The future of Obamacare?

[Birds Away]

Now sick babies go on death pathway: Doctor's haunting testimony reveals how children are put on end-of-life plan | Mail Online

 

[poptab]

My mother is a neonatal nurse practitioner. I sent to her and will post her response later.
Her initial response is that the article seems sensationalized. After reading it myself, from what I know it sounds worse to the uninitiated.

Our medical science is capable of much. It is no longer a question of if we can do something but if we should do it.

 

[IndyDave1776]

My mother is a neonatal nurse practitioner. I sent to her and will post her response later.
Her initial response is that the article seems sensationalized. After reading it myself, from what I know it sounds worse to the uninitiated.

Our medical science is capable of much. It is no longer a question of if we can do something but if we should do it.

It will be interesting to hear what mom says. I will, however, caution you that with most forms of socialism and government intrusion, Britain is generally 20 to 40 years ahead of us and just because it doesn't happen immediately, that isn't to say that it won't later, especially at the time of the next major budget problem. I would amend your last thought to say that it is often not a question of it we can but rather if we are willing to pay the cost of doing so.

 

[poptab]

People habe been insulated from health care prices via health insurance for a long time.

I am certianly not arguing that socialized medicine is a good thing. Just that the prctices cited here seem like common prctices everywhere. Maybe there was some poor palative care going that may be the case but these babies and the 14 year old were going to die reguardless of how much care they recieve.

When you put out headlines like 'doctors starve baby to death' you get emotional respones.

 

[GlockPaperScissors]

People habe been insulated from health care prices via health insurance for a long time.

I am certianly not arguing that socialized medicine is a good thing. Just that the prctices cited here seem like common prctices everywhere. Maybe there was some poor palative care going that may be the case but these babies and the 14 year old were going to die reguardless of how much care they recieve.

When you put out headlines like 'doctors starve baby to death' you get emotional respones.

I don't think that's necessarily true. In one section it was talking about how the parents didn't want to put their child through surgeries that could possibly save their child's life just because they felt it would be too harsh for them.

Now, I know this is speculation, but it sounds like in that case the parents didn't want to put up the cash for the procedures to possibly save the child.

I would rather have a life filled with pain and living out my days in some way disabled than not have one at all.

Starving children to death isn't humane. If you pull someone off of life support and they are still living on their own, you shouldn't be allowed to let them just lie there and slowly whither away. It's sickening to think that people nowadays find that perfectly acceptable.

 

[Double T]

Now sick babies go on death pathway: Doctor's haunting testimony reveals how children are put on end-of-life plan | Mail Online

I would not want a child on a ventilator on a tube feed for life. There is no quality of life.

A LOT of times, those children are left alive to keep the parents happy; not the child.

Take care of one sometime, and you will understand why sometimes withdrawing enteral feeding is the best option.

 

[Double T]

I don't think that's necessarily true. In one section it was talking about how the parents didn't want to put their child through surgeries that could possibly save their child's life just because they felt it would be too harsh for them.

Now, I know this is speculation, but it sounds like in that case the parents didn't want to put up the cash for the procedures to possibly save the child.

I would rather have a life filled with pain and living out my days in some way disabled than not have one at all.

Starving children to death isn't humane. If you pull someone off of life support and they are still living on their own, you shouldn't be allowed to let them just lie there and slowly whither away. It's sickening to think that people nowadays find that perfectly acceptable.

Break your neck, unable to speak or breath or eat on your own, or move your arms, or poop/pee, or ANYTHING. And tell me what kind of LIFE that is.

 

[GlockPaperScissors]

Break your neck, unable to speak or breath or eat on your own, or move your arms, or poop/pee, or ANYTHING. And tell me what kind of LIFE that is.

That is not what I meant. If life-support is the only thing keeping you alive, then I understand. If you can't live without a breathing tube, then you really aren't living a life.

But if there are medical procedures that can be tried to potentially save your life, they should be tried.

If you think it's okay to let someone starve to death for ten days, why not just give them the lethal injection? Put them to sleep and put them out of their misery. Regardless of how you look at it, starving to death is torture, and it shouldn't be happening.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I have not had health insurance for 20 years, I have no intention of getting it now. They can just confiscate all my property and lock me up. Guess I would be insured then.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Just think of it as postpartum abortion.

The investigation, which will include child patients, will look at whether cash payments to hospitals to hit death pathway targets have influenced doctors’ decisions.

Is this an example of that which you subsidize, the more you get?

 

[GlockPaperScissors]

I have not had health insurance for 20 years, I have no intention of getting it now. They can just confiscate all my property and lock me up. Guess I would be insured then.

That's how I feel. I haven't had health insurance since I turned 19. I don't have the money to afford health insurance now. I don't think it should be something socialized or forced on people. I don't get sick or hurt more than once every couple of years anyway. I shouldn't have to keep insurance on something that isn't defective.

 

[Double T]

That is not what I meant. If life-support is the only thing keeping you alive, then I understand. If you can't live without a breathing tube, then you really aren't living a life.

But if there are medical procedures that can be tried to potentially save your life, they should be tried.

If you think it's okay to let someone starve to death for ten days, why not just give them the lethal injection? Put them to sleep and put them out of their misery. Regardless of how you look at it, starving to death is torture, and it shouldn't be happening.

Without knowing case by case what was happening, it is all conjecture. A child who will require tube feeding from birth to death, requires life support to survive.

It happens all the time. People pull someone off "life support" (mechanical ventilation, artificial nutrition et al.) every day. A LOT of these are elderly patients. A child is no different. It's the POA/PCG/parent's right to choose. If a baby won't eat or breathe on it's own. And has a neurological disease, what kind of life can they live? Let them go, without being tied down with tubes, so that they can be free.

 

[88GT]

That is not what I meant. If life-support is the only thing keeping you alive, then I understand. If you can't live without a breathing tube, then you really aren't living a life.

But if there are medical procedures that can be tried to potentially save your life, they should be tried.

If you think it's okay to let someone starve to death for ten days, why not just give them the lethal injection? Put them to sleep and put them out of their misery. Regardless of how you look at it, starving to death is torture, and it shouldn't be happening.

I think you need to take a look at this blog Praying For Noah, starting with this post

The world isn't as neat and tidy as you'd like it to be. You'd have every family go through their own little version of torture just so you can be appeased that they did everything to keep their child alive. There's more than one way to be on life support without being on life support, ya know.

 

[GlockPaperScissors]

Considering the life I grew up with, I know the world isn't and tidy. If you want to pull someone off of life support, that's fine then. Although if that's allowed and accepted, why not just give them lethal injection? Might as well kill them faster to end their suffering and get them out of the hospital so they aren't taking up space for the next patient.

Without knowing case by case what was happening, it is all conjecture. A child who will require tube feeding from birth to death, requires life support to survive.

It happens all the time. People pull someone off "life support" (mechanical ventilation, artificial nutrition et al.) every day. A LOT of these are elderly patients. A child is no different. It's the POA/PCG/parent's right to choose. If a baby won't eat or breathe on it's own. And has a neurological disease, what kind of life can they live? Let them go, without being tied down with tubes, so that they can be free.

I think you need to take a look at this blog Praying For Noah, starting with this post

The world isn't as neat and tidy as you'd like it to be. You'd have every family go through their own little version of torture just so you can be appeased that they did everything to keep their child alive. There's more than one way to be on life support without being on life support, ya know.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Once again, INGO misses the forest for the trees.

Whether or not the child could have been saved is not the point.

The point is that end of life decisions about you and your kin are being made FOR you.

If someone wants to spend a billion dollars extending their life for another 2 minutes, that should be their prerogative, and not the decision of a bean counter.

On the flip side, if someone doesn't want ANY care, that should also be their decision.

Socialized medicine removes your power to make your own decisions.

 

[88GT]

Considering the life I grew up with, I know the world isn't and tidy. If you want to pull someone off of life support, that's fine then. Although if that's allowed and accepted, why not just give them lethal injection? Might as well kill them faster to end their suffering and get them out of the hospital so they aren't taking up space for the next patient.

Are you being obtuse or really just completely ignorant about the dividing line between a natural death based on a disease process and the deliberate killing of someone?

I take issue with your broader opinion that the choice not to treat is torture. Not your family, not your choice. In this case, I whole-heartedly agree with the MYOB approach.

 

[88GT]

Once again, INGO misses the forest for the trees.

Whether or not the child could have been saved is not the point.

The point is that end of life decisions about you and your kin are being made FOR you.

If someone wants to spend a billion dollars extending their life for another 2 minutes, that should be their prerogative, and not the decision of a bean counter.

On the flip side, if someone doesn't want ANY care, that should also be their decision.

Socialized medicine removes your power to make your own decisions.

Medical decisions are constantly being made for us by the government, without the implementation of Obamacare or any other version of socialized single-payer systems.

 

[beararms1776]

Medical decisions are constantly being made for us by the government, without the implementation of Obamacare or any other version of socialized single-payer systems.

But what ATO said just makes it more legal thats all.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Medical decisions are constantly being made for us by the government, without the implementation of Obamacare or any other version of socialized single-payer systems.

Agreed. Regulations and "guidelines" are just as bad as hundreds of pages of legislation.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Once again, INGO misses the forest for the trees.

Whether or not the child could have been saved is not the point.

The point is that end of life decisions about you and your kin are being made FOR you.

If someone wants to spend a billion dollars extending their life for another 2 minutes, that should be their prerogative, and not the decision of a bean counter.

On the flip side, if someone doesn't want ANY care, that should also be their decision.

Socialized medicine removes your power to make your own decisions.

Medical decisions are constantly being made for us by the government, without the implementation of Obamacare or any other version of socialized single-payer systems.

I would say that you are both right so far as this type of change is a matter of magnitude, somewhat like a slave being sold from a bad owner to an even worse owner.