|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Dec 10, 2010 8:11:47 GMT -8
We have always had Death Panels. After my father had his skull crushed in in three places from a construction rod Black Jack outside his home on Upas Street in Escondido he was lying in a coma in Palomar Memorial Hospital. The Chief Nurse on the floor asked me if I would be all right to "No Code" my father.
I told her I had no problem with it as Dad and I shared the same belief that life in a wheel chair drooling at people and not being able to speak is not LIFE.
If I was a wheel chair bound drooler, I'd take an overdose of sleeping pills and not give it a second thought. Unfortunately, I probably would not be able to, so I have told my children and my wife (all of them) to help Dad die if it is at all possible.
There comes a time that it is just not practical to prolong life. I would gladly sit in on my own Death Panel if the option was not to go out in a lot of pain.
How about you guys? Would you undergo a Heart Lung transplant to get a possible six more months out of life? Would you do it if your family had to pay for the procedure? Would you do it if your family and the government agreed to split the cost? That would be about a half million for your wife and children to come up with. I would never ask my children to use their life savings to pay to keep me alive for six more months.
Fugg that music sheet!
They could give me a generous overdose of Heroin any day and I'd say thank you to the attending physician who would probably be a member of the Kevorkian Society for humane death that I want to see founded. Jack, bless him, needs name recognition for eternity for his efforts to promote painless and decent death.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Dec 10, 2010 8:17:02 GMT -8
Think about it. We treat our dogs better than we treat our grandparents when the time to die has come. My arthritic old dogs had all been put down they slide off into dream land with their last memory is one of no pain and comforting pats and pets on the head as they drop off.
At my age, I have been to a lot of hospital intensive care wards as I have seen a lot of good friends and relatives die. Not one of them went out as peacefully as my dogs have.
|
|
|
|
Post by joshjones1 on Dec 10, 2010 10:40:49 GMT -8
Joe, you are definitely very passionate about this topic. You post on it often.
Crank up that morphine!
|
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Dec 10, 2010 15:26:38 GMT -8
Think about it. We treat our dogs better than we treat our grandparents when the time to die has come. My arthritic old dogs had all been put down they slide off into dream land with their last memory is one of no pain and comforting pats and pets on the head as they drop off. At my age, I have been to a lot of hospital intensive care wards as I have seen a lot of good friends and relatives die. Not one of them went out as peacefully as my dogs have. I tend to agree with the last paragraph. My dogs went out a lot better than some of my friends have. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Dec 10, 2010 17:08:33 GMT -8
Think about it. We treat our dogs better than we treat our grandparents when the time to die has come. My arthritic old dogs had all been put down they slide off into dream land with their last memory is one of no pain and comforting pats and pets on the head as they drop off. At my age, I have been to a lot of hospital intensive care wards as I have seen a lot of good friends and relatives die. Not one of them went out as peacefully as my dogs have. I tend to agree with the last paragraph. My dogs went out a lot better than some of my friends have. Yes, so have a number of my pets... ...but none of them went out because of the diktat of some slimey government slug. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Dec 11, 2010 7:59:59 GMT -8
I tend to agree with the last paragraph. My dogs went out a lot better than some of my friends have. Yes, so have a number of my pets... ...but none of them went out because of the diktat of some slimey government slug. Yes, I have to laugh at the folks who equate their pets to humans. How many of those pets were put down because the cost of a cure to their condition was too much for the owner to handle. Just better and cheaper to put them down. Now we want to pass that task where it concerns Grandma over to some Government Death Panel so we can skirt the responsibility of taking care of those who took care of us. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Dec 11, 2010 9:42:26 GMT -8
Obviously we should outsource the "death panels" to private enterprise. The private economy always does everything better than government. We could call those enterprises "health insurance companys". Oh wait, we already have.  |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Dec 11, 2010 10:49:39 GMT -8
Something like 90% of all Medicare payments go to maintain people in their last year of life. And Medicare is an unfunded liability to the tune of (if I recall correctly -- and I probably don't) something like $35 trillion. That's with a "t" -- the amount is multiples of our so-called national debt.
The fact is, financially, death panels -- so called -- are not only justified, they are long overdue. The problem is, we don't generally look at it as a financial equation. We look at it as Mom or Dad, brother, sister or friend. Or we bring God into it and impose our religious beliefs on the rest of society.
I don't have a good answer. Intellectually, I have no problem with rationing scarce taxpayer resources such that they aren't poured down a rat hole trying to "cure" people who have no real chance of an extended life. But I also have elderly parents and I don't trust bureaucrats.
Damned if you do... Damned if you don't... It is too bad that we can't have the kinds of discussion that we need to have in this country without extremists politicizing the situation by inventing emotionally charged phrases like "death panels".
Yoda out...
|
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Dec 11, 2010 11:24:47 GMT -8
Something like 90% of all Medicare payments go to maintain people in their last year of life. And Medicare is an unfunded liability to the tune of (if I recall correctly -- and I probably don't) something like $35 trillion. That's with a "t" -- the amount is multiples of our so-called national debt. Which is why the issue of putting down the family dog was brought up. Some of us have seen the family dog go out in a humane way, with family present, holding paw and talking to for a couple hours. We have also seen friends and family extended much too long through unbelievable suffering, loss of spirit and will and financial stress to a point that some have lost everything. What is political about this discussion? A couple guys on here see conspiracy in every subject and it gets so predictable and old, plus it adds nothing to the discussion. My family knows that I am not going out drooling on myself in a wheelchair.. it will never happen. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Dec 11, 2010 16:39:58 GMT -8
>>>What is political about this discussion?<<<
What is political is that the ultimate aim of socialized medical care is that private fee for service care will be illegal.
That takes the "end-of-life" decisions away from the family, and places it into the hands of slimey government pieces of human excrement. (most of whom themselves should be euthanized)
You didn't have some filthy government creep tell you when to put your dog down. YOU made the decision based on YOUR judgment.
People deserve the same consideration, and most people I know will make the right decision without some GODDAM government slug sitting in his air-conditioned office wielding his pencil making it for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Dec 11, 2010 18:37:02 GMT -8
>>>What is political about this discussion?<<< What is political is that the ultimate aim of socialized medical care is that private fee for service care will be illegal. That takes the "end-of-life" decisions away from the family, and places it into the hands of slimey government pieces of human excrement. (most of whom themselves should be euthanized) You didn't have some filthy government creep tell you when to put your dog down. YOU made the decision based on YOUR judgment. People deserve the same consideration, and most people I know will make the right decision without some GODDAM government slug sitting in his air-conditioned office wielding his pencil making it for them. Seriously, how do you make it through the day with all the conspiracists out there? I doubt that there is a person on the planet who wants to make the acceptance of a private fee for health service care illegal. I mean, really, not one. Not even the most extreme liberal on the planet. Yet you're running around like Chicken Little, convinced that the sky is falling. So I have a question for you Mr. Conservative (with apologies to Barry Goldwater). With 90% of Medicare payments going to people in their last year of life, and with unfunded Medicare liabilities somewhere near $35 trillion, it is safe to say that in the absence of an alternative plan, you are advocating the wasting of (say) $30 trillion. Since you are obviously not really in favor of that, what is your plan? How do you fund that $30 trillion expense without the use of death panels? You can't cut services enough any other way and, Gawd forbid, you can't ever raise anyone's taxes. So what do you do? Yoda out... |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Dec 13, 2010 6:33:49 GMT -8
I did a little checking and, as I suspected, I was out in the weeds as respects the size of the unfunded Medicare liabilities. I said $35 trillion and it was actually $73.4 trillion -- plus another $15.5 trillion for the new prescription drug benefit. So the total is $88.9 trillion, not $35 trillion. My bad... According to this writer, www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html it would take an 81% federal income tax increase to bring those numbers into a "funded" state. (Actually, that would bring Social Security into a funded state as well -- but that's a mere $17 trillion unfunded liability.) Of course, such a move would be counterproductive in that it would send the economy into the toilet. So davdesid, the question is back to you. I assume that you would not support an 81% federal income tax increase and you've made it pretty clear that you oppose cutting off life saving services to those in their last year of life (aka: death panels) -- even though they represent 90% of all Medicare expenditures (probably exclusive of the prescription drug program). So how exactly do you propose to bring Medicare back into a funded state when you oppose both the most significant thing that you can do to cut costs and you also oppose increasing taxes? You can't have it both ways. Actually, there are a couple of options. You could means test Medicare -- only make it available to those with a net asset level that is below a certain level. That level might have to be fairly low, in order to bring Medicare to a fully funded state -- but I don't know how low. Doing that would protect the poor and middle class but it would kind of screw the rich (and maybe the upper middle class) -- in that they have paid for benefits that they would not be getting. But the rich would survive. Or you could cut benefits across the board -- maybe you only pay 50% of Medicare bills. That would bankrupt many to most of the poor and middle class (who would no longer be able to afford Medicare Supplements as the cost of those Supplements would skyrocket) while protecting the rich (who could still afford Medicare Supplements). Or maybe you could try to blend the two -- cutting benefits some while concurrently eliminating benefits (on a sliding scale?) for the rich. Either way, if you oppose death panels and you oppose the notion of that it is okay to have $88.9 trillion in unfunded Medicare liabilities, then you have to support something. So what do you support? Oh and incidentally, the "slimey government pieces of human excrement" that would serve on these death panels would be the same medical professionals that advise individuals and families as to their options now, under the system that you apparently approve of. Yoda out... |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Dec 13, 2010 12:15:35 GMT -8
Something like 90% of all Medicare payments go to maintain people in their last year of life. And Medicare is an unfunded liability to the tune of (if I recall correctly -- and I probably don't) something like $35 trillion. That's with a "t" -- the amount is multiples of our so-called national debt. Which is why the issue of putting down the family dog was brought up. Some of us have seen the family dog go out in a humane way, with family present, holding paw and talking to for a couple hours. We have also seen friends and family extended much too long through unbelievable suffering, loss of spirit and will and financial stress to a point that some have lost everything. What is political about this discussion? A couple guys on here see conspiracy in every subject and it gets so predictable and old, plus it adds nothing to the discussion. My family knows that I am not going out drooling on myself in a wheelchair.. it will never happen. We all seem to be forgetting one aspect of this issue. I would bet that most of us have living wills. I know I do. We get so caught up in the idea (rightfully so in my view) that some low level government slug will be making those decisions for those who have not planned for the end of life event. Do we have a real argument or a political argument? |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Dec 13, 2010 14:54:04 GMT -8
>>>I doubt that there is a person on the planet who wants to make the acceptance of a private fee for health service care illegal. I mean, really, not one. Not even the most extreme liberal on the planet.<<<YoYo Ya, right.... www.healthcareil.org/faq.php?page=2/#buy_health_care |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Dec 13, 2010 18:05:09 GMT -8
Gonna passionately rant about how bad / un-American everybody else's ideas are but you can't come up with any of your own?
How extreme right wing of you. Please don't breed.
We need serious people interested in finding solutions to our problems -- not ideologues who regurgitate the mantras of those with an economic interest in promoting divisiveness and preventing solutions.
Yoda out...
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Dec 14, 2010 12:53:09 GMT -8
Obviously we should outsource the "death panels" to private enterprise. The private economy always does everything better than government. We could call those enterprises "health insurance companys". Oh wait, we already have. Indeed, the entire system as it has been set up still allows the Health Care Providers to make the live or die decision. Cost is a consideration. If you do not like their solutions, you can always sue and lose in court, or you can pay 1.3 Million to have chronic smoking Grandma's lungs and heart replaced with a cadaver transplant. She will live for a year or two longer and will constantly bitch at you for not letting her die when her time was up. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Dec 14, 2010 13:39:02 GMT -8
Gonna passionately rant about how bad / un-American everybody else's ideas are but you can't come up with any of your own? How extreme right wing of you. Please don't breed. We need serious people interested in finding solutions to our problems -- not ideologues who regurgitate the mantras of those with an economic interest in promoting divisiveness and preventing solutions. Yoda out... Trouble is, the "serious" people cramming their "solutions" down everyone's throat are the same government slugs who gave us Medicare in the first place. To ensure health security for the elderly, doncha know. I'm not disputing your numbers. But the gummint said 40 years ago that Medicare wouldn't cost more than ~12 billion or so. Now, after nearly forty years of forcing people to pay into it, the slugs are all fisheyed and incredulous to find out that OMG!!!... elderly people have the most health issues. Who knew? So, cut 'em off when some paper-shuffler decides they ain't worth it. And it's supposed to be those evil Republicans who want to feed grandma dog-food and pull the plug on her. And making fee for service ultimately illegal is in play, as the not-at-all-right-wing link I provided shows. |
|
|
|
Post by survalli on Dec 14, 2010 23:46:07 GMT -8
Joe, im glad you posted this. its the god honest truth, they will try and get you to pull the plug on relative if that survivability is low...there is alot that goes into it to make it legal. but lets just say they have social workers on call to lend you some words of encouragement.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Dec 15, 2010 12:48:32 GMT -8
I think that it is quite plausible that the govt. will at some time want to outlaw private health insurance. "Fairness" and "Social Justice" will be cited as justifications. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't outlawing private insurance part of HillaryCare?)
Too many Americans do not understand that the Left, especially the Far Left, is essentially authoritarian and anti-libertarian. They feel that they know what's best and that it's important that everyone be brought into the fold. Of course, that can only be done two ways. The first is to offer arguments so persuasive that everybody happily signs on. Since leftist ideas are not so hot, that alternative won't work.
The obvious alternative to that is to use the police power of the state to compel the unwashed to fall into line.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Dec 15, 2010 13:58:47 GMT -8
I think that it is quite plausible that the govt. will at some time want to outlaw private health insurance. "Fairness" and "Social Justice" will be cited as justifications. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't outlawing private insurance part of HillaryCare?) Too many Americans do not understand that the Left, especially the Far Left, is essentially authoritarian and anti-libertarian. They feel that they know what's best and that it's important that everyone be brought into the fold. Of course, that can only be done two ways. The first is to offer arguments so persuasive that everybody happily signs on. Since leftist ideas are not so hot, that alternative won't work. The obvious alternative to that is to use the police power of the state to compel the unwashed to fall into line. AzWm All of the liberal plans are to ultimately get rid of any private insurance or fee for service in favor of "single-payer" (gummint) control. Stalinism is in their DNA. In their own words: www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmR1anu2QOkwww.youtube.com/watch?v=S2N32x4UXy8OBTW, YoYo, WRT to your snark, "Please don't breed", it's too late. I have grown children, and growing grandchildren. The oldest grandchild will be eligible to vote next year. I have counseled all of them about people who masquerade as "moderates". |
|
