Replies

>>>Actually, as it appears to me, she is the death panel

How is she the death panel? She is leaving the decision up to the medical community and the standards that they set.

If she involves herself in the decision, then maybe that argument makes sense because she would be choosing one recipient over another.

Do we really want the Secretary to be making these decisions on a case by case basis with the ones with the most compelling back story being chosen the winner?

Keep in mind that the surgery for her with an adult lung is riskier than if it were going to an adult.

Lungs are a scarce resource and sometimes you have to play the percentages. It's harsh, but what would you say to the adult that would have been the recipient if the government steps in and makes the change?

>>>This is the type of control Obamacare has given the us government over its citizens, and that is total control.

But this is a policy set in place by the medical community back in 2005.

There is a comment under the story that says the doctors said go and the government said no.

Do you know if that is actually the case or not here?

But this is a policy set in place by the medical community back in 2005.

Thanks for putting a date on when the current policy was put in place. While relevant at the time, advancements in medicine over the past eight years, since this policy was established, make continued adherence to this policy unfair to those under 12 years of age, who now have a better chance at survival by modifying adult organs.

Here’s what bugs me about this:

“Please, suspend the rules until we look at this policy,” Rep. Lou Barletta, R-Pa., asked Sebelius during a House hearing Tuesday on behalf of Sarah Murnaghan, a 10-year-old girl who needs a lung transplant. She can’t qualify for an adult lung transplant until the age of 12, according to federal regulations, but Sebelius has the authority to waive that rule on her behalf. The pediatric lungs for which she qualifies aren’t available.

“I would suggest, sir, that, again, this is an incredibly agonizing situation where someone lives and someone dies,” Sebelius replied. “The medical evidence and the transplant doctors who are making the rule — and have had the rule in place since 2005 making a delineation between pediatric and adult lungs, because lungs are different than other organs — that it’s based on the survivability [chances].”

That quote is from the excerpt in Morgana’s recent post of this story near the top of FR:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3027413/posts

If it is federal regulation blocking this from going forward, and if indeed the parents are asking that the reg be set aside for all children, not just theirs, even though theirs would obviously likely benefit or not benefit soon considering her state, then Sebelius must decide what is more important, a chance at a child’s life or regulations.

This brings in a larger question, at least to me, does the government have any business at all in issuing medical regulations such as this or any business in medicine at all? To me the answer is no. It should be up to the child’s doctor. If there is an adult lung available, she should in the very least have a chance at getting it instead of being regged out, and especially so considering her time is almost out.

THANK YOU! I have a terminal lung disease. Not every one that needs a tx is going to get one for one reason or another. The protocol is tough and designed to make the procedure as safe and successful as possible. There are more failures than we would like. A transplant is NOT a fix all end all.