Posted on 10/23/2009 8:08:48 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
The memory still bothers Ken Keller: A panicked ambulance crew had a critically ill patient, but the man weighed more than 1,000 pounds and could not fit inside the vehicle. And the stretcher wasn't sturdy enough to hold him.
The crew offered an idea to Keller, who was then an investigator with the Kansas Board of Emergency Medical Services. Could they use a forklift to load the man - bed and all - onto a flatbed truck? Keller agreed: There was no other choice.
"I'm sure it was terribly embarrassing to be in his own bed, riding on the back of a flatbed with straps tying him down, going to the hospital, and then have a forklift at the hospital unload him," Keller said.
As the nation battles the obesity crisis, ambulance crews are trying to improve how they transport extremely heavy patients, who become significantly more difficult to move as they surpass 350 pounds. And caring for such patients is expensive, requiring costly equipment and extra workers, so some ambulance companies have started charging higher fees for especially overweight people.
Please!....He got past any kind of embarrassement when he passed 500 lbs.....
That is a mental disorder.
I’m sure he was embarrassed. Hiding in your house is much different than being displayed like a Macy’s float. Come on.
However, I see nothing wrong with charging more for morbidly obese patients to be served by ambulance companies. It may take special equipment and more people to lift them.
And I’m no skinny minnie myself.
Think about all the extra precautions and equipment ambulances must carry on board to protect attendants from hiv. Homo’s need to pony up too.
Those who are morbidly obese have more than an eating problem. It’s very sad that this man was so isolated. That may be a part of the problem, but not being an expert, I don’t know.
Obviously, under government run health care, this could never have happened. The poor obese patient would have been dead a long time ago. I’m sure he has been receiving in-home-healthcare for some time, and it is extremely unlikely that he had health insurance.
An end-of-life-panel would have adjudicated him out of existence as hopleless and too expensive. They’ll call it “Aggregate Triage”: a will consist of a list of who doesn’t get to call an ambulance when one is needed. “
Oops, sorry, you’re name is on the “Don’t Send List” (DST)”
And upon arrive at the scene, the EMT will have a computer that will assist in the “Field Triage” of the px relative to quality of life remaining verses potential cost of services and odds of recovery.
“Oops, sorry. Looks like even if you would have a 75% recovery, you just don’t have a long enough life expectancy to warrant the expense of saving you. Tata.”
Welcome to an Orwellian world of dehumanized Obamnobots.
Once the person is so fat that they cannot feed,clothe,bathe, and move about ,then those who do those tasks for them are enablers.
I have had the misfortune to deal with a few 350plus people who claimed to want to work;they wanted nothing more than to sit and be paid for it.
If someone is too fat,then reduction of caloric intake is indicated.NOT stapling their stomach or hiring people to carry more food to the addict.NO sympathy here for the 99% of huge fatties who just keep stuffing.(I had to deal with a chronically ill father who began claiming"all I get out of life is what I eat",and he packed on an extra hundred pounds hiding in his bedroom.)The morbidly obese will try to make you feel sorry for their self-inflicted problems.
Orwelian or not,whoever provided health care for this man failed in their duty to him as a patient.We don’t encourage people to jump off cliffs without a parachute,why is it expected to support someone who fattens himself past ridiculous ?
>>The morbidly obese will try to make you feel sorry for their self-inflicted problems. <<
I do feel sorry for them.
Enabled or not, they are in a horrible situation. Whether it is their fault or not.
If someone has a heart attack from eating too many fatty foods, I don’t look at them and say “Oh well, it’s your own fault” I hold some human compassion and pray that the person will work to make him/herself well.
The reality is people who do stupid things suffer for them.
We teach a child fire burns;but if he continues to stick his hand in fire,we keep him away from it.If someone will not control their gluttony for food ,or anything else,then neventually either nature or other people WILL control that behavior.
I was an EMT back in the 70’s. Pre-AIDS. I remember being
stained with blood and mopping out the back of the rig, then
heading over to the cafe for a quick meal.
Once we went into South Central to pick up a patient. The lady weighed as much as a heifer. The term stuck - the dispatcher even used it.
This poor fellow serves mainly as an example of a situation where healthcare professionals will be able to make a decision that is presently not available to them, that being the decision to withhold care from a person who can be saved. Presently, that is done only in the context of “do not resuscitate” directives made by the sick elderly and the terminally ill.
Under Obamacare, it will be utilized in a much more liberal fashion and without the px’s prior approval.
This particular person’s obesity became fatal when he surpassed 350 pounds, unless vigorous medical intervention had occurred. It didn’t. But that is no excuse for not doing everything possible to save his life in the short term!
It’s not my job nor yours to control another’s behavior.
They make choices.
Once they are there, compassionate instruction does tons more than belittling.
*****************
That must have been very frustrating.
At what point is it ok to write someone off? When they hit 500, 750 1,000 pounds? A whole industry needs to be changed to accomadate a timy percentage of super-obese people?
I think it’s perfectly acceptable for a hospital or ambulance company to say sorry we can’t help you, you’re just too heavy.
Nobody wants to take responsibility. What about a guy that gets brain damaged from not wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle? You can have sympathy yes, but at what point does society finally have to stop paying for people’s stupid choices?
And if another's behavior becomes a grave threat to his own health and well-being,as well as a burden on others,then it becomes,indeed,it has long been common and accepted to curb the destructive behavior.We do not stand idly by if a friend starts playing "Russian roulette",we would try to take away the gun without anyone getting hurt;likewise there is a time someone else may need to say"no more food,you've had enough".IF the person can get the food on their own,then we acknowledge their freedom,but if I have to so much as bring it to their house,much less stock their refrigerator and pantry;then they are going to get just the amount daily needed for maintaining a more normal weight.By the morbidly obese person own choice to make themself so big that they become dependent on my assistance,I have the freedom,nay,responsibility to see they eat more rationally.Nor should any care agency,public or private,be compelled to maintain the patient' lifestyle when that lifestyle is the source of their problem.We would not rationally carry crack cocaine to an addict,then neither should we carry harmful quantities of food to the morbidly obese.
Again,as long as the person can fend for himself,then his weight,cigarette use, alcohol consumption are not my concern;but once he expects me to "do" for him(or her)then I will not assist his destructive habits.
I should be shocked,no, amazed, if any of these 500 to 1000 pound patients have any kind of job,or can move about unaided,even to the kitchen and bathroom.
Further,why should taxpayers be forced to pay for say, replacement knee and hip joints or heart transplants to such people?Or for liver transplants to confirmed alcoholics?Or lung transplants to heavy cigarette smokers?There is not an endless supply of anything,people have always had to make choices regarding the best use of finite resources.
Well, you are probably correct. However, someone has to be getting food for this guy, so how isolated can he be? He can’t feed himself at that weight.
Yes, someone is enabling this poor man. But even so, if he sees one person a day while spending 100% of his time in his home, he’s still pretty isolated.
In case you are interested.
>>Showing compassion and enabling their behavior are not the same.<<
Um, where did I say they are?
Granted, but this guy cannot work at that weight. Someone has to be supporting him. It’s just wrong, whatever the situation. It’s his fault and the fault of whomever is enabling this behavoir.
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.