Posted on 05/19/2005 11:13:51 AM PDT by JZelle
LONDON, May 19 (UPI) -- A terminally ill British man's request to be kept alive indefinitely has sparked legal debate over the economic impact on the National Healthcare System.
Leslie Burke, 45, suffers from a degenerative brain condition and won a landmark case last year granting him the right to stop doctors from withholding food and water until he dies from his ailment.
The General Medical Council has appealed the ruling to the High Court, saying it created confusion between the roles of doctor and patient. Decisions on treatment should be made by doctors, not patients, it contended.
The council's lawyers argued further Wednesday costs could become unmanageable if every patient made the same request, The Times of London said Thursday.
Intensive care beds cost $2,750 a day to operate while high-dependency beds for patients who require close monitoring cost as much as $1,500 a day.
Testimony in the appeal continued Thursday.
UPI Perspectives Scientists clone cells from human patients Case will test REAL ID asylum law Sinn Fein: DUP must deal or be excluded Analysis: Seoul fails to win nuke pledge Space Watch: A shrinking, timid industry Momentum building for nuclear power Analysis: What's wrong with the French? Overture to ETA fraught with uncertainty Clinton offers hope to Petra conference Review of the Arab press Outside view: Iran's nuclear dead parrot China accuses U.S. and EU of trade protection Nuclear-war threat still very real UPI Intelligence Watch Resignations, reform in U.N. management Analysis: Rumsfeld pursues space vision Walker's World: Poles rally neighbors Senators debate immigration reform Fox comment ruffles feathers on race U.K. lawyer claims Iraq abuse negligence
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Hey, the government took on the burden of supplying healthcare to citizens; this is one of those burdens.
Knew this was coming, I did. Warned people.
Well, it WOULD be scary, if that were indeed the quotation.
That you had to alter it to make it scary kind of undercuts your point.
Just give the guy a bed ... and tilt his feet up about 75 degrees when he falls into the coma. Eventually a blood vessel will pop in the brain and he will go peacefully.
ping
If it's a choice between saving money, and terminating a "unproductive/useless" life, then they will gripe about the cost and do anything to avoid paying it. (especially since they have "important" stem cell research to conduct!)
It's not an assumption. It's the very basis for the article.
excerpt:
The General Medical Council has appealed the ruling to the High Court, saying it created confusion between the roles of doctor and patient. Decisions on treatment should be made by doctors, not patients, it contended.
The council's lawyers argued further Wednesday costs could become unmanageable if every patient made the same request, The Times of London said Thursday.
~snip~
Its not too hard to see where this is heading, is it?
Talk about a perfect example of the proverbial slippery slope...
Reading (and comprehending) articles is a rare skill on FR these days, I'm afraid.
It's worth discussing who pays for this expensive care. Evidently not the patient.
Actually he made the point rather well - with socialized medicine, the patient is not an important part of the equation - if the government and government-owned doctors decide you cost too much to treat, you are toast. Can you imagine being sick and have a doctor tell you it would cost too much to keep you alive for the next few years, so he was cutting off food and water to ensure you weren't a burden? That's pretty much what the story suggested - the guy wants to be fed and hydrated until the disease kills him and the system says he shouldn't get to make that call. How scary do you want it?
Comprehension is a rare skill anywhere, I'm finding... LOL
If he pays taxes then doesn't he pay for the care?
"It's worth discussing who pays for this expensive care. Evidently not the patient."
As I recall from the Terry Schiavo information, providing water and food by means of a gastric tube is not expensive care. She was in a very low cost facility, more like $75/day than $1500. I think the real issue isn't cost. It's doctors' and goverment's authority being challenged.
Ah, yes, the inevitable conclusion to universal health care.
Ping to tutstar.
Money is always a consideration. Whether it's the government or an HMO, eventually somebody has to make the decision that enough's enough. Health care gets rationed no matter who controls the decisionmaking process. That will only be more true in the future.
Government bureaucracies don't have the patients's best interest at heart. I would submit that you can say the same thing about HMO bean counters.
I'm not a fan of socialized medicine. I'm just saying that for-profit medicine presents its own set of problems.
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.