’ve long known that the general public is ignorant of history, but I expect better from FReepers. And I expect higher morals than that too. Conservatives don’t murder little old ladies to save a buck.
I’m sorry if I upset you. I’m only taking of economic realities. For one, people who are currently collecting Medicare did not generally pay into the system nearly as much as they are getting paid out. Social Security is a similar program that’s under water. The ones who are collecting now are generally getting paid far more than they paid in. If these programs aren’t made fiscally solvent, then those who are currently paying in won’t get the same benefits.
Secondly, there’s no way to collect enough money to offer unlimited medical care to everyone who needs it. I doubt very many people paid hundreds of thousands into Medicare/Medicaid, but that is what some procedures can cost. Nursing home care is also very expensive. Yet, retirees think they are owed it simply because they paid a proportionally small amount of it when they worked. Since government is picking up the tab, it is inevitable that rationing will and must occur.
Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are underfunded by trillions upon trillions of dollars. Enjoy what you get while you can, because those programs are not solvent. Making them solvent on the backs of current workers, something current retirees depend on, will destroy the economy. There simply isn’t enough money.
Oh, one other thing...
I’m not taking “their” money and don’t enjoy it when government does. If I had my way, I’d keep the promises made to current retirees while privatizing everything else. Private charities should take care of those who cannot afford their own treatment. No one has a right to other people’s money, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be charitable.
If you ask me, it’s a sad shame that some generations think they are owed so much on the backs of others. Like all Ponzi schemes, it’s good to get in on the scam early. I did not vote to establish these unaffordable entitlements. The generations that did have already cashed out, leaving generations after mine to hold the bag. That, my FRiend, is despicable.
Insurance benefits should be capped at the amount each individual paid in? Then what would be the point of taking out an insurance policy in the first place? And who gets the money left by people who die before collecting the money they paid in? Do you refund it to their survivors?
Do you see our whole medical system as the patient, the elderly as the disease, and health care reform as the cure?
As for money that has been paid into government entitlement programs, I'm afraid it's gone. Politicians have promised more than they can deliver. Those at the front of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security have reaped the benefits while passing (a goodly portion of) the bill down to those who are late to the Ponzi scheme.
Do I think beneficiaries should be able to pass down as inheritance what was collected from them and not paid out? No. Medicare and Social Security are taxes, not actual insurance programs. On the other hand, I do think government should try to take care of current retirees. If we don't alter course soon, I wonder if even that will be possible, because we might bankrupt the nation trying to keep paying what we cannot afford.
As for you final question, I don't see the medical system as the patient. I just don't think we should have a “medical system” per se. What we should have is freedom, the freedom of individuals to make their own health care decisions. In other words, my dream health care “system” is not really a system at all, more of a free market.
No. I also don't see the elderly as a disease. I'm almost one myself, and I have loved ones who are on these programs. I believe in taking care of loved ones and private charity for one’s neighbor. I can't afford to pay directly (out of my own pocket) for everything my retired family members get. That is why I accept the reality that programs can't be changed over night.
People have planned and lived their entire lives based on these entitlement programs, so choices they could have made earlier to better prepare were made based on a belief that government would be there. Now you have ridiculous situations like one retiree paying out everything he owns for his nursing home care, while a retiree in the next room gets the exact same care without paying anything. Why? Because the one person probably planned and saved so as to not be a burden on others, and the other planned...to be taken care of by others (taxpayers) at their expense.
Finally, health care reform IS the cure to the current mess. I do agree with that. Whether you agree or not, the economic facts are what they are. The nation has trillions in unfunded liabilities if it doesn't alter the terms and benefits of these big entitlement programs.
A picture is worth a thousand words, but which thousand words?
I’m not sure what your point is. Is it that sick, disabled and elderly people are now whipped and stripped from being recognized as humans, much the way slaves were? That a certain low segment of society views them as a commodity to be harvested? That those cretins think it’s okay to kill people when they become inconvenient, all for the sake of money?
Since this is a prolife forum, I hope your point isn’t that you agree with that mindset.
Murdering the sick, disabled and elderly to harvest their assets has never been the American way.
That’s what it looks like to me. I was kind of hoping Kellis91789 would speak up.
“Thou shalt not kill.”
Don’t they know the Commandments?
Amen — No abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, contraception, same-sex marriage for the Catholic Church.
They have stood strong against these things and will continue to stand strong against all of them.
I find it interesting that you two would interpret those two images as representing the patients. You posted the Nazi image to me in response to my post ... but you apparently never read my original post.
Had you read my original post, it should have been obvious that the SLAVE in the picture with the whipping scars represents the TAXPAYER whom you propose to enslave to pay for the medical care of others. If you are not willing to enslave and use government force to wrest the money from the taxpayers, then you cannot pay for the medical care you seem to think will simply appear from thin air.
The second image shows your obvious belief that those with the ABILITY to work and pay taxes should be forced to give up the fruits of their labors to provide those patients in NEED of medical care. That is the essence of Marxism, which you obviously adhere to, correct ?
I find it strange that Marxists should bother to read FR, but we expect TROLLS like you to show up occasionally. Now that you’ve had your fun calling small government fiscal conservatives mean old Nazis, you can go back to the HuffPo or wherever you slithered from.
So, being PRO-LIFE and opposing death panels and euthanasia makes us trolls?
This post isn't about taxpayers paying for anything, it's about the death panels that want to kill Americans and are working to convince people that they can inherit more money if they go along with it. The left has ALWAYS employed this tactic.
You and all of the other liberaltarians may think that your utilitarian nonsense is somehow conservative, but you are simply playing the part of useful idiots for the culture of death.
FR is a pro-life site and we are 100% opposed to euthanasia or death panels. If you can’t live with that then get the hell out! You are the huffington troll in this case.
Anyone else smell ozone?
Thank you, Jim.
Thank you Jim.
This is the entirety of my post to which I received an obnoxious reply making me out to be a genocidal Nazi:
“Everyone should be allowed to decide for themselves whether they want to continue living.
The more relevant question of this article is whether anyone has the right to make virtual slaves of strangers to prolong their own life. Can you demand healthcare that you have no way of paying for, knowing that it will lower the quality of life for hundreds of other people ? Isnt that what is really happening when the government must tax hundreds of other people thousands of dollars each to pay for $500,000 of longterm nursing care for a comatose octogenarian ?”
NOWHERE in this post did I suggest euthanizing anyone. I posed a simple question as to the morality of people being FORCED to pay for the medical care of others. And for this I deserved to be called a Nazi who would euthanize people with “hereditary defects” ?
Bykr Bayb could have replied to me with a civil, reasoned argument ... but instead chose to post me an inflammatory picture essentially calling me a Nazi. It was outrageously insulting.
Anyone who has read my posts over the last 7 years knows I am very much pro-life. I consider abortion to be murder and always have. It was actually my tagline for years. I also think “euthanasia” is quite different from refusing to pay somebody else’s hospital bills. My first sentence was that people should live as long as they want. Maybe we disagree on that, but I don’t think that justifies calling me a Nazi.
You’ve been here long enough to know what a courtey ping is. You have no excuse for complaining about my post to anyone who did not post it, except for cowardice.
I posted that Nazi propaganda poster in reply to your post, because it said exactly the same thing you said. If you don’t like being associated with Nazis, don’t parrot their propaganda posters. If you’re too cowardly to own up to what you said and what it meant, that’s fine, but please don’t piddle on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
UK prematurely kills 130,000 elderly per year. THAT’S how they can afford to have jubilees, weddings, The Olympics and other big bashes. They murder so they can party and have parades.
BB, EXCEPT in Florida the sick, disabled and elderly have been murdered for quite some time. Many have died so that trustees can steal their assets. In Florida, killing is The American Way.
You are not pro-life. Free Republic is pro-life. The taxpayer should subsidize murder instead of care?????? One way or the other, somebody is going to get paid either to KILL or to care of someone. It appears you are for taxpayer sanctioned killers. If you think killing people is inexpensive, you are very misinformed.
If MURDER became law, it would become more expensive than health care. The bad guys would move right in and make it a for profit, public sector project to murder people and you’d be paying all expenses for the killers and the tools of their trade. You think health care was expensive? It would pale in comparison to DEATH PANELS AND SQUADS. You’d like China (like Obama and Michele do with all their hearts.)
What happened to obeying the Commansment, “Honor thy Father and thy Mother”?