this'll re-intensify the (so-called health-care) fight.
Posted on 12/25/2010 7:58:43 PM PST by jimbo123
When a proposal to encourage end-of-life planning touched off a political storm over “death panels,” Democrats dropped it from legislation to overhaul the health care system. But the Obama administration will achieve the same goal by regulation, starting Jan. 1.
Under the new policy, outlined in a Medicare regulation, the government will pay doctors who advise patients on options for end-of-life care, which may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment.
Congressional supporters of the new policy, though pleased, have kept quiet. They fear provoking another furor like the one in 2009 when Republicans seized on the idea of end-of-life counseling to argue that the Democrats’ bill would allow the government to cut off care for the critically ill.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Not me. The media's been saying in recent days that among Obama's holiday reading will be a biography of Reagan. Makes me want to puke. Obama and his ilk hold Reagan in nothing but the utmost contempt, and his entire agenda is about undoing Reagan. This is all part of a MSM/WH campaign to rebrand and retool Obama as the new centrist.
“Just what else do these idiots think “end of life planning” means?”
It reminds me of when they call abortion “choice.”
Sarah Palin was right all along.
Combine excellerated deaths with the huge tax on inheritences and you’ve got the Rats killing you off so they can get “their cut”, asap.
Someone tell me, that this is not part of the plan, I dare ya!
So when options for care are limited BY the Rats, then the lack good alternatives to death will make for a desperate disabled and aged population.
Evil has no bounds.
My thoughts exactly.
I fear however, that ne’er do wells will make some kind of push for incompetency.
Not my point, Do you think that a government panel should establish protocol? Ironically, Doe vs. Bolton, the companion to Roe v. Wade, forbade a panel of doctors in a hospital from deciding on abortions. So the law make the “woman’s right to choose,” an “absolute” right.The same folks, however, want to have an authority a millions miles way from the case to decide matters of life and death.
His doctors ( yes, plural) and I agree that he can live for years with what is ailing him but he may have only a few months or at most 14 months with the Alzheimers. It is not worth losing his sanity to have him undergo an involved surgery that will not do anything to truly extend his quality of life or length thereof.
Makes sense. There is a time to do nothing.
The mental deterioration from the anesthesia would be worse than the surgery involved.
I would make sure though that their pallative care is outstanding and also available, with what is coming down the pike.
Government panels should not be involved in determining health care. Government isn’t effective at making life or death determinations of any sort.
As for a panel of doctors making recommendations for care, that I could agree with as long as a family member or the patient makes the final determination.
I always felt the biggest mistake made by pro-life groups was to demonstrate outside hospitals. That drove abortionists out into clinics where killing unborn children is now a for-profit industry.
Thank you for your statement.
My sister worked as a nurses assistant/dialysis tech in a nursing home. Many of her patients had Alzheimers. She’s been a good source for information. The doctors caring for my dad are also very informative.
What you said is exactly what they’ve told me and what I’ve read on the subject. I feel certain that I’m on the right path.
No kidding. Anytime liberals get involved in anything, costs go up and availability goes down. And that is when they AREN’T trying to make something happen deliberately.
Thanks for the compliment...the chilling thing is...can’t you just see this as the end result? Once you start down a slippery slope, who is to say otherwise?
I can easily see cash given to people if their relatives take early out option. Liberals don’t have any problem turning children against parents, they think society should raise children, not parents. If you accept that, it is only a matter of time before every person is an island, isolated against the family grouping.
All it takes on the part of liberals is time and persistence.
My mind is bleary from alcohol, but have you noticed all the recent pushes to “desensitize” you to government intrusions? The TSA patdowns are only an example. I try to make the case that this is a one party effort, I do get the point across about 25% of the time.
“One party effort”
Before the Kerry election, I was surveyed by some guy about issues. It became apparent that he was a real Leftist type from a fringe organization. He asked me about my thoughts on there being one party. When I shot back at that idea with a polite version of WTF, he just laughed, at which point I held the phone in front of my face, off to the left, and looked at the phone speaker.
It is the tone and tenor of that laugh that I remember. It felt like he was onto something. I remember ending the conversation and looking at the phone before hanging it up.
Don’t see your logic here. Doctors do not perform abortions in hospitals for free. Their not being performed in hospitals places a stigma on the procedure. Doctors so dislike doing this procedure that Planned Parenthood is now trying with the help of its political allies to make it a mandatory part of medical training. A pro-life person could then no even become a doctor or a nurse without going against conscience. Do you really want the routine destruction of life to become part of the mission of a hospital?
When abortions were performed in hospitals it was always reviewed first by a board of physicians to ascertain whether it was necessary - to save the life of the mother. This was long time ago, prior to the 1970s. Abortions were few and far between.
It was due to the adverse public reactions to anti-abortion demonstrations at hospitals which caused them, by and large, to drop performing ALL abortions. This included even those necessary to save a woman’s life.
My nephew would not exist today if his mother hadn’t had her life saved by such an abortion five years before he was conceived.
You’re right, shame on me! Dreadful waste of bandwidth.
Oops!
The Supreme court ruled out physicians boards to decide on abortions. Roe v. Wade overrode a Texas law passed in 1856; Doe vs.Bolton overrode a NEW Georgia law setting up physicians. We have a VERY, very liberal abortion law. But the prolife movement has made doctors scared to perform abortions, not because they are afraid of getting shot but because the procedure is medically shameful. It is not good medical treatment to kill healthy fetuses.
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.