Death Panels?

[rubato]

rubato, it was you who introduced partisan nastiness into this thread, and while it's regrettable that dgs49 responded in kind (if I read his OP correctly, I don't think that the two cases mentioned in the linked news story are the type of cases Dave was referring to in that post, and he should have noted that)) you have to take most of the responsibility if the thread deteriorates from here.

I see the very fact that dgs49 started this thread as evidence that maybe we actually can have that national conversation about end-of-life care. It's a subject that everyone will have to deal with eventually, and everyone should devote some rational thought to the subject before that time arrives.

You want to make something mandatory, make everyone fill out a living will.

Spot on.

You missed the point.

The partisan nastiness consists in destroying any hope of a national health care and leaving a situation where people are killed for profit. Because when those who pay for and who will live with the limits on health care do NOT have input, and in a non-national health world they do not, they are being used just as brutally as if they were lab animals.

You might say that we can regulate a private system to achieve the same ends. That is probably true. But you will find that by the time you have written all of the necessary regulations you will have a system which is identical to a national health system +20% (minimum) in costs.



yrs,
rubato

[dgs49]

The very mention of an asinine, stupid phrase like, "...people are killed for profit..." basically ends any hope of a rational discussion.

As I have posted before, I personally would not mind having socialized medicine, but it will never happen in this country. Where we are headed is: The Lefties in and out of government are determined to bankrupt the health insurance system, one company at a time. They will do this by mandating expensive coverages and preventing the companies from recouping the added cost by raising premiums. Long term, everyone will be on something analogous to Medicare.

[Gob]

All medical decisions should be made on predicted prognosis, not on "does this person have the insurance cover to afford life.

[BoSoxGal]

The article I linked discusses the extreme lengths that are gone to in treating people with advanced cancers, etc.

The comments section includes many attacking the piece as media intended to groom us for 'Obamacare' rationing.

However, one important aspect of the article was the discussion regarding how desperately many patients hold onto any hope of improvement or extension of life - even in cases where they may have made different decisions in living wills prepared when they were well. Even when doctors are telling them there is likely to be little improvement from further treatments.

I know this personally from the experience of nursing my dear friend to her death of breast cancer, 3rd recurrence; she was absolutely determined to hold onto hope that something might improve, even after going through hell on experimental chemo while her tumors continued to grow. When she was taken off the experimental chemo regimen and signed up with hospice care, she still continued to research last-ditch options for experimental care - high tech laser surgery. Sadly, she died two weeks following the end of the experimental chemo, which had made her last several weeks of life a misery of chemo-related side effects and pain.

The will to live, or the fear of dying, are huge issues that don't begin to be discussed in conversations about resource allocation and necessary rationing. How do we have those conversations in our society? I'm not sure. I found it difficult enough to try to strike a balance between encouraging my friend, and helping her prepare to die. I will probably always feel I could have done better, but this is probably also the hardest thing any of us ever does.

[rubato]

Even more reason that these decisions need to be made by the people who will live with them before they are in crisis and while they are still capable of a more rational assessment of the costs/benefits.

It would be beneficial if a part of the general school curriculum were to introduce people to this type of decision-making which they will (or ought to in a more moral world where we have national health) have to make as citizens.

yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

Isn't the trouble with the US system that there isn't a equitable discussion to be had?

One person says: "my insurance covers Granny for this, so I want the best care lavished on her until she dies," and another says; "we have no insurance, please don't pull the plug on Granny."

[oldr_n_wsr]

Granny gets medicade (or medicaire, can't remember which is which), or at least they do in NY. The real problem (I think) is those 20-50yo who either don't have the option of employee sponsored HC or don't "opt in". Need the healthy young'uns who don't burden the system to pick up the slack for us 50-somethings starting to use the system more.

Sort of like social security where the young pay for us elders when we retire. Would have been nice if the gov had "banked" all teh money I/we paid in to the system all these years, but that's not the way they do things.

[Timster]

[Gob]

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that one Tim.

[BoSoxGal]

Prison healthcare is terrible - so, it's not actually that funny.

[Timster]

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that one Tim.

How about cry laughing.

Prison healthcare is terrible - so, it's not actually that funny.

Well I suppose if one were going to be literal... then dark humor regarding shooting and maiming politicians should probably be off the table also.