The Affordable Care Act contains provisions for “death panels,” which decide which critically-ill patients receive care and which won’t, according to Mark Halperin, senior political analyst for Time magazine.
“It’s built into the plan. It’s not like a guess or like a judgement. That’s going to be part of how costs are controlled,”
Sarah Palin was right all along while her detractors where lying. Than mocking her knowing full well the death panels they planned.
The treachery with plain underhand duplicity. Along with its personnel animus towards anyone who disagrees with its outright lies, is unparalleled in American history.
particularly when you compare how it uses the government itself as an assault weapon of menace. No agency left untouched by its degeneracy.
whether no insurance, private ins, or gov ins ,death panels are part and parcel of any organized health care institution..
the difference is who gets to decide..
local doctors or faraway bureaucrats..
not to bring up the occasional local nurse who decides for everyone(in the news constantly)
Martin Bashir unavailable for comment.
If you think Canada or the UK’s public health systems don’t have “death panels” you probably are living on a street with heavy unicorn traffic.
ALL socialized health care systems administered by collectivist governments are RATIONING systems. As with all collectivized resource systems with martinet administrative control of finite unsustainable resources, arbitrary prioritization is instituted. Healthcare in a modern secular technocracy is doled out on a “needs base” – the “needs” of central planning and the collective state take precedent over the needs of the system user (as they are just an expendable pawn in the ultimate goal of continuity of the collective state and its systems).
Rationed health resources focus on an individual’s value to the collective state – the productive survive to pay the tax base and the non productive (seniors, chronically ill, fully handicapped or those requiring expensive medical maintenance) are not on a priority scale for costly treatments and medicines. There is one place in the system where resource-gobbling users disappear – the black hole called “palliative care”. Arbitrary decisions are made to direct users there.
Huxley’s dehumanizing technocracy has been with us for some time in these public health systems, and the only reason we are not up in arms about public health being used as a technocratic euthanasia tool, is because the statistics regarding cure rates for our system are a more closely guarded state secret than the taxable income of senior federal administrators.
If you don’t carry private health insurance in this situation you will probably never survive your encounter with public health systems when you really need it.
“The treachery with plain underhand duplicity.” Perfect description of socialism.
Occam, “If you think Canada or the UK’s public health systems don’t have “death panels” you probably are living on a street with heavy unicorn traffic.” Exactly, and this is from personal family experience. We did not cave though.
Socialized health care is one big death panel.
Waiting for the apologies to Sarah Palin from the mainstream media.
(crickets)
Waiting… waiting… waiting…
Hey, come on you guys. Death panels?
Its not like they’re going to let anyone -important- die, right? (/sarc)
I’d like at this time, after that bit of heavy sarcasm, to inject a note of sober advice. With end-of-life decisions, it works like this: they can keep a corpse going for weeks. If your relative is at the stage where they can’t walk, can’t talk, can’t eat and can’t eliminate unaided, you need to let them go. Its time. If you say “do everything” they will, but your relative isn’t going to enjoy their life.
Procedures -suck-. So if your relative has a massive stroke or some other potentially fatal event, strongly consider what kind of quality of life they’re going to have if the doctors save them.
Its always different, unfortunately. Some people crash and burn all at once, others kind of dwindle away for YEARS and their families suffer right along with them. Some people fear death, others don’t so much. (Everybody is afraid of course, but there are those who are deathly afraid, pardon the expression.)
The problem we have in Canada is that medical care is “free”. So old demented patients have millions of dollars spent on them in their last month or two of life, because the family gets all guilty about having stuffed the old bird in a nursing home ten years ago and never visited. (Happens all-the-f-ing-time. Obscene but true.) The patient does not benefit from these procedures, because while it keeps them alive they are in pain from it. And demented. Like, not there.
So really, when the doctor says Aunt Maisey isn’t going to thank you for the heroic medical effort that gives her another week of life, you should believe that guy. He knows. He sees it every fricking week.
I should add that -cost- is rarely an issue that doctors consider when choosing treatment. Saving the hospital or the taxpayer money never even enters their heads. If anything they are militantly spendthrift. So if a doctor tells you resuscitation is a bad idea for you or your relative, money is not a factor. (Having said that, you might get the one guy in all Ontario who’s a scrooge. Stay awake.)
The danger with “death panels” of course is that money -is- a factor with them, and they will inevitably deny treatment to people who can benefit from it. Because that’s what bureaucracies do. Make insane rules and then only break them for friends and brown bags fulla money. It will take a few years, but that’s where we are going.
The slippery slope gets steep here.
Because you have to win the lottery to get them and they cost the system immense amounts of cash, government funded heart, liver, and lung transplants should be a no-no. On top of that, at my age I’m never getting one. After all I’m not a political big-wig like Dalton Camp who got one at 73.
And preemies destined for warehousing in an institution should be allowed to die.
Anyone who has watched old family members die certainly see the discontinuance of treatment such as critically ill heart patients being discharged from hospital to die. I am not sure it is a bad idea.
I am second to no man in pointing out the cravenness of Obama.
But consider this: everyone is going to die.
Doctors are there to keep us on the playing field for longer.
All the easy deaths have been eliminated.
Kidney disease will not carry you off. Pneumonia? Forget it.
If all the little things don’t get you something bigger will
have to come along. And then, even then, of course, the
doctors will work to keep you on this side of the veil.
A person can be a net benefit to society their whole life,
and then, at the end, millions could be spent futilely.
There have always been “death panels”. When my grandmother
was brain dead and being manually resuscitated for three
days while my uncles agonized about the religious implications
of plug pulling and the doctors deferred out of decency and perhaps
fear of law suits, my cousin and I and a doctor or two formed
our own death panel.
And we managed to engineer a “plug pulling” ceremony that
was sad and funny and solemn and ridiculous.
Are you telling me that someone is going to decide who will
live and who will die?
Um, heck yeah, and it’s been happening since there have
been doctors. The question is if it’s overt or covert. If it’s
ethical or unethical. If it honours individuals or zooms
’em.
What are the considerations which will govern the death
panels? Because there are death panels of one kind or
another.
Sometimes it’s an extra shot of morphine the doctor
allows, saying, “I’m going to take away the pain. You
may not wake up. Blink three times if you understand
me”.
It’s great to bash the left who are going about things
in their typical collectivist way.
But saying, Death Panel Death Panel over and over
again is a wee bit disingenuous because these
big decisions have to be made.
This isn’t about pulling the plug on the terminally ill. It’s more about denying potentially life-saving care to otherwise-healthy people in their 60’s and 70’s, people who may be at or past their retirement age, but are still vigorous. But maybe they need a heart stent, or a kidney transplant, or a tumor removed.
And the government death panel runs their sums, and decides that if Joe Doe dies now, they save the cost of his surgery, plus he ceases to receive Social Security and other benefits. Win-win!
At the bottom of Driscoll’s article
Tweet
Where does Sarah Palin go to get her apology? Or will Liberals claim she was just made a ‘lucky guess’?
tsl said: “But saying, Death Panel Death Panel over and over again is a wee bit disingenuous because these big decisions have to be made.”
So there’s no difference between a government bureaucracy and the family of the patient in consultation with the doctor? Come on.
Besides which, the true costs of the care are never addressed. If people and families paid from their own resources, most of these end of life decisions would be a lot easier. Let Aunty die properly in her own time, or keep her alive with heroic measures and ruin the family financially? Not a hard choice.
Or do you want to pay -more- than the half your total income to tax you already pay?
How long before the voter registration rolls become a factor in the decision process? Registered Republican…time to start praying for a miracle. I’m sure Lois Lerner could use a new gig.
Many prematurely born infants survive and live long, healthy and happy lives and no elderly person should be killed off for a hospital bed. It is beyond inhumane. We can’t pick apart Obamacare for those reasons yet excuse or tacitly accept what we do here.
What should be impressed upon the Americans who thought that Obamacare was great is what awaits them.
So really, when the doctor says Aunt Maisey isn’t going to thank you for the heroic medical effort that gives her another week of life, you should believe that guy. He knows. He sees it every fricking week.
Doctors work for the government and do what the government tells them they can do. Simple as that. Everyone needs to take that into account.
The health care system should be based on triage principles. Help those who can be cured; comfort the dying. People with terminal illness should only get morphine from the public system. If they, or their relatives want more, then they can pay for it.
phantom and tsl are correct.
North of 60 – Phantom and tsl are correct? No one is totally “correct”. That’s like saying that abortion and birth control are the answers to over-population/environmental fears. Perhaps the newborns should get their kick at the can, and they should come for you! Strad and Ken and Kinyobe are closer to the truth.
You said ‘totally correct’ not me, and ‘like saying’ is your opinion, not mine.
Try to state your own views concisely as you can, instead of misinterpreting the comments of others to fit your agenda.
This is what happens when you make health care soley from stolen dollars, people think they have the right over other’s bodies, souls and minds…just one step away from the collectivism you so eschew….it’;s hilarious.
I’m waiting for Loki to weigh in; he usually has many good points on health-related issues.