Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: blueyon

This is a bad result. I don’t mean to sound cruel or heartless but this girl got a lung because her parents generated a lot of publicity and a political decision was made based on a sympathy factor. Now we have Obamacare, where politicians will be more involved in these decisions. The idea that someone gets life-saving treatment at the expense of someone else, who may die as a result, because that person is cute or sympathetic or in the right politically correct group is chilling.


40 posted on 06/05/2013 3:00:35 PM PDT by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Opinionated Blowhard

>> someone gets life-saving treatment at the expense of someone else

Didn’t know FR was blessed with so many soothsayers.


42 posted on 06/05/2013 3:03:00 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: Opinionated Blowhard

I posted similar in another thread.

Who created ‘the list’? Government or medical personnel?

==

It is difficult to argue that government needs to intercede if the list is via medical personnel.

That puts us right into the middle of the Obamacare argument — that government [in this case, a federal judge] knows betters than the medical profession does.

What is the reason for the minimum age requirement? Could it be that those younger than the ‘minimum age’ has little success with such transplants? And what of the person who would have received this particular organ under regular circumstances?

==

I have empathy for the little girl and her family. I am just not comfortable with a judge or the HHS officials making medical decisions.


70 posted on 06/05/2013 3:27:41 PM PDT by TomGuy (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: Opinionated Blowhard
The idea that someone gets life-saving treatment at the expense of someone else, who may die as a result, because that person is cute or sympathetic or in the right politically correct group is chilling.

Yes, it is, and it was already going to happen anyway with Obamacare. We've known that all along. This case does not change that fact.

81 posted on 06/05/2013 3:37:38 PM PDT by Bronzewound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: Opinionated Blowhard

Look at the silver lining in the cloud. Maybe just maybe more people will see the need to be a donor. Small children do not drive so no one knows if they would be listed as a donor. Maybe this is what should change.


135 posted on 06/05/2013 4:39:03 PM PDT by Coldwater Creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: Opinionated Blowhard

Her parents were not advocating for her to ‘get a lung’. They were advocating for her to be placed on the waiting list with adults that also needed lungs. Every adult that was added to the list was bumping this girl to last place on the list even if they aren’t as critical as she is. The rules do not allow for a child below 12 to take an adult lung if there are adults waiting for lungs. While she has been waiting for lungs, adults that were behind her in line have already received lungs. I wish people would stop spreading false information about this case. The rules need to change. If there are adult lungs that will ‘fit’ a child below 12 years old, they should be offered the lungs if they have been waiting the longest or are the most critical.


279 posted on 06/07/2013 6:43:31 AM PDT by christianhomeschoolmommaof3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: Opinionated Blowhard
The idea that someone gets life-saving treatment at the expense of someone else, who may die as a result, because that person is cute or sympathetic or in the right politically correct group is chilling.

You are incorrect. She's not going to the "top of the list" but rather just getting on the list. She was denied a spot on the "list" before because she was only 10 years old and the "list" is for those 12 and older regardless of their need. That was a government imposed list and her doctors fought for her and other children to be added to the "list". I believe the medical decisions should be decided by the doctors not by government "rules".

290 posted on 06/07/2013 12:04:20 PM PDT by 2nd amendment mama ( www.2asisters.org | Self defense is a basic human right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson