Obamacare dehumanizes "we the people" into a line item on a budget.
Once we out live our ability to pay taxes, we can be "cut"
Top British doctor's chilling claim: The National Health Service kills off 130,000 elderly patients every year. Is this going to happen in a future America,under Obamacare?
Steverno~POTL~PWCM~JLA
2012/06/21 16:17:35
|
|
|||||
|
93 votes
|
|
72% | |||
|
4 votes
|
|
3% | |||
|
32 votes
|
|
25% | |||
NHS doctors are prematurely ending the lives of thousands of elderly hospital patients because they are difficult to manage or to free up beds, a senior consultant claimed yesterday.
Professor Patrick Pullicino said doctors had turned the use of a controversial ‘death pathway’ into the equivalent of euthanasia of the elderly.
Professor Patrick Pullicino said doctors had turned the use of a controversial ‘death pathway’ into the equivalent of euthanasia of the elderly.
He claimed there was often a lack of clear evidence for initiating the Liverpool Care Pathway, a method of looking after terminally ill patients that is used in hospitals across the country.
It is designed to come into force when doctors believe it is impossible for a patient to recover and death is imminent.
It can include withdrawal of treatment – including the provision of water and nourishment by tube – and on average brings a patient to death in 33 hours.
It can include withdrawal of treatment – including the provision of water and nourishment by tube – and on average brings a patient to death in 33 hours.
There are around 450,000 deaths in Britain each year of people who are in hospital or under NHS care. Around 29 per cent – 130,000 – are of patients who were on the LCP.
Professor Pullicino claimed that far too often elderly patients who could live longer are placed on the LCP and it had now become an ‘assisted death pathway rather than a care pathway’.
He cited ‘pressure on beds and difficulty with nursing confused or difficult-to-manage elderly patients’ as factors.
He cited ‘pressure on beds and difficulty with nursing confused or difficult-to-manage elderly patients’ as factors.
Professor Pullicino revealed he had personally intervened to take a patient off the LCP who went on to be successfully treated.
He said this showed that claims they had hours or days left are ‘palpably false’.
He said this showed that claims they had hours or days left are ‘palpably false’.
In the example he revealed a 71-year-old who was admitted to hospital suffering from pneumonia and epilepsy was put on the LCP by a covering doctor on a weekend shift.
Read More: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161869/To...
Top Opinion
-
Farnsworth 2012/06/21 16:26:03
it is also reccomended that people over 80 are denied advanced stroke treatment.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/he...
Race-the so-called 'Final Solution-so would it now appear that the British National Health Service has adopted pretty much the same tactics to get rid of the elderly in this once great country of ours...!!
Yes this could happen here.
Doctor assisted suicide was the toe hold, but "I'd give your Grandma a pill to make her comfortable"(BHO) will be the next Rubicon to be crossed.
Life, or at least life determined to be an un-necessary drain on society, will be let go easily with a carelesness to remind us Pol Pot and Mao, Stalin and Hitler.
There is a little of real neglect going on, but most hospitals do not do this deliberately.
And BTW,Obamacare still would still allow these people those services & more,without being required to purchase healthcare insurance.
If you go to "one provider" insurance, who pays for aggressive end of life treatment that doesn't truly favor patient nor society? Society does. So who should have some say about when their efforts end? Should a vegetative individual be kept "alive" by feeding tubes for years with virtually no chance of recovery? One provider insurance removes the choice of the patient who should be personally responsible for financing end of life treatment under those circumstances.
Obamacare at its finest moment.
Take that thought just a little farther
Accident victims , why bother with expensive shock trauma centers spending huge sums of money . When the potential organ donor ( due to the the severe shortage ) should just be make comfortable . Society saves cash and the politically connected have a ready source of body parts.
Not to far from, " why maintain ICUs" , medical Darwinism. There is a surplus population to draw upon . Cost to society ( position and connections are secondary ) in terms of cash and cash alone determines who dies .
Why should any patient have any say at all , when with a single payer it costs someone else. Death by disease and accident based entirely on cost ?
The wise have personal major medical insurance (and keep reasonably healthy lifestyles). The future wise will also be personally responsible for their medical requirements.
The thought of death doesn't really bother me. We all find it eventually. Dignity and quality of life, and personal choice concerning my treatment is far more important than living a few days more in pain or a vegetative state.
Under any single payer plan that option, and options for treatment disappear.
If a patient is advised that chances are nil and the want to expend all of it for a single minute , then the choice is theirs. They can't take the money with them, Money is worthless after death . ( Bankruptcies , it is the medical providers that lose )
"I think it's interesting how the medical establishment is perfectly willing to take every last dime of the patient, full well knowing they're not going to cure them."
Patients are normally told what their chances are.
Medical care is a commodity , sold like any other. Those who wish to purchase do so.
Like any other commodity , desire does not equal entitlement .
We are all born with a terminal illness. Fate has decreed that mortal life comes with an expiration date. Medical care is an industry of compassion , that does not mean that it comes without cost to the recipient .
The greatest cost of medical care could be removed with tort reform and streamlining FDA approval of New Medicines .
The doctor would say, ok that's what we're going to do then. Within a week, they're flat on their back from the chemo instead of enjoying what time they have remaining.
That's really the only point that you make with which I disagree - that the patient really is fully informed under these circumstances. Human nature is not to want to pop someone's balloon - even when there's really no reasonable chance of success.
The dozen or so that I personally knew ( Cancer ) were all given fairly accurate time spans. Most declined the treatment as the pain wasn't worth the expected benefits. One went to surgery and the doctors stopped mid procedure and told the patient it was hopeless when he woke up. Others were told that treatment should be limited to attempting to promote quality of life . ( unlimited pain medications, self administered ) essentially go home , be with family and wait for the end. Hospice care was a blessing for them .
Have not seen anyone given false hope . One was advised to call for last rights ( not cancer ) Prognosis wasn't good. That one after a few months actually recovered and is well today. Staying alive was a daily , sometimes hourly struggle.
Most were given Odds , Risk / Benefit ratios and consequences of both choices.
Perhaps merely fortunate ?
Followed closely by expensive defensive practices and tests to protect against potential lawsuits.