Posted on 07/24/2011 9:50:15 AM PDT by wagglebee
I told you so. I have said for almost as many years as I have engaged in anti assisted suicide advocacy that eventually killing (ending life) would come to be seen as a splendid way to save money in health care. I used to have HMOs in mind in making that argument. But now, it seems that single payer systems may be the greater danger.
Vermont has passed a single payer health plan–but hasn’t figured out how to pay for it, as I mentioned here previously. An editorial has come up with two “pragmatic” ways to cut costs. Yup, one is assisted suicide. The other is explicit health care rationing–which I have also written flows naturally from single payer systems in difficult economic times. From the Addison County (VT) Independent editorial:
Money must also be saved in services delivered to people with chronic diseases and those who frequently use emergency rooms, he said; two areas in which the community at large must help play an important role. Passing a law that allows physicians to help end a patient’s life under very controlled circumstances, known as “death with dignity,” is one such measure that could help (an effort was tried this pass session but postponed until next year). Another is approving some type of rationing measures, as Oregon has done, that help control health care costs.
Exactly. And you’ll end up with expensive care being denied in Oregon–but patients offered assisted suicide–as happened to cancer patients Barbara Wagner and Randy Stroup under Oregon’s oh, so “compassionate” law. And the editorial ludicrously talks about restricting heart transplants for 92-year olds–as if all those near-centurions are getting all the organs. What a joke.
Some are willing to dismantle Hippocratic medicine by tossing the sickest out of the lifeboat and legalizing doctor-prescribed death as a way of saving money and promoting “pragmatism.” I am not. VT opponents of assisted suicide, raise this editorial as a battle flag and defeat the threatened culture of death.
Why don't you just means test it, instead? Save a lot of ammo that way, and some of us old farts will shoot back.
Smells like roasted chicken.
And that black leopard loves roasted chicken.
*cleans up any and all remains plus tar drippings and feathers*
Unfortunately you are correct.
Germany...crushed by the debt of the Weimar Republic...started down the same path in the early ‘30’s.
The road to their gas chambers for the Jews was paved with the bones of the sick, weak and elderly from amongst themselves. Their Federal Government rewarded the physicians in this endeavor.
We face the moral, ethical challenges and consequences of the debt created by the Obamanation right here and now.
I have to agree with you on that. I've had some of my stances questioned, and it was no more than my political view.
What? That cute little troll-hungry kitteh? [blinks eyes innocently]
Right To Die = Duty To Die
And I'm an old fart too.
They both look pretty good, maybe a vote.
You really need two, for when one is at the cleaners.
LOL! ;-p
Well deserved, imho.
Tough call. They're both very good. I vote for both of them.
Don’t get me wrong: Jim’s house, Jim’s rules. It’s just that in case, I really have to question the call.
~Slings and Arrows
____________________________________________________________________
I don't know if you had seen the following post at the time of the above response:
____________________________________________________________
"To: The_Pickle; G Larry; Dr. Brian Kopp; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; ...
Whether or not you agree with the idea of physician assisted suicide I, for one, must admit that I feel much more comfortable with the idea that Oregon's law was passed through the voter initiative process, for the sole purpose of allowing individuals to make decisions regarding end of life treatment, rather than having the government "decide" that I need to be encouraged to end my life in order to lessen the burden on the taxpayer funded "health care" system.
~ The_Pickle
" So, if the majority of the population voted to impose death panels that were empowered to kill off large portions of the country you would be okay with it?
Once we accept that ANY of our rights can be voted away by the majority, we put ALL of our rights in jeopardy. "
27 posted on July 24, 2011 3:53:48 PM EDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
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.