[MD] The Death Panels

[Ian Glendinning]

Horse, et al,

I'm pretty sure when Palin used that rhetoric it had already been
invented in British politics ? She was obviously using it to draw
attention to this difficulty in "socialized" medicine - the kind
American conseravtives recoil at. Easy point to score.

It's real enough that health-care committees have to sit in the UK to
allocate who gets (or doesn't get) expensive treatments - life and
death - when they are limited by budgets. Nothing to stop individuals
with private wealth or insurance getting those treatments, if denied
by the public system, nor charitable / philanthropic funding. We pay
taxes by choice.

It's right wing hype to call these "death panels", as if any system
(socialized or otherwise) could avoid this problem. The right thing is
to wake up to the fact that health care ain't free, and health-care
professional make life and death decisions every day.

The right response is to work out an equitable (moral quality)
approach to dealing with such difficult decisions. Demonizing people
who have to make them - with dirty rhetoric - is a cheap shot.

Regards
Ian

On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Ham Priday<hampday1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Greetings, Horse --
>
>
>> Arlo (or anyone else reading)
>>
>> Help me out here. I've spent some time searching for
>> some mention of these so called "Death Panels" and
>> all that I seem to find is, effectively, propaganda by
>> generally right-wing fear-mongers equating a possible
>> decision making process with this emotive terminology.
>> All I can assume from this is that it is just that -
>> fear-mongering and emotive hyperbole. I doubt that
>> Platt will actually give me anything like what I asked him
>> for so I'm asking you - is the term "Death Panel" used
>> in any official capacity in the proposed healthcare legislation.
>
> I have been following the House Healthcare bill since the initial draft was
> unveiled in June of this year.  Known as H.R. 3200, the bill proposes to
> "reform the current system" to reduce costs, improve choices, and expand
> access to "quality, affordable health care for all Americans" at an
> estimated cost of $1.5 trillion over ten years.  Obama has been pushing it
> as a "public option", which is somewhat misleading for a mandatory program
> that will force private (profit-making) insurance companies out of business
> because they can't compete with a tax-supported government.  Facing
> increasing resistance to his "reform" proposal (85% of U.S. citizens are
> satisfied with their existing healthcare benefits), he's now promoting it as
> a "moral obligation."
>
> The issue in question is a widely quoted Facebook posting in which former
> Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin charged that federal bureaucrats would play God,
> ruling on whether ailing seniors or children with Down syndrome - such as
> Palin's son Trig - are worthy of healthcare.  Palin called the proposal
> "downright evil," arguing that a health-care overhaul would create "death
> panels" forcing the elderly into accepting minimal care at the end of their
> lives.
>
> The "end-of-life" provision that stirred up the "Death Panel" controversy
> requires that people on Medicare receive an "Advance Care Planning
> Consultation" every five years or when their health status changes. Although
> the Senate Finance Committee is reportedly dropping this provision, Palin
> has stuck to her guns.  "With all due respect, it's misleading for the
> President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that
> simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients," she said,
> noting that the provision authorizes consultations whenever a Medicare
> recipient's health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home.
>
> Here's the relevant wording of this section, [note especially item (E)]:
>
> "Such consultation shall include the following: '(A) An explanation by the
> practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and
> considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to. (B) An
> explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living
> wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses. (C) An explanation by
> the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.
> (D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and
> State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance
> care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, advance care
> planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including
> those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965). (E) An explanation by
> the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports
> available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such
> services and supports that are available under this title'."
>
> Another page (relating to treatment limitations for the elderly and
> terminally ill) states:
>
> "(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range
> from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all
> or specified interventions."
>
> Inasmuch as none of this has been finalized (Congress will not vote on the
> bill until the summer recess ends in September), and references to existing
> law have yet to be specified, I'll let you and the MD participants decide
> the extent to which the "Death Panels" charge is valid or just "right-wing
> hype".
>
> Hope this helps fill you in on this latest American struggle with creeping
> collectivism.
>
> Best regards,
> Ham
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>