60 Minutes "Cost of Dying" piece, 11/22/2009

Wondering if anyone else saw the 60 Minutes piece on the cost of Dying. If you missed it, the only thing missing was "My name is Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and I approve this message.

A brief synopsis was that they had 2 doctors on and a "taxpayer advocate" that said the answer to America's woes in healthcare costs were to go ahead and let terminally ill patients die, and give them less treatments and services. Rationing, it was explained, wasn't a dirty word, but in fact was the right path to not bankrupting ourselves. We must, as one of the "death doctors" put it, embrace the idea of what a moral, robust death looks like.

Particularly offensive to me was that they actually went into a man's death bed while this same "death doctor" tried to talk a patient into not having CPR preformed on him should his heart stop. When the man said he wanted all attempts to revive him to be made, should his heart stop, and we watched Dr. Death assure him his wishes would be followed, it immediately went to a cut scene where Dr. Death, in so many words, stated that the man had made the wrong choice. So I guess it was "we will honor your wishes, but reserve the right to skewer your wishes on national TV".

Then, after another cutaway while the narrator explained that Medicare was not allowed to deny coverage due to cost, and could even be required to require for a defibulator to be placed in the body of a 93 year old, it was back to Dr. Death. His comment was to lament that there wasn't some official policy by which he, as a doctor, could say "we dont do that proceedure for people your age".

I'm sure I missed parts that were important, but wanted to see who else was disgusted by this. I know the MSM are cheerleaders, but this was particularly vile; Taking advantage of a man on deaths door, to promote a policy that the man's very actions showed he wouldn't favor.

But no moral worry though..CBS informed us at the end of the piece that the man had died this week, and his family had agreed before his death that it was okay to ignore his request for revival.

So, then, I’m confused...you are, on the one hand, saying that the patient and family should have the talk and make the decision. On the other hand, your tired of putting in feeding tubes into dying patients who want you to. But if someone is asking you to continue treating them...isn’t that someone who has weighed the options and is choosing to continue to fight?

What it seems you really want is the right to, as the doctor, make that decision for the family and patient. The hell with the patient that wants everything done. If you, as the almighty doctor decide that its futile, then thats the opinion that counts.

So it really comes down to your definition of futile, doesn’t it, and who gets to make that call? I dont know you, so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you have good standards and would be somewhat careful with those standards...how long until someone else moves the yardstick? I’m sorry, but if I am sick, or a member of my family is, I dont trust the doctor to make that decision more than myself of my family.

You are concerned about the familial guilt and greed over granny’s social security check. Okay, what about the opposite, wanting to off granny before she uses up all your inheritance money. Is that any less grotesque? Yeah, I know grandma said she wanted everything done, but this care is costing so much, and gee I’d like to pay off my mortgage. If the scenario of keeping her alive for the social security can be true, and it may be in some cases, then surely the opposite could be true as well.

You ended by suggesting we have that talk before the sad days...but in the eyes of the CBS special and apparently you, we could have the talk all we wanted...but our opinion shouldn’t be the final say...so why have the talk at all?

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.