Posted on 08/30/2010 4:19:51 PM PDT by wagglebee
Good points.
I didn’t know they were forced to serve as guardians. Could you provide a link to back that up.
>>I think people deserve to keep the fruits of their labors without a bunch of Nanny State busybodies demanding their money for whatever pet cause it is they think is ‘moral’.<<
So if a disabled human cannot produce fruit, should he be euthanized?
WOW!
What is left unsaid about caring for the mentally incompetent or disabled is how damnably bankrupting and life-draining it is for the guardian(s), as the necessity for acute care drags on for decade after decade.
The majority of families cannot afford that kind of care and cannot stop working to support themselves or other members of the family to concentrate on just one non-productive member.
Criticizing people who are in this position, accusing them of selfishness for NOT sacrificing their lives to the care of a disabled family member is grossly unfair.
I do want to add that this young man doesn’t appear to be dying from a terminal disease and wanting to withhold treatment for pneumonia was very cruel.
“Is the state going to start paying the medical bills? or are they going to force the guardians to continue to pay under threat of arrest? “
I am certain the state is already paying his bills. Guardians aren’t responsible for bills. They are supposed to act on behalf of helpless people.
The Doctors hands were bound to
rules of best medical practice as
the patient could not speak for himself, and
there is no Adult Competent Spouse, Child, Parent, Sibling, (In that order)
or Court appointed Power of Attorney to speak for him
The Custodians were requesting
pre-established restraint of care,
when they were not any one of those categories
As best I can tell
Also, I didn’t see any indication that his guardians are forced to pay for his care out of their own funds. I’d like a link for that too.
Can you quote where I said that they were? Thanks in advance. Have a super day.
That's not the point. Do YOU think those who cannot afford to pay their medical bills should be left to die? YES or NO.
When did the 'conservative' position become forcing one person with the threat of fines, prison, and ultimately death if they don't want to provide money of their own free will?
So, YOU think the conservative position should be to let people die for lack of medical care?
I think people deserve to keep the fruits of their labors without a bunch of Nanny State busybodies demanding their money for whatever pet cause it is they think is 'moral'.
So, you consider life a "pet cause"?
Which means that I'm forced to pay for it by the Government. Thanks, sweetie. Real 'moral' of you.
Your entire argument is predicated on the assumption that they were forced to serve as guardians against their will, and forced to pay for his care out of their own pockets.
Those who try to save money by advocating for ending care of certain classes of people under certain situations, are going to force society to pay a bigger price than the cost of that the medical intervention would have cost in dollars.
We have to take care of people like this, because the consequences of not doing so are ones we literally can’t afford to live with.
I don’t support most state paid health care. But we have it.
And we have no alternative safety nets, because they have largely been dismantled due to the extreme welfare hammock.
So we are in that awkward in between place.
I don’t support Medicare. But having had all these folks including myself pay into it since employed, it makes me angry when honest Medicare claims are denied, as in the case with an elderly relative of mine. He “paid” for it.
You and I “pay” for the health care of handicapped people, especially the many abandoned by their families (whether deliberately or because they have passed away or whatever).
Since I “pay” for that care, I want it paid out.
I’d like to work back to a system of personal responsibility, then family responsibility, then church or charity responsibility.
But when you have people who just can’t care for themselves (like a 5 year old) and the parents can’t or won’t care for them, and there is no extended family to care for them, what do you do? Force a church or the Red Cross? Sue the Salvation Army? Let the kid die by the side of the road?
Either the very dependent are going to be left literally to die, or the government is going to have to make some provision for the worst case scenarios. These would be minors, severely physically handicapped, seriously crazy, severely retarded, and the very frail elderly.
I am all for suing and jailing deliberately negligent parents, also.
In other words...
Sad. And they’re called guardians. I’ll call them bastards.
>>Which means that I’m forced to pay for it by the Government. <<
So if a disabled person doesn’t have the money for his pneumonia treatment, should he be left to die? Would you be willing to pay for something to relieve his pain? Too costly? Or should we just drop him off at the Humane Society?
New show on Animal Planet. “Disabled Human Cops” They humanely euthanize, you know.
"Non-productive"? Is that the newspeak for "worthless eater"?
Criticizing people who are in this position, accusing them of selfishness for NOT sacrificing their lives to the care of a disabled family member is grossly unfair.
Killing the disabled is the pinnacle of selfishness.
I do want to add that this young man doesn’t appear to be dying from a terminal disease and wanting to withhold treatment for pneumonia was very cruel.
So, you condone the killing of the disabled with some conditions but not others? What criteria do you use to determine who lives and who dies? What is your method of rationing?
It should also be noted that Medicaid, which is the last ditch of government funding, does seek to recoup from estates where possible.
The Sixth Commandment states, "Thou Shalt Not Kill".
It does not say, "Thou Shalt Steal other people's money in order to extend life."
After all, that would be a violation of the Eighth Commandment: "Thou Shalt Not Steal".
We must be careful not to embrace theories that deem taxation to be ipso facto a crime.
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.