[MD] How far do you go to preserve individual life?

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Ian:
The question is: What does the MOQ offer as a guide to making the decision as 
to who lives and who dies? What do you say?

I gather you prefer a government panel rather than a private insurer who is 
bound by contract. Does the patient's family have any say?

Platt

On 13 Sep 2010 at 17:13, Ian wrote:

> Nice try Platt, to sneak death panel propaganda under the guise of a  
> serious moral question.
> 
> Every organisation engaging in health and safety risks makes this  
> decision every minute of every day. Think drilling for oil in the gulf.
> 
> As far as health care goes US & UK are identical in nature - ie mixed.  
> Basic minimum socialized care limited by tax budgets plus private care  
> limited by insurance budgets limited by personal choice and ability to  
> pay. The balance is different, the socialized downside is lower in the  
> US, but the private upside is identical. Read my lips - identical.
> 
> Neither is imune from the difficult decision. Both have to conserve  
> budgets as opportunity to spend on alternatives. Only one has to hold  
> back  funds for shareholder profit dividends.
> 
> Now, what was the question ?
> Ian
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On 13 Sep 2010, at 16:35, plattholden at gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > All:
> >
> > In a conversation reported in the Guardian.uk scientists David  
> > Attenborough and
> > Richard Dawkins were asked, "What is the most difficult ethical  
> > dilemma facing
> > science today:?
> >
> > "DA: How far do you go to preserve individual human life?
> >
> > RD: That's a good one, yes.
> >
> > DA: I mean, what are we to do with the NHS? How can you put a value  
> > in pounds,
> > shillings and pence on an individual life? There was a case with a  
> > bowel cancer
> > drug -- if you gave that drug, which costs several thousand pounds, it
> > continued life for six weeks on. How can you make that decision?"
> >
> > How would the MOQ make that decision? There's no direct answer that  
> > I can find
> > in Pirsig's writings. I presume that if the patient was of sound  
> > mind and, from
> > his past history, could potentially offer something of intellectual  
> > value
> > during the remaining six or so weeks of his life, he should receive  
> > the drug.
> > Otherwise, the social value of his life would rule which, as the  
> > Giant would
> > judge, isn't worth a pence. Biologically the poor soul would be best  
> > recycled.
> >
> > What's really horrendous about the question is that in the NHS and now
> > potentially in the U.S. such questions are all too real with life  
> > and death
> > decisions in the hands of a government committee, i.e., a death  
> > panel. I don't
> > know about you, but the thought of my government determining whether  
> > I live or
> > die makes me sick. It's as if Joe Stalin was resurrected.
> >
> > When you surrender such personal decisions to the government, not  
> > only is your
> > life threatened, but DQ, the creative force of evolution, dies, too.  
> > Perhaps,
> > the MOQ answer is just that -- take responsibility for your own life  
> > so DQ can
> > flourish.
> >
> > The interview is at:
> >
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/11/science-david-attenborough-
> > richard-dawkins
> >
> > Regards,
> > Platt
> > 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/md/archives.html
> 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/md/archives.html