Health care the way it should be

Issues of a more global nature: National Politics, etc.
Forum rules
Please Click Here To View Rules ---- To contact the administrator please email admin@southshoreforums.com
User avatar
Kurt Schluter
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4770
Joined: Apr Fri 07, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by Kurt Schluter » Aug Fri 14, 2009 12:12 pm

False 'Death Panel' Rumor Has Some Familiar Roots

By JIM RUTENBERG and JACKIE CALMES
WASHINGTON - The stubborn yet false rumor that President Obama's health care proposals would create government-sponsored “death panels' to decide which patients were worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere in recent weeks.

Advanced even this week by Republican stalwarts including the party's last vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, and Charles E. Grassley, the veteran Iowa senator, the nature of the assertion nonetheless seemed reminiscent of the modern-day viral Internet campaigns that dogged Mr. Obama last year, falsely calling him a Muslim and questioning his nationality.

But the rumor - which has come up at Congressional town-hall-style meetings this week in spite of an avalanche of reports laying out why it was false - was not born of anonymous e-mailers, partisan bloggers or stealthy cyberconspiracy theorists.

Rather, it has a far more mainstream provenance, openly emanating months ago from many of the same pundits and conservative media outlets that were central in defeating President Bill Clinton's health care proposals 16 years ago, including the editorial board of The Washington Times, the American Spectator magazine and Betsy McCaughey, whose 1994 health care critique made her a star of the conservative movement (and ultimately, New York's lieutenant governor).

There is nothing in any of the legislative proposals that would call for the creation of death panels or any other governmental body that would cut off care for the critically ill as a cost-cutting measure. But over the course of the past few months, early, stated fears from anti-abortion conservatives that Mr. Obama would pursue a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia agenda, combined with twisted accounts of actual legislative proposals that would provide financing for optional consultations with doctors about hospice care and other “end of life' services, fed the rumor to the point where it overcame the debate.

On Thursday, Mr. Grassley said in a statement that he and others in the small group of senators that was trying to negotiate a health care plan had dropped any “end of life' proposals from consideration.

A pending House bill has language authorizing Medicare to finance beneficiaries' consultations with professionals on whether to authorize aggressive and potentially life-saving interventions later in life. Though the consultations would be voluntary, and a similar provision passed in Congress last year without such a furor, Mr. Grassley said it was being dropped in the Senate “because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly.'

The extent to which it and other provisions have been misinterpreted in recent days, notably by angry speakers at recent town hall meetings but also by Ms. Palin - who popularized the “death panel' phrase - has surprised longtime advocates of changes to the health care system.

“I guess what surprised me is the ferocity, it's much stronger than I expected,' said John Rother, the executive vice president of AARP, which is supportive of the health care proposals and has repeatedly declared the “death panel' rumors false. 's people who are ideologically opposed to Mr. Obama, and this is the opportunity to weaken the president.'

The specter of government-sponsored, forced euthanasia was raised as early as Nov. 23, just weeks after the election and long before any legislation had been drafted, by an outlet decidedly opposed to Mr. Obama, The Washington Times.

In an editorial, the newspaper reminded its readers of the Aktion T4 program of Nazi Germany in which “children and adults with disabilities, and anyone anywhere in the Third Reich was subject to execution who was blind, deaf, senile, retarded, or had any significant neurological condition.'

Noting the “administrative predilections' of the new team at the White House, it urged “anyone who sees the current climate as a budding T4 program to win the hearts and minds of deniers.'

The editorial captured broader concerns about Mr. Obama's abortion rights philosophy held among socially conservative Americans who did not vote for him. But it did not directly tie forced euthanasia to health care plans of Mr. Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress.

When the Democrats included money for family planning in a proposed version of the stimulus bill in January, the socially conservative George Neumayr wrote for the American Spectator: “Euthanasia is another shovel ready job for Pelosi to assign to the states. Reducing health care costs under Obama's plan, after all, counts as economic stimulus, too - controlling life, controlling death, controlling costs.'

Ms. McCaughey, whose 1994 critique of Mr. Clinton's plan was hotly disputed after its publication in The New Republic, weighed in around the same time.

She warned that a provision in the stimulus bill would create a bureaucracy to “monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost-effective,' was carried in a commentary she wrote for Bloomberg News that gained resonance throughout the conservative media, most notably with Rush Limbaugh and the Fox News Channel host Glenn Beck.

The legislation did not direct the coordinator to dictate doctors' treatments. A separate part of the law - regarding a council set up to coordinate research comparing the effectiveness of treatments - states that the council's recommendations cannot “be construed as mandates or clinical guidelines for payment, coverage or treatment.'

But Ms. McCaughey's article provided another opportunity for others to raise the specter of forced euthanasia. “Sometimes for the common good, you just have to say, 'Hey, Grandpa, you've had a good life,' ' Mr. Beck said.

The syndicated conservative columnist Cal Thomas wrote, “No one should be surprised at the coming embrace of euthanasia.' The Washington Times editorial page reprised its reference to the Nazis, quoting the Aktion T4 program: “It must be made clear to anyone suffering from an incurable disease that the useless dissipation of costly medications drawn from the public store cannot be justified.'

The notion was picked up by various conservative groups, but still, as Mr. Obama and Congress remained focused on other matters, it did not gain wide attention. Former Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, an advocate for the health care proposals, said he was occasionally confronted with the “forced euthanasia' accusation at forums on the plans, but came to see it as an advantage. “Almost automatically you have most of the audience on your side,' Mr. Daschle said. “Any rational normal person isn't going to believe that assertion.'

But as Congress developed its legislation this summer, critics seized on provisions requiring Medicare financing for “end of life' consultations, bringing the debate to a peak. To David Brock, a former conservative journalist who once impugned the Clintons but now runs a group that monitors and defends against attacks on liberals, the uproar is a reminder of what has changed - the creation of groups like his - and what has not.

“In the 90s, every misrepresentation under the sun was made about the Clinton plan and there was no real capacity to push back,' he said. “Now, there is that capacity.'

Still, one proponent of the euthanasia theory, Mr. Neumayr, said he saw no reason to stop making the claim.

“I think a government-run plan that is administered by politicians and bureaucrats who support euthanasia is inevitably going to reflect that view,' he said, “and I don't think that's a crazy leap.'

Robert Pear contributed reporting.
Make America Great Again!
Trump/Pence 2016

User avatar
Phil
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 9943
Joined: Jun Sun 11, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: phil.shannon
Location: Earth

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by Phil » Aug Fri 14, 2009 1:10 pm

The left wing can keep calling it a false rumor and saying there is no "death panel" in the legislature, but the facts prove otherwise. Of course they wouldn't call it a "death panel" LOL. But if you keep saying it doesn't exist, that won't make it go away. What I haven't seen explained is why Ezekial Emanuel is an advisor to the President. Care to take a try, Kurtz? LOLOLOLOL

Here comes Sarah with more facts with references:
Troubling Questions Remain About Obama's Health Care PlanShare
Today at 1:11am
I join millions of Americans in expressing appreciation for the Senate Finance Committee's decision to remove the provision in the pending health care bill that authorizes end-of-life consultations (Section 1233 of HR 3200). It's gratifying that the voice of the people is getting through to Congress; however, that provision was not the only disturbing detail in this legislation; it was just one of the more obvious ones.

As I noted in my statement last week, nationalized health care inevitably leads to rationing. There is simply no way to cover everyone and hold down the costs at the same time. The rationing system proposed by one of President Obama's key health care advisors is particularly disturbing. I'm speaking of the “Complete Lives System' advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the president's chief of staff. President Obama has not yet stated any opposition to the “Complete Lives System,' a system which, if enacted, would refuse to allocate medical resources to the elderly, the infirm, and the disabled who have less economic potential. [1] Why the silence from the president on this aspect of his nationalization of health care? Does he agree with the “Complete Lives System'? If not, then why is Dr. Emanuel his policy advisor? What is he advising the president on? I just learned that Dr. Emanuel is now distancing himself from his own work and claiming that his “thinking has evolved' on the question of rationing care to benefit the strong and deny the weak. [2] How convenient that he disavowed his own work only after the nature of his scholarship was revealed to the public at large.

The president is busy assuring us that we can keep our private insurance plans, but common sense (and basic economics) tells us otherwise. The public option in the Democratic health care plan will crowd out private insurers, and that's what it's intended to do. A single payer health care plan has been President Obama's agenda all along, though he is now claiming otherwise.
Don't take my word for it. Here's what he said back in 2003:

“I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan.... A single payer health care plan - universal health care plan - that's what I would like to see.' [3]

A single-payer health care plan might be what Obama would like to see, but is it what the rest of us would like to see? What does a single payer health care plan look like? We need look no further than other countries who have adopted such a plan. The picture isn't pretty. [4] The only way they can control costs is to ration care. As I noted in my earlier statement quoting Thomas Sowell, government run health care won't reduce the price of medical care; it will simply refuse to pay the price. The expensive innovative procedures that people from all over the world come to the United States for will not be available under a government plan that seeks to cover everyone by capping costs.

Our senior citizens are right to be wary of this health care bill. Medical care at the end of life accounts for 80 percent of all health care. When care is rationed, that is naturally where the cuts will be felt first. The “end-of-life' consultations authorized in Section 1233 of HR 3200 were an obvious and heavy handed attempt at pressuring people to reduce the financial burden on the system by minimizing their own care. Worst still, it actually provided a financial incentive to doctors to initiate these consultations. People are right to point out that such a provision doesn't sound “purely voluntary.'

In an article I noted yesterday, Charles Lane wrote:

“Ideally, the delicate decisions about how to manage life's end would be made in a setting that is neutral in both appearance and fact. Yes, it's good to have a doctor's perspective. But Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party -- the government -- recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations. You don't have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach.' [5]

I agree. Last year, I issued a proclamation for “Healthcare Decisions Day.' [6] The proclamation sought to increase the public's knowledge about creating living wills and establishing powers of attorney. There was no incentive to choose one option over another. There was certainly no financial incentive for physicians to push anything. In fact, the proclamation explicitly called on medical professionals and lawyers “to volunteer their time and efforts' to provide information to the public.

Comparing the “Healthcare Decisions Day' proclamation to Section 1233 of HR 3200 is ridiculous. The two are like apples and oranges. The attempt to link the two shows how desperate the proponents of nationalized health care are to shift the debate away from the disturbing details of their bill.

There is one aspect of this bill which I have not addressed yet, but it's a very obvious one. It's the simple fact that we can't afford it. But don't take my word for it. Take the word of Doug Elmendorf, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. He told the Senate Budget Committee last month:

“In the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.' [7]

Dr. Elmendorf went on to note that this health care legislation would increase spending at an unsustainable rate.

Our nation is already $11.5 trillion in debt. Where will the money come from? Taxes, of course. And will a burdensome new tax help our economy recover? Of course not. The best way to encourage more health care coverage is to foster a strong economy where people can afford to purchase their own coverage if they choose to do so. The current administration's economic policies have done nothing to help in this regard.

Health care is without a doubt a complex and contentious issue, but health care reform should be a market oriented solution. There are many ways we can reform the system and lower costs without nationalizing it.

The economist Arthur Laffer has taken the lead in pushing for a patient-center health care reform policy. He noted in a Wall Street Journal article earlier this month:

“A patient-centered health-care reform begins with individual ownership of insurance policies and leverages Health Savings Accounts, a low-premium, high-deductible alternative to traditional insurance that includes a tax-advantaged savings account. It allows people to purchase insurance policies across state lines and reduces the number of mandated benefits insurers are required to cover. It reallocates the majority of Medicaid spending into a simple voucher for low-income individuals to purchase their own insurance. And it reduces the cost of medical procedures by reforming tort liability laws.' [8]

Those are real reforms that we can live with and afford. Once again, I warn my fellow Americans that if we go down the path of nationalized health care, there will be no turning back. We must stop and think or we may find ourselves losing even more of our freedoms.

- Sarah Palin
[1] See
[2] See http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/au ... rationing/
[3]See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hsqzSKuC44
[4] See http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2 ... UzMzFiOTc=
[5] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03043.html
[6] See http://www.gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1094&type=6
[7] See http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/0 ... plans.html
[8] See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 92006.html
Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
Image

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Fri 14, 2009 3:01 pm

One question to all those railing against the "death panel".

What was your position in 2005 when Terri Schivo's next of kin, her husband, tried to carry out the medical wishes if his wife and legislation was filed to take that right away from him?
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by lost cause » Aug Fri 14, 2009 3:57 pm

Personally, I am all for insurance companies whether it is the government or private insurance companies saying no to treatment that will do nothing to cure the patient, I don't know about the rest of you but I do not want to be stuck in some type of institution when I get old being kept alive by machines or some drug cocktail.

As for the government running health care I don't want that either, if they want to pass legislation that will regulate the industry, and what malpractice awards can be, I would like to see that before I post an opinion. However the government has continually proved that they can not manage any program and I don't believe they are finally going to get it right with health care.

I also don't want the burden of a tax increase which is going to be more then what I am currently paying in insurance premiums.

Does anybody think adding 10's of thousands of new government jobs really going to be the answer. They are not able to properly fund medicare or medicaid, nor are they able to control the fraud in both of these programs, so why should we think they will get it right with a new program?
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

specialties
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 12127
Joined: Jun Mon 15, 2009 11:27 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by specialties » Aug Fri 14, 2009 4:14 pm

The crux:
However the government has continually proved that they can not manage any program and I don't believe they are finally going to get it right with health care.
The sub crux:
I also don't want the burden of a tax increase which is going to be more then what I am currently paying in insurance premiums.
The Acrux:
Does anybody think adding 10's of thousands of new government jobs really going to be the answer.
First it was the CHURCH, then the FAMILY, and now the NATION...

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Fri 14, 2009 4:28 pm

jonathan wrote:One question to all those railing against the "death panel".

What was your position in 2005 when Terri Schivo's next of kin, her husband, tried to carry out the medical wishes if his wife and legislation was filed to take that right away from him?
Helpful.
Image

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Fri 14, 2009 5:16 pm

Thank you.

I was simply pointing out the irony. I honestly think that none of the public officials believe the death panel rhetoric of which they speak, they are simply using it as a vehicle to scare the public. That is what is wrong.
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by lost cause » Aug Fri 14, 2009 6:08 pm

jonathan wrote:Thank you.

I was simply pointing out the irony. I honestly think that none of the public officials believe the death panel rhetoric of which they speak, they are simply using it as a vehicle to scare the public. That is what is wrong.
None of the public officials really care as they will not have to worry about what is really in the insurance plan as they will not have to use it.
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Fri 14, 2009 6:20 pm

jonathan wrote:Thank you.

I was simply pointing out the irony. I honestly think that none of the public officials believe the death panel rhetoric of which they speak, they are simply using it as a vehicle to scare the public. That is what is wrong.
Assuming you are genuine ... tough after other give and take with you, but...

You can read. You followed this thread enough to post on it, you saw clear and convincing evidence that Oregon HAS boards that can decide to let subscibers die ... "death panels"

Think of it this way, if the appeal process for BCBS was as follows.

1) We decide if you live or die.
2) If we decide you die, you can appeal ... twice!
3) Your first appeal will be heard by ... BCBS
4) But don't worry ... if we deny your first appeal, your second appeal will be heard by ... BCBS.
5) Then you die.

Can you imagine the leftist outrage??

Yet that IS the appeal process from the death panels of Oregon.


It WILL be the process if we go national.

Somebody earlier said they were fine with that ... I'm not. I suspect you will say you are not either. Yet knowing that EVERY government plan to date has death panels, you will not only trust these jamokes to be the first not to, you will be dishonest or naive enough to say that anyone thinking that this plan will end up with death panels .... like every other socialized plan EVER devised ... is somehow crazy.

And when that doesn't work you'll talk about Terri Schivo???

Prove me wrong.
Image

specialties
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 12127
Joined: Jun Mon 15, 2009 11:27 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by specialties » Aug Fri 14, 2009 9:42 pm

So, they get to pull the big switch on YOU, but not before they give themselves all of YOUR money and control, then you go into bondage, and do as you're told...


Then they live as capitalists ( on your nickle ) , as if they earned it themselves... :lol:

Kurtz and bildgepimp and chomp will love it...

Well, it hasn't worked anywheres yet!!! So go to hell and keep trying as it will keep US sharp...
First it was the CHURCH, then the FAMILY, and now the NATION...

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Fri 14, 2009 11:24 pm

Mark, I will overlook your opening comment as you cannot seem to post without taking a shot.

Here we go.

If you are referring to the Death with Dignity act in Oregon, you really not compare this to what is being proposed in congress or the interpretation that some are using to scare and enrage people, here are the differences.

In Oregon the Death with Dignity is a law that allows assisted suicide. There are several conditions that have to be in place.

1. The person has to seek it out.
2. The person has to be terminally ill with a life expectancy of less than six months.
3. It has to be endorsed by their physician.
4. There has to be two witnesses to the request, one of the two cannot be a family member and can no way benefit from the death.
5. The person has to be of sound mind.

There are several other safeguards that I don't recall at the moment but the major point is that before permission be granted, the patient has to seek it out vigorously.


What those who are trying to scare and divide the nation are stating is that an aging person, or in the case of former Governor Palin, having a mentally handicapped baby, will have to advocate to save their lives in front of a panel. That is what is being used to scare and enrage the public.

Your BCBS hypothetical is irrelevant as there is no system like that and no one is proposing that so there is really no point in going into it. If you have taken the time to read the bill, what is being proposed is "End of Life Counciling" That is composed of the following.

1. It is 100% voluntary.
2. The person receives information and can set up a living will.
3. The person is instructed how to and can set up a health care proxy.
$. The person is instructed and informed about hospice care when they are terminally ill.

A far cry from what the alarmists are saying that this is. Please tell me what is wrong with counciling someone regarding any of these issues. Someone pointed out earlier it is what any estate planner worth their salt would do.

As for my Terry Shivo comparison, it is showing the hypocrisy of those who state that they want no government intervention into end of life decisions but were all willing to do it then.

What was your position in 2005, you did not answer?

My biggest complaint about all of this is that it is totally unnecessary. The bill has so many flaws without lying about what is in there.

1. The cost
2. The public option.
3. Forcing employers to pay for health care or face an 8% tax.
many many others.

It is not the obligation of any employer to provide health care coverage, it is done as part of a compensation package to attract better employees. It is not the roll of government to provide health insurance to everyone either.

Lastly, health care rationing is going on now and has been for years. Every time an insurance company denies a procedure or declines to pay for medication A that your doctor is prescribing and instead wants you to take medication B which is cheaper, that is rationing of health care.
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

User avatar
Phil
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 9943
Joined: Jun Sun 11, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: phil.shannon
Location: Earth

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by Phil » Aug Sat 15, 2009 12:08 am

'Palin Power' Forced the Senate To Drop 'End of Life' provisions.

Image

The age that ends during 2009-2012 may be the Age of Moonbattery, as Obama and his gang of Marxist fools cure the country of all tolerance for liberalism.

Image
Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 5:44 am

Very well constucted answer that completely ignores my question and the factual information I provided on the thread. I don't know if that's a shot, but it is true.

And very frustrating.

I still refuse to believe that anyone who could put together such a well constructed post as you just made has no idea how a socialized program saves money (or more precisely SEEKS to save $)

YOu could not possibly be this naive without SOME willfulness.
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 5:50 am

Know any Cancer survivors?

With socialized medicine ... maybe you wouldn't?


Cancer Survival Rate

American men: 66 percent
European men: 47 percent

American women: 63 percent
European Women: 56 percent
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 5:51 am

Hip replacements offer a stark contrast. In the U.S., more than 90 percent of seniors are treated within six months. In Canada, less than half of patients are treated in the same time with many waiting over a year. Britain is not a place to break a hip - only 15 percent of patients are treated within six months. Many die during the wait.

My mom has two new hips, and is PROUD to be an American
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 5:52 am

Many of the advances in 21st century medicine come from MRI scans.

Most Americans wait less than a week for an MRI;
most Canadians wait over a year.

In America, doctors use 27 MRI scans per million.

In Canada and Britain, it is less than a fifth of that at just five MRI scans per million.
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 6:00 am

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... rgery.html


NHS chiefs tell grandmother, 61, she's 'too old' for £5,000 life-saving heart surgeryBy CHRIS BROOKE
Last updated at 20:51 28 February 2008


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z0OFChOvEw

Image
Angry: Dorothy Simpson of Thirsk, North Yorkshire,
was told she was too old for heart surgery at 61

A woman of 61 was refused a routine heart operation by a hard-up NHS trust for being too old.

Dorothy Simpson suffers from an irregular heartbeat and is at increased risk of a stroke. But health chiefs refused to allow the procedure which was recommended by her specialist.

The school secretary was stunned by the ruling.

"I can't believe that at 61 I'm too old for this operation," she said.

"A friend has had exactly the same thing done and it has changed his life.

"I feel as though I've been put out to grass and surely deserve better than this."
Image

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by lost cause » Aug Sat 15, 2009 7:29 am

The abortion component needs to come out of the bill as well, one group of people should not have to pay for another groups carelessness.
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by Bridges » Aug Sat 15, 2009 7:34 am

MCasper wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... rgery.html


NHS chiefs tell grandmother, 61, she's 'too old' for £5,000 life-saving heart surgeryBy CHRIS BROOKE
Last updated at 20:51 28 February 2008
Your story is out of date...or intentionally inaccurate:
Medical director Dr David Geddes apologised to Mrs Simpson for the "distress" caused by the delay.

He said: "We have reviewed the case in the light of the additional clinical information and national guidance and, as Mrs Simpson fits the clinical criteria, we have agreed funding for her treatment."

"All decisions are taken on individual clinical needs; we do not discriminate on the grounds of age.

"Our procedures exist to ensure fair decision-making, based on clinical evidence, for all our patients."
This is no different than the US. People here are deemed "not transplant candidates", for example, if they are deemed not in good enough shape. Perhaps they need the transplant (new lungs, for example) to save their life...But if they have other serious clinical issues, those organs are likely going to someone else who does not.

And Mrs. Simpson DID have serious clinical issues that were cited by the trust as grounds for refusal originally (a thyroid condition). I suspect the only reason they reversed, was due to the media feeding frenzy...But they'll wind up looking pretty stupid if she gets the heart surgery, then dies of the thyroid condition.
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 8:00 am

Typical post. Your story is out of date...or intentionally inaccurate:

I say something, you call me a liar, then as proof - you post something that proves me to be right ... and simply spins it.

The story cannot be out of date if it happened - and as you have corroborated ... IT HAPPENED.

Then you spin ...it was a thyroid condition? I and my wife have thyroid conditions ... GREAT, guess I'm on the too sick to save list now.

At least there is a grain of honesty in your post ... you are ready for the hacks in Washington to decide if your Mom is worth saving.

To restate ... I'm not.



BTW: " ... they'll wind up looking pretty stupid if she gets the heart surgery, then dies ... "

You just typed that and blighthly hit the submit button?

No remorse? No second thoughts?

A working women ... SIXTY ONE ... paid her taxes, needs an operation to be paid for ... FROM HER TAXES ... taken from her involunterily ... with the "promise of cradel to grave health care ... and your more worried the Government might look stupid for allowing her to try to keep living?

Don't you people have a soul?
Image

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by lost cause » Aug Sat 15, 2009 8:09 am

The nice thing about the English system is that they are trying to limit the waiting period for a procedure to 18 weeks, nothing like waiting 4 to 5 months to have a medical issue taken care of.
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 8:17 am

Typical post. Your story is out of date...or intentionally inaccurate:

I say something, you call me a liar, then as proof - you post something that proves me to be right ... and simply spins it.

The story cannot be out of date if it happened - and as you have corroborated ... IT HAPPENED.

Then you spin ...it was a thyroid condition? I and my wife have thyroid conditions ... GREAT, guess I'm on the too sick to save list now.

At least there is a grain of honesty in your post ... you are ready for the hacks in Washington to decide if your Mom is worth saving.

To restate ... I'm not.



BTW: " ... they'll wind up looking pretty stupid if she gets the heart surgery, then dies ... "

You just typed that and blighthly hit the submit button?

No remorse? No second thoughts?

A working women ... SIXTY ONE ... paid her taxes, needs an operation to be paid for ... FROM HER TAXES ... taken from her involunterily ... with the "promise of cradel to grave health care ... and your more worried the Government might look stupid for allowing her to try to keep living?

Don't you people have a soul?
Image

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by Bridges » Aug Sat 15, 2009 8:19 am

MCasper wrote:Typical post. Your story is out of date...or intentionally inaccurate:

I say something, you call me a liar, then as proof - you post something that proves me to be right ... and simply spins it.

The story cannot be out of date if it happened - and as you have corroborated ... IT HAPPENED.

Then you spin ...it was a thyroid condition? I and my wife have thyroid conditions ... GREAT, guess I'm on the too sick to save list now.

At least there is a grain of honesty in your post ... you are ready for the hacks in Washington to decide if your Mom is worth saving.

To restate ... I'm not.



BTW: " ... they'll wind up looking pretty stupid if she gets the heart surgery, then dies ... "

You just typed that and blighthly hit the submit button?

No remorse? No second thoughts?

A working women ... SIXTY ONE ... paid her taxes, needs an operation to be paid for ... FROM HER TAXES ... taken from her involunterily ... with the "promise of cradel to grave health care ... and your more worried the Government might look stupid for allowing her to try to keep living?

Don't you people have a soul?
Mark - THIS HAPPENS IN THE US NOW! EVERY DAY!

Again - I will use the example of a transplant recipient, as my best friend is transplant recipient (double lung, due to CF). If he had other complicating issues, he could have very well been told no. It happens - there a limited supply of organs, aren't there?

There are strict criteria for who gets on an organ donor waiting list, and who does not - and it is generally based on clinical reasons, not age (but they do try to get kids in first, when they can)...and the rules are NOT decided by "hacks in Washington"...never have been :roll:
organtransplats.org wrote:Specifics of waiting list rules, which can be seen at OPTN website, vary by organ. General principles, such as a patient's medical urgency, blood, tissue and size match with the donor, time on the waiting list and proximity to the donor, guide the distribution of organs. Under certain circumstance, special allowances are made for children. For example, children under age 11 who need kidneys are automatically assigned additional points. Factors such as a patient's income, celebrity status, and race or ethnic background play no role in determining allocation of organs.

Contrary to popular belief, waiting on the list for a transplant is not like taking a number at the deli counter and waiting for your turn to order. In some respects, even the word "list" is misleading; the list is really a giant pool of patients. There is no ranking or patient order until there is a donor, because each donor's blood type, size and genetic characteristics are different. Therefore, when a donor is entered into the national computer system, the patients that match that donor, and therefore the "list," is different each time.
In short - there are rules about who gets treatment, as the treatment itself (organs) are a limited commodity. Again - this happens NOW, every day, in the US. So why have you not been screaming about it? :?
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 9:09 am

Using organ shortages as an equivelancy to not doing a surgical proceedure because of cost vs life expectency ... Is dishonest and/or pointless.

2+2 = Skim Milk?

Great answer ... Wrong question.

Are you that thick, or more likely, do you think we are?
Image

specialties
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 12127
Joined: Jun Mon 15, 2009 11:27 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by specialties » Aug Sat 15, 2009 9:18 am

I wish that bridgepimp and bobkat would write a book, then we could throw away all the others...

How much government do they want in OUR lives, or their own for that matter???

Knickpick haven still propagates...
First it was the CHURCH, then the FAMILY, and now the NATION...

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Sat 15, 2009 9:34 am

I think you missed my point entirely and I actually thought I was addressing yours.

I agree that this is a flawed bill, that government does not belong in the health care business BUT

There are so many issues that you can discuss the bill on the merits.

MY point was that people like Sarah Palin, stating that "death panels" will figuratively pry her mentally retarded son from her arms and deny him health care. This is totally unnecessary, reckless, untrue and divisive. Anyone such as her who makes this type of public statement eliminates themselves from any serious discussion on the issue.

Again, I fundementally do not agree with this bill but I am far more concerned with the rhetoric and the permanent damage that it does to the country.
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:02 am

jonathan wrote: ... MY point was that people like Sarah Palin, stating that "death panels" will figuratively pry her mentally retarded son from her arms and deny him health care. This is totally unnecessary, reckless, untrue and divisive. Anyone such as her who makes this type of public statement eliminates themselves from any serious discussion on the issue.
...
Once again, I will try to say...

a) There are panels.
b) They will approve or disapprove things.
c) They will in effect choose to let people die at times.
d) It is THE concern for sociallized medicine #1 ... period.

To say that a women with a DS child has no cause to be concerned that the main advisor to BHO said...
While Emanuel does not use the term "death panel," Palin put that term in quotation marks to signify the concept of medical decisions based on the perceived societal worth of an individual, not literally a "death panel." And in so doing, Palin was true to Dr. Emanuel's concept of a system which...
considers prognosis, since its aim is to achieve complete lives. A young person with a poor prognosis has had a few life-years but lacks the potential to live a complete life. Considering prognosis forestalls the concern the disproportionately large amounts of resources will be directed to young people with poor prognoses. When the worst-off can benefit only slightly while better-off people could benefit greatly, allocating to the better-off is often justifiable....
When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.
Put together the concepts of prognosis and age, and Dr. Emanuel's proposal reasonably could be construed as advocating the withholding of some level of medical treatment (probably not basic care, but likely expensive advanced care) to a baby born with Down Syndrome. You may not like this implication, but it is Dr. Emanuel's implication not Palin's.
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:05 am

Couldn't happen right?
Disabled children wait up to two years for wheelchairs
NHS accused of relying on charities to plug funding gap, leaving patients facing postcode lotteryComments ('¦)

Guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday 4 March 2009

The NHS was told today to stop relying on charities to fill funding gaps after figures revealed many trusts would not pay the full cost of electric wheelchairs for disabled children.

Freedom of information figures obtained by the Muscular Dystrophy Campaign found children were subject to a postcode lottery in terms of equipment.

Statistics from 54% of NHS trusts in England and Scotland revealed that disabled children in England are forced to wait five months on average for a wheelchair.

The worst performing primary care trust (PCT), East Lancashire, in the north-west of England, had an average wait of two years for an electric wheelchair.

The survey showed 58% of children in England had to wait at least three months for an electric wheelchair and 14% waited more than six months...

A separate patient survey of 237 children found one in three did not receive any funding at all for their wheelchair.
Image

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:16 am

Why work in absoute total hypotheticals?

And actually this is a cause that Senator Kennedy has worked his entire career for and looking back at his sister's life and legacy, to even think that he would allow any such provision to go forward is just silly.

Why not discuss what is being proposed as opposed to possible future hypotheticals that no one has even indicated would be part of a bill.

And I wil say, there are no "death panels" please point out once place in the 50 united states where they exist and please do not use Oregon as an example as it would be perverting what they are doing there.

As far as panels approving and disapproving treatment, it occurs every single day now by the Insurance companies. Actually panels would be an improvement for them, they have calculations and grids, a panel would at least hear an argument.
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:22 am

When my father passed, he spent the last two years of his life shuttling between the nursing home and the hospital. He had no living will. His quality of life was non existant. He really did not know anyone about 95% of the time, he could no longer read, watch television or engage in conversation. He had to have damn diapers that were changed by the nurses, (God bless their hearts, really).

I had to fight and fire two doctors to get them to stop treating him, to finally only have a morphine drip to ensure there was no pain or discomfort and hopefull speed up the death process.

Now aside from the emotional toll, think of how many resources were absolutely wasted trying to treat him the last two months.

A living will would have prevented that, setting up a health care proxy would have prevented that.
Having voluntary discussions regarding those topics makes perfect sense.
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:24 am

Again, couldn't happen here...
In the Netherlands, infants are killed because they have birth defects, and doctors justify the practice. A 1997 study published in the British medical journal, The Lancet, revealed how deeply pediatric euthanasia had metastasized into Dutch neonatal medical practice. According to the report, doctors killed approximately 8 percent of all infants who died in the Netherlands in 1995. Assuming this to be typical, this amounts to approximately 80-90 infanticides per year. Of these, one-third would have lived more than a month. At least 10-15 of these killings involve infants who did not depend on life-sustaining treatment to stay alive. The study found that 45 percent of neonatologists and 31 percent of pediatricians, who responded to study's questionnaires, had killed infants. A follow up study of end-of-life decisions made for infants published in the April 9, 2005, found that nothing had changed. In 2001, “in 8%' of cases, drugs were administered to infants “with the explicit intention to hasten death.'
You cannot tell me you have never heard any of this before?
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:28 am

Sunday, March 7, 1999

Down's patients denied medical care

Image


People with Down's syndrome are discriminated against by the medical profession, a report claims.

In some cases parents of Down's syndrome children have been invited to withhold life-saving treatment for a condition that is perfectly treatable.

People with Down's syndrome have also been denied routine treatment for common ailments such as hearing and sight problems.

The survey conducted by the Down's Syndrome Association (DSA) found that more than one in four people with the condition had been discriminated against by health professionals.

Responses from 1,509 parents in the association showed that 28% expressed a high level of dissatisfaction with the medical care their child had received.

The DSA claims that the survey reveals that many medical staff view people with Down's syndrome as second-class citizens and that these views often affect their treatment decisions.

Types of discrimination reported by survey respondents include:

Failure to treat Down's syndrome as individuals

Dismissing unrelated and treatable medical problems as being an inevitable part of the syndrome

Making comments that imply negative judgements about the value of the life of someone with Down's syndrome

Use of the word "Mongol" to describe a patient although the term has been excluded from medical usage for more than 20 years
In one case the first words a paediatrician said to a new mother after examining her baby were: "You have a Mongol."

Another consultant said about a child of two: "There is not point in working your guts out to help him because he will never be normal."

Worst fears realised

Carol Boys, DSA director, said: "Our worst fears have been realised in the results of this survey.

"It is clearly wrong that medical practitioners should contravene existing laws and guidelines in this way.

"Like anyone else, people with Down's syndrome are entitled to be treated with dignity and respect and that includes equal access to any medical attention they need."

The DSA makes a number of recommendations on the back of its report. These include:


An urgent need to implement existing government guidelines more quickly

Assurance to be given to parents who decline ante-natal testing or who test positive and continue with the pregnancy that they will be treated with the same respect and dignity as others

A call for more emphasis on the training of medical students with regard to learning disabilities

No person with Down's syndrome to be denied treatment on the grounds of their condition

Echocardograms to diagnose potential heart defects to be carried out on all babies with Down's syndrome

Wider implementation of routine checks for all health problems including those which are more common in people with Down's syndrome.
Now, after reading this, apologize to Sarah Palin and prove yourself to be the open minded guy you profess?
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:30 am

Sorry about your Dad.
Image

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:31 am

1. NO I had not read that before.

2. And while horrific, it would never and could never ever happen here.

Again look at the outrage over the Terry Shivo case, do you really think that this could happen in the United States? Really? Honestly?
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:37 am

Like anyone else, people with Down's syndrome are entitled to be treated with dignity and respect and that includes equal access to any medical attention they need."
I agree 1000%



The recommendations seem very very reasonable and needed. But these are physicians, not the government. And each one of those doctors deserve a 2X4 off the side of th head. I for years and firmly believe that people with downs syndrome are God's chosen people and while they are burdened with this disability here, they will flourish in heaven. I have believed that for as long as I can remember.

As for the Governor, I do not think that she was being sincere, no. She was being an opportunist.


I have a young son that has a genetic disorder and at times shows very mild signs of an autistic disorder. I am very afraid of what he faces as he get's older and into the years when children can be very cruel to each other and how his adult years will be. I plan and prepare as best I can but the one thing that I do not worry about is having to justify his existance to get treatment. But then again, I am lucky as I have the resources to get good treatment and I am loud and assertive and usually get what I want.

Maybe I should be more open to that but it has not been my experience to this point.
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:43 am

Sorry about your Dad.

Thank you, one of the great ironys of life having to do this for your parents.
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

User avatar
Phil
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 9943
Joined: Jun Sun 11, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: phil.shannon
Location: Earth

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by Phil » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:55 am

H.R. 1 (more commonly known as the Recovery and Reinvestment Act, even more commonly known as the Stimulus Bill and aptly dubbed the Porkulus Bill) contains a whopping $1.1 billion to fund the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. The Council is the brain child of former Health and Human Services Secretary Nominee Tom Daschle. Before the Porkulus Bill passed, Betsy McCaughey, former Lieutenant governor of New York, wrote in detail about the Council's purpose.

Daschle's stated purpose (and therefore President Obama's purpose) for creating the Council is to empower an unelected bureaucracy to make the hard decisions about health care rationing that elected politicians are politically unable to make. The end result is to slow costly medical advancement and consumption. Daschle argues that Americans ought to be more like Europeans who passively accept "hopeless diagnoses."

McCaughey goes on to explain:

Daschle says health-care reform "will not be pain free." Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them.


Who is on the Council? One of its most prominent members is none other than Dr. Death himself Ezekiel Emanuel. Dr. Emanuel's views on care of the elderly should frighten anyone who is or ever plans on being old. He explains the logic behind his discriminatory views on elderly care as follows:

Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years.

On average 25-year-olds require very few medical services. If they are to get the lion's share of the treatment, then those 65 and over can expect very little care. Dr. Emanuel's views on saving money on medical care are simple: don't provide any medical care. The loosely worded provisions in H.R 1 give him and his Council increasing power to push such recommendations.

Similarly hazy language will no doubt be used in the health care bill.
What may pass as a 1,000 page health care law will explode into perhaps many thousands of pages of regulatory codes. The deliberate vagueness will give regulators tremendous leverage to interpret its provisions. Thus Obama's Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein will play a major role in defining the government's role in controlling medical care.

How does Sunstein approach end of life care? In 2003 he wrote a paper for the AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies arguing that human life varies in value. Specifically he champions statistical methods that give preference to what the government rates as "quality-adjusted life years." Meaning, the government decides whether a person's life is worth living. If the government decides the life is not worth living, it is the individual's duty to die to free up welfare payments for the young and productive.

Ultimately it was Obama himself, in answer to a question on his ABC News infomercial, who said that payment determination cannot be influenced by a person's spirit and "that at least we (the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research) can let doctors know and your mom know that...this isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller."
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/ ... _bill.html
Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13956
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by MCasper » Aug Sat 15, 2009 10:57 am

jonathan wrote:1. NO I had not read that before.

2. And while horrific, it would never and could never ever happen here.

Again look at the outrage over the Terry Shivo case, do you really think that this could happen in the United States? Really? Honestly?
"Keep tellin' yourself that darlin'"

To respond to your non sequitor for a moment ... Isn't she dead? Didn't the courts let her be die with two parents wanting to care for her?
Image

jonathan
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1931
Joined: Jul Thu 02, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Marshfield

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by jonathan » Aug Sat 15, 2009 12:21 pm

They were not her next of kin.
"God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're f***ed. "

specialties
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 12127
Joined: Jun Mon 15, 2009 11:27 am

Re: Health care the way it should be

Post by specialties » Aug Sat 15, 2009 12:46 pm

It appears that dr. ezekiel cares as much for those who liberated his people as hitler cared about his...

Image

Save a nation, lose a friend, I always say...
First it was the CHURCH, then the FAMILY, and now the NATION...

Post Reply