[wagglebee]

No longer can a patient assume that his physician has his best medical interests at heart. Now physicians are being urged to consider the cost to society of a patient's care and judge whether a patient is worthy of such expense. Instead of seeking to provide comfort and authentic compassion at the end of life, there is increased support for hastening death as an expedient solution to suffering.

And it will only get worse when the death panels exert even more power.

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

[nascarnation]

Look at the bright side.

If the Death Panels can slice 10 yrs off the life expectancy, Social Security and Medicare become financially viable.

[wagglebee]

Ping

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Given the politicization of science it’s hard to trust the medical profession.

[clee1]

Trust NO ONE but the Lord, yourself, and MAYBE your spouse!

Doctors, Lawyers, your children, and (maybe) your spouse will ALL $hit on you if it is their interest to do so.

As a nurse, I see MDs act against their patient’s interest on at least a weekly basis, for a variety of reasons.

[exDemMom]

No longer can a patient assume that his physician has his best medical interests at heart.

I've often thought that gynecologists should be required to inform all of their patients whether or not they commit abortion. The reason is that if I have a gynecological problem, I simply cannot trust a murderer to have my best interest in mind. All patients have a right to know up front if their physician engages in practices that hasten or cause death, and be given the opportunity to select another physician.

Now physicians are being urged to consider the cost to society of a patient's care and judge whether a patient is worthy of such expense.

That's the whole problem with government paid health care. When "society" is paying the costs, then "society" has the right to decide that some patients aren't worth the cost. Even in the 1970s, I saw articles in NEJM calling for rationing. There would be no such calls if patients had more responsibility for paying for their own health expenses--if health insurance only covered catastrophic events, like other insurance. When a patient decides that a certain level of care is not worth the expense, it is not rationing, and the patient retains autonomy.

[Secret Agent Man]

For a long time now, unless you need emergency care, hospitals are the last place you want to be when you’re sick.

[outofstyle]

This is an ancient struggle. Hippocrates believed that the physician's duty was to the patient first. Plato believed the physician's duty was first to “the state.” It's no surprise that the Nazi regime promoted the Platonic philosophy.