Will Old Folks Get in the Way of our Brave New World?

American Thinker ^ | February 13, 2009 | Pamela Meister

[neverdem]

Washington bureaucrats hoped something wouldn't see the light of day until it was too late. Buried in the stimulus bill is the framework for rationing medical care to the elderly. The part Obama and his cohorts are talking about publicly -- electronic medical records -- sounds great: no more having to fill out annoying paperwork at the doctor's office or hospital when you are ailing.

But according to the provision's author, former Health and Human Services director nominee (and tax cheat) Tom Daschle, there's much more, including the newly-created bureaucracy of the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology. What will the NCHIT be doing? Making sure your doctor gives you the treatment it deems to be efficient and cost-effective. And if your doctor doesn't comply? Well, that part is still a bit fuzzy.

What is clear is that the elderly will be the ones to bear the brunt of this brave new world. Older citizens shouldn't bother treating those ailments that come with age. After all, being retired and collecting Social Security and Medicare, they're not as productive as younger members of society. And Social Security and Medicare, despite Democrats' protestations to the contrary when George Bush tried to do something about it, are on thin ice as it is. So if the proposed Federal Council does not think a treatment is cost-effective due to the patient's age, then the patient will have to do without for the good of the collective. You will assimilate.

This already happens in the UK. But according to one medical ethics expert there, that's not enough. Those who suffer from dementia, for example, are not only wasting their own lives and the lives of their families, but they are wasting precious resources from the National Health Service, and so they should just get on with dying. Sooner rather than later, thank you very much.

Joe Biden told us it's our patriotic duty to pay higher taxes. Will dying off so we don't use up precious resources be our next patriotic duty? Perhaps we can consider a set "expiration date," like in the movie Logan's Run: when the crystal on your hand turns black, it's off to Carousel.

I'm going to take a page from the liberal playbook and use a personal example to put a face on the problem. A few years ago, there was a devastating fire at my mother's home. My mother was unable to get down the stairs and was forced to jump out the second story window, breaking both legs and shattering her feet. On the first day after her accident, we were told that the worst case scenario was that she might have to have both legs amputated. However, her orthopedist managed to put her legs and feet back together. She spent many months recuperating and now, while she will never be back to "normal" and still endures daily pain, she can once again walk without assistance and go about her daily routine. As a popular "English as a second language" teacher at a middle school in a nearby town, she continues to be a productive, contributing member of society.

But what if Tom Daschle's plan had been in place three years ago? Already in her sixties, would my mother have been told that the first possibility -- amputation of both legs -- was the only option open to her because of her age? Would she be sitting at home in a wheelchair today dealing with the onset of severe depression because her age dictated that even trying to repair her broken legs and feet was not a possibility and she could no longer do anything for herself? Would she, as UK medical ethics expert Baroness Warnock suggests, be better off "offing" herself so that she wouldn't waste everyone's time and taxpayer resources?

Nancy Pelosi's contraception measures were removed from the stimulus bill because she let it slip that "too many people" around is not cost-effective. Will the Daschle healthcare provision be struck out too, before it's too late?

Considering that supporters of the bill like Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) didn't seem to even know the provision exists, I wouldn't count on it.

Pam Meister is the editor for FamilySecurityMatters.org and a contributor to Pajamas Media. The opinions expressed here are her own.

[neverdem]

AARP's reaction should be interesting.

[napscoordinator]

If you are going to ration medical care, then I want it to start with folks with no insurance first. The women with 14 children should be about at the limit by now. /sarc.

[John Valentine]

AARP is bought and sold.

[mimaw]

A movie from the 60’s or 70’s Solvent Green I think was the name of it is becoming a reality.

[Rastapopoulos]

AARP's reaction should be interesting.

AARP will not react in any way that will furrow the brow of any Democrat. Just as the stimulus bill isn't about economic stimulus, neither is the AARP about the interests of retired people.

[LiteKeeper]

INTREP

[Purrcival]

I have AARP’s reaction for you, right here. I wrote to them, asking how they planned to spin it. This is what I got back:

Dear Ms. [name deleted]:

Thank you for contacting AARP to voice concern about comments from the news media criticizing the comparative effectiveness research provision in the economic recovery package being debated in Congress.

Opponents of health care reform have begun using scare tactics and misleading the public to keep us from fixing our broken health care system. It is my pleasure to clarify what the provision entails.

The economic recovery package being considered by Congress contains a provision which will provide $1.1 billion for comparative effectiveness research. Comparative effectiveness research is a wonky term that means the ability to compare different kinds of treatments to find out which one works best for which patient. It is
patently false to say this provision will lead to the rationing of care.

Both houses of Congress included funding for this important research in their economic recovery plans because lawmakers understand the need to improve the quality and performance of our health system. AARP would strongly oppose any attempts to limit doctors and hospitals from providing the best possible care to their patients-the provisions in these bills don’t make any such attempt. In fact, this
research would do the opposite-giving doctors the best information available to make health care decisions with their patients.

This research is designed to also empower patients-giving them more and better information so they can make better decisions with their doctors. This is a common sense idea that is, unfortunately, not happening now. Some estimates say that only about half of all therapies that patients receive have been backed up by head-to-head comparisons with alternatives. While our country spends more than $2
trillion a year on health care, we spend less than 0.1 percent on evaluating how that care works compared to other options.

I hope this information sheds light on this issue, which has been misrepresented by some in the media. Again, thank you for providing us the opportunity to share with you the facts regarding this provision. If there is anything we can discuss with you in the future, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

Jaimie
Member Communications
Member@aarp.org

Toll-free 1-888-OUR-AARP (1-888-687-2277)
Toll-free 1-877-434-7598 TTY

Worried you might lose your job and/or your health care?
Considering going back to work because you’ve lost so much
of your retirement income? At risk of losing your home?
In this time of economic crisis, AARP wants to help you find real
relief. Go to http://www.aarp.org/money/personal/real_relief_aarp/

Click here to keep in touch by email about AARP activities, events
and
member benefits: http://www.aarp.org/emailupdate

For AARP’s Privacy Policy:
http://www.aarp.org/aarp/articles/privacypolicy.html

©1995-2009. AARP. All Rights Reserved.
AARP, 601 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20049

[Global2010]

This BS started happening years ago.

You know how many (been a good share of supportive good guys too) in the Medical Pro. see King Vanities life as a burden.

Funny the King and I and those who support his will and choice to live dont see it that way.

I am proud that I have been able to physically care for him and he has lived an eventful life which has been a witness to others who may now see life for all as Gods will and choice to give/take not Mans.

[Enterprise]

As I recall, AARP threatened to retaliate against Republicans who voted AGAINST the stimulus! Go figure!

[neverdem]

I meant the reaction of the membership of AARP when it comes time to vote after they realize they have been suckered, not its leadership’s reaction. I should have been more specific.

[Enterprise]

They should have labeled the health care portion the “Snuff Your Granny” amendments.

[Global2010]

Great movie.

Soylent green the new health food.

Shut down the peanut/bean and rice production and feed the world the economic healthy go Green food.

This would be a great movie to see as an updated remake.

[Enterprise]

Just guessing, but people who were too stupid to believe that the Republicans would take away their Social Security all these years are stupid enough to believe AARP.

[TAdams8591]

"Will dying off so we don't use up precious resources be our next patriotic duty?"

Yes. and what's more, under this bill, Specter wouldn't have been covered...then again, he has more than enough money to pay for his own treatment. Therefore, these provisions discriminate against the middle class and the poor. thanks a lot, Arlen.

We've got to get Obama and his D majority OUT in four years. When we do it, the R's had better get in there and make it the number one priority to undo as much of these laws as they can.

[JimC214]

I should wipe my butt with all the mailings I get from AARP. Maybe if after I did that, I sent them back. They might finally stop sending this crap.

[television is just wrong]

I think it was Soylent Green with Charlton Heston.

[celtic gal]

YEP like I said a few threads ago on the general topic..at oh say whatever age you would start to collect SS then to contribute to the reduction of health issues as well..at that special age it is off to the La Brea Tar Pits..it’s the place in CA where you can find lots of fossils of ancient animal life from eons gone by..
WE should call this the La Brea Tar Pits Act of 2009

[celtic gal]

I wish we could call a special election sort of like they do in the UK when the folks there get ticked at the prime minister..recall him..
I’ll settle for Impeachment proceedings..ya think we can start it up now?

[dalereed]

“The women with 14 children should be about at the limit by now. /sarc.”

They should take that broads kids, sterilize her, and lock her up in a mental hospital for life!

[Seven plus One]

Isn’t the leadership of AARP a bunch of democrat punks in their thirties?