This article sounds like a plug for the healthcare rationing that our government put into the healthcare bill and our president signed while denying the reality of the rationing and denying that medical plans will be replaced. "If you like your healthcare you will be able to keep it."

Hogwash!

This country sounds more and more like a lying communist dictatorship to me.

Hillary presented a more comprehensive heath care reform package while first lady.

It went no where. Regardless of party , a legislature full of lawyers will not agree on tort reform.

If we like our healthcare plan we can keep it? Right...except once the federal plan takes over the private insurance companies will cut services to bare bones to keep in line with the fed policy. We lose either way.

I can't believe the govt stopped looking into counseling all because of that idiotic woman Palin. I totally agree that patients need to be told what their options are. It's not a stupid death panel, and where she came up with that one, I've no idea. What a freak. God help us if she decides to run in 2012. There are a lot of other idiots who just love her - though I can't figure out why!

As for being over treated, I agree that happens too. I don't have cancer, but I do have many, many back and neck problems, osteoporosis, knee problems, hip problems, etc... (lot's more), yet all the docs can do is keep me on pain meds. Don't get me wrong, I'm so thankful for that because if I wasn't able to take my morphine or other lower dose narcotic, I wouldn't be able to walk - and I'm only 42. I begged for surgery to fix me, but I've been told by several different doctors that I "can't be fixed", so all they do is dope me up.

I've been approved for disability through Social Security, and also have a 100% disability through the VA because I'm unable to work. Aside from the looks I get when parking in the handicapped spots, I'm grateful for these disability payments because I currently take care of my daughter and pay all expenses in the house, and my mother lives here too - basically to help take care of me when I need it. We wouldn't be able to live on her tiny social sec. check she gets each month, and it would take about a year to go through all the money in the banks we have, which isn't much.

I'm just afraid that when I hit my 50's, I'll be on such a high dose of narcotics and because of tolerance issues, that it will literally kill me. I've had several bad side affects from all the medications I take, narcotic and non-narcotic, that I wonder what they'll have me on in 10 years, and how I'll tolerate it. It actually frightens me thinking about it, but really, my only option is to take pain meds, and has been like this for the past 10 years. I hate taking them, but I have to in order to get around, yet I still have to use a wheelchair at times. That I really hate. I just wonder if maybe they're over treating me because with the VA medical system that mostly sucks, they just couldn't be bothered to give me more options.

Death panels are coming....COUNT ON IT!! Oh we will call them nice euphamistic terms like counselling or efficient use of resources or something nice and pretty but THEY WILL BE PART OF OBAMA CARE. We are not blind nor fooled.

Death panels are coming....COUNT ON IT!! Oh we will call them nice euphamistic terms like counselling or efficient use of resources or something nice and pretty but THEY WILL BE PART OF OBAMA CARE. We are not blind nor fooled.

Death panels might be a good thing. We have them now whether you realize it or not. One is called "the family". They decide to pull the life support when "they believe" there is no more hope for you. Doctors today decide whether or not you are a good transplant candidate with the alternate being death. My father was once told they were taking him off of life support because the end was near, hours. He said BS that without life support he would certainly die but with it he still had a chance. He lived 10 more years.

What is the matter with Americans that they can't think for themselves?

Instead, Vandenberg, a pharmacist in Franklin, Mass., had endured two surgeries, chemotherapy and radiation for an incurable brain tumor before she died in July 2004.

One assumes she was an adult. She could have just said no. She didn't need anyone's permission and the big bad doctor wouldn't have spanked her. Really.

More baloney from the new government office of Fatalities and Suicides.

If this could be taken seriously then the sarcasm wold slack up but when a bunch of pompous windbags in the congress won't even use the plan they want everyone else "to die for" this gets a bit ridiculous and I think maybe it's time for them to go.

Hell, no one can read the piece of trash they call a health plan....especially them.

This actually happened to my grandmother. I had my last real conversation with my grandmother the night before she was hospitalized for radiation treatments. The treatments were so painful that they couldn't even finish. She spent the next couple of weeks in a nursing home being pumped full of morphine until she died. I wish that she had been able to speak to an end of life counselor. It might have ended her denial (and ours) and prevented the unnecessary torture she went through for that unrealistic shred of hope given by her doctors.

I can't believe the govt stopped looking into counseling all because of that idiotic woman Palin.

I can't believe you can give her that much credit.

The person in this story was 32 years old and had a two year old daughter to live for. It's her choice to try anything to live. But will soon be the government's via a board (since you don't like "panels").

BTW, it's none of your business what other people choose to do medically, paticularly when they have their own insurance, paid for by them. Insurance is supposed to be for catastrophic illness, not a bunch of freeloaders who don't feel like paying for their own well visits.

Grow up, if that is possible. (Though I doubt it.)

BTW, it's none of your business what other people choose to do medically,

Which is why abortion is a right.

Bonos-Rama,

Interesting you posit the right to kill but not the right to live.

The bigger issue in free countries is more accurately labeled reproductive rights. People can choose to have kids or not. Having them is not forced upon them, and neither is limiting the number they can have (think China = 1).

Ben, give it up. The fetus has NO rights, whether you think so or not. Mind your own business. That is why we have seperation of church and state, thank God. Bravo, Usmith. However, the right to HAVE children must be called into question in this increasingly overpopulated world. Abortion is not the answer. It is a "last resort" mechanism. One needs a driver's license to legally drive. Consider the same for breeding. Harsh but inevitably necessary. Ignoring the reality of an increasingly polluted planet with its progressively depleted resources is a prescription for disaster.

I wonder why people like this, so concerned about overpopulation and the pollution of the planet, don't volunteer to be first in line to jump off of a cliff. You think of humans as parasites, forgetting that you are one yourself. GFY and FYL, idiot.

It would be interesting to see how much you charge when you know you are dying? Especially if you think there is an alternative. Or would you sacrifice yourself for the sake of Obama? I doubt.

I want everybody to do as much as they can to stay alive, if that is their wish. Especially a fetus/unborn baby, which cannot speak for itself.

Perhaps we could simply stop paying people for having kids they cannot afford and the problem would work itself out. I posit that just having the knowledge that in less than one generation, you will have to pay your own way in life for you and your kids unless you are disabled, would greatly change reproductive behavior.

I just read an article less than a week ago in the WSJ (the most shameful propaganda piece I have seen in recent times). They were encouraging people (obviously their readers) to have more kids. They posited you should have them, even if you thought you could not afford them. They gave reasons like economies of scale, your lifestyle won't change much between a single child and multiple children (btw they recommended multiple) and finally that upbringing and good education don't really matter at all in your childrens' outcomes in life.

They went on to post numbers that the upper middle class (Obama's soak the rich people -- who aren't rich enough to escape his 40%+ taxation rates, because they work for a living) are only replacing themselves at just over a 1 to 2 ratio. In essence they are phasing themselves out. Gee, I wonder why?

Why would we be having kids when we see that they will be nothing more than tax slaves in this world? And we will pay a fortune to subsidize dozens of other people, while paying horribly over inflated rates for our own child (not 5 like the people on public aid down the street) to be educated and cared for. And the final outcome, is its all for tax slavery, for everyone (that we indirectly subsidized) and directly paid for to be exploited by our government. No thanks!

Are you kidding me! You say that Palin is politicizing healthcare. Give me a break!

dpac, an ad hominem attack shows you to be the idiot. If you had an ounce of intelligence (doubtful), you would argue the facts. But that would require an open mind; clearly not your strong suit. And resorting to cursing, even in an abbreviated form, shows you to be the scumbag you obviously are.

So you would rather play God and snuff out a life before its time. We are on this earth to care for each other not destroy one another. God has a plan and purpose for each of us. It is in his hands how many days we have on this earth, why don't you all just leave His job to Him and get angry with Satin for causing the mess called illness, and while you are doing that pray that our current administration sees the lifgt and gives government back to the people. God Bless

If God has a plan and everything is pre-ordained, who are you to say whether the life should continue or not? Could it be part of his plan? I doubt any of us could tell the difference. I do not support abortion and think it is abhorrent, but that is my belief and may or may not be shared by others. I do support those who wish to end needless suffering. I do not have the right to dictate or "play God" to another human being, be it fetal, ill or otherwise. More men have died in the name of God than any other reason. I do, however, agree that we need to take our government back from the Socialists that are running it now.

JM, I am with you on this. We can euthanize a pet, but not a person. The so called 'doctor' that was involved in Michael Jackson's untimely death is still practicing medicine, but Kevorkian went to jail for assisting death when it was iminent anyway. I have seen too many friends and family members be 'kept alive' for the sole reason of medical bills. We, a supposedly humane society.

Doctors are trained from medical school forward to cure and provide relief. If they feel threatened by the possibility of a lawsuit, that only gives further reason to pursue drastic measures. When my family decided that we only wanted palliative care for my 85-year old mother, I had to really insist on palliative care. Everyone in medicine's default position was to cure, reconstruct, etc. By that time, the "fix-it" list was so extensive that there was no end to it. She had a broken hip, dementia, breast cancer and was deaf, among other things. There was nothing that would have provided her one more pain-free day short of being knocked out with morphine.

There was no counseling, but the end was at hand and it was obvious. She had Hospice care for her final month and it was a Godsend. I was able to get her out to lunch with her two best friends and she had a few more enjoyable moments in that final month under watchful eyes to make sure she wasn't in pain.

To usmith - "Insurance is supposed to be for catastrophic illness, not a bunch of freeloaders who don't feel like paying for their own well visits." - I hope you don't call yourself a "Christian" because that comment is the most anti-Christian thing a person can say. I have a friend whose husband decided it was time for a younger model (and she was only 40yrs old when he took off), he left her high and dry and told her he did not care if she ended up homeless. She works every day, does OT when possible, and she is STILL barely able to make ends meet (pay her bills, pay her TAXES, take care of her kids). She puts off going to the doctor because of her co-pay and because she can't afford to get prescriptions filled. She is actually working OT so she can go to the Dr in AUGUST, at which time she'll be able to afford to get her migraine medication re-filled. Let's not judge, shall we? Because if I can help 10 of her, and have to also pay for 2 of the "freeloaders" I'll do it without hesitation. They are my fellow humans, and if I have extra, why should I not help one in need?

To JM387 - I agree with you, in that I would rather be comfortable than doped up with poison trying to kill whatever is ailing me. I would not opt for a Kavorkian remedy, but to each their own. I think Hospice is a Godsend, and more people should look into it if they know they are terminal. Better to die around things/places you love, than in a hospital with a staff that may or may not take good care of you.

barbarainPA: I applaud your friend's willingness to work for a living, and your choice to help others. If you want to pay for freeloaders, go ahead. Me, I'd rather help people I know instead of having the government put a gun to my head and take away my ability to help the people I personally love and admire.

Change Now - It's time: You stated that "Sometimes it's time for granny to pass away like god intended. Keeping someone alive 'at all costs' is not wise." I agree- if that's granny's choice. However, if you- or some bureaucrat using QALY scores- decides that granny's not worth the cost or effort of keeping alive even if she wishes to remain alive- that's called a death panel whether or not you like the term, Sarah Palin, or conservatives. "As God intended", you say. So...are you God?

I, too, have experienced the situation to which you refer. My brother was terminally ill with lymphoma at 52 and was obviously suffering beyond what anyone should have to experience. He became paralyzed (no one could explain why) and experienced neuropathy that made him feel that he was constantly being tortured. This went on for months. Through this, the doc kept giving his wife hope, saying things like, "I think we can get a handle on this" if we just do this treatment, then that one. I never saw anything any improvement through his last two months in the hospital no matter how much chemo or radiation he underwent. Moving him for radiation just caused increased neuropathic pain and suffering. Not only that, they mis-diagnosed a blocked bowel and did an abdominal surgery that cut him from chest to pelvis only to then report that they had made a mistake and it wasn't blocked. I watched the docs give my sister-in-law false hope and never did anyone suggest hospice. She kept hoping that maybe the next treatment would work and would hang onto anything that was offered. My brother was exhausted by it all and died in the hospital with a tube down his throat, on life support. God, how I wish that a "death panel" (such a ridiculous name) would have given some honest counseling and options to this couple. What happened in this "top hospital" was criminal, if you ask me.

tathataboy - sorry, but I believe in helping THOSE IN NEED, not just THOSE I KNOW. I know that many of the "tea party" people think that most "in need" are "of color" when in fact 70% or more of welfare recipients are white. Not that it matters, it does not (to me), but there are PLENTY of people who DO care what color they are helping.

If Jesus himself were to descend and pick up where he left off, helping the poor, working with (and healing) the sick, railing at the establishment for getting rich off the backs of the poor....many of the so-called "conservatives" would call him a liberal, pinko, commie, Socialist, Communist, Marxist, free loading, tree hugging traitor. Of that I have NO doubt.

Shame on everyone who thinks that by helping someone who needs HELP (not some grifter) is wrong. Because the veterans of these wars we're waging? Yeah, they're probably going to be some of the ones who need help. You going to snub them too, with the "holier than thou" attitude?

I agree- if that's granny's choice. However, if you- or some bureaucrat using QALY scores- decides that granny's not worth the cost or effort of keeping alive even if she wishes to remain alive- that's called a death panel whether or not you like the term, Sarah Palin, or conservatives. "As God intended", you say. So...are you God?

As the Federal government increasingly controls health care by mandating minimal levels of coverage and prohibiting various exclusions as well as programs like Medicare et al, the treatment mandated MUST be medical necessary and cost effective (QALY seems like a reasonable method). Religion has no role. Cost has to have a role just as traffic engineers regularly make decisions on improving roads based, in part, on the cost per life saved by such improvements (the EPA and other government entities do this routinely as well).

For example, in Medicare, there is no room for religious preferences driving someone to receive expensive and medically futile care -- as that would be taxing one person in order to allow another to practice their religion -- pretty clearly in violation of the First Amendment. As well, some medically reasonable limit must be developed in policy just to keep the cost of "minimum" insurance affordable and to control the deficit.

Obviously, private "excess coverage" policies paid for by individuals themselves would still be able to provide care that is not "medically necessary" or is not cost effective.

Our other safety nets such as welfare, housing, and food stamps don't provide enough funds for personal private jets, $20 million mansions, or the most expensive elite caviar every day - government funded or mandated health care must be no different.

As an RN working in long term care and long term acute care, I have seen old and young kept alive, with what I consider poor quality of life, mostly at the request of families, in at least one case, to keep retirement checks coming in. We have remarkable technology available to maintain life in a body, but just because it exists doesn't mean it is appropriate for everyone. I hate the idea of legislating ethics, but there should be some system in place to stop using machinery to keep people alive when there is no hope for their quality of life to improve beyond requiring 24 hour care while contributing nothing to society. I know that sounds heartless, but it is a waste of resources that I do not believe we are inherently entitled to. Insurance isn't the issue; Medicare will keep someone on a ventilator just as long as the most expensive insurance policy. Hospital ethics committees are often inadequate. I don't have the answers, I just know that lines have to be drawn, and someone has to draw them.

Great points, S. Savage. The problem, however, is that you personally know a so-called outlier and these will always exist. But they are few and far between. Life is not necessarily fair, and it may come to be that we can no longer afford (on any level) to deal with the many because of the very few (and they are a very few) odds-beaters. Food for thought--just sayin.

It's the person being treated's right to decide when "enough is enough" and quit the treatments. Your friend has not had enough, but sometimes people will keep going on because their family is not ready to lose them. So they suffer with the injustices and discomfort to spare their family a pain that will come eventually.

I just pray when I die, I die with dignity. Preferrably quickly, but whatever God sees fit for me, I hope I have honor when I die.

It's the person being treated's right to decide when "enough is enough" and quit the treatments.

Absolutely. One of my best friends battled non-Hodgkin's lymphoma for three years. By the time it was caught, during surgery to remove an ovarian cyst, it had already spread to her uterus, liver, kidneys and lungs. She went through 3 rounds of chemo, 2 rounds of radiation therapy and finally an experimental T-cell stripping procedure. She was in the hospital so long that she named the stand her IV bags hung on; I think it was Harold. A few months after the T-cell procedure the cancer was growing again, and legions started appearing on the skin of her back. Breaking the skin barrier is apparently a very bad thing, so her doctor told her that the cancer was eventually going to win the fight, and laid out some choices. One was that she could continue with the aggressive therapy and possibly buy a few more weeks or months living in sterile conditions in the hospital. The other was that he would give her prescriptions for pain killers and a mood elevator, and she could live out the remainder of her life at home with her family. She took the second option. Her fiance, parents and sister all took leaves of absence from work, rented an RV and drove up the west coast until she couldn't go anymore.

Two days after coming home, Debbie died at 27 years old. I received a package of polaroids a few days later of the whole group in Disneyland, Debbie actually smiling and enjoying herself; something I hadn't seen in a very long time. If it wasn't for that doctor giving her the option of stopping treatment she undoubtedly would have drawn things out and died without ever leaving the hospital again.

I think she made the right choice, and am still grateful to that doctor for his counseling.

It's the person being treated's right to decide when "enough is enough" and quit the treatments.

Absolutely. However that is not the same as saying that patients have the right to government care that is not medically cost effective.

As a compassionate person, I think Medicare should provide palliative care to terminally ill patients (although, only if the patient is not paying, on their own, for other 'Hail Mary' treatments which prolong the palliative care).

I also believe that Medicare should pay for 'Dr. K' treatment for terminally ill patients that desire that option -- the main argument against it is religious (and the government should be religiously neutral) and it is certainly very cost effective (CO is really cheap and appears to be a fairly pleasant way to go -- although I'm not a doctor).

Let me tell you how "counseling" goes when you are in a situation that a loved one is critically ill. This is from personal experience. My father had a stroke and the doctor asked if he had ever in his life stated that he didn't want life support. I said not to my knowledge and her answer was that we needed to have him unplugged from life support and if we didn't she would go to the hospital board and override our decision. This was within a day or two of the stroke.There was no consideration for us or him by any doctor there, it was all by the book. The family in this situation is not emotionally able to fight back. If you think that in "counselling" a family would be given any different "advice" then you are very naive. I have given my family specific directions that they and they alone make decisions like that and that the doctors are not to be part of it.

You will need something to get rid of us since we have 99% of all guns..

pats-

that sounds like a terrible situation. It is not legal in the state that I practice in for doctors to make that decision unless we have no "next of kin" . We do ask every patient if they have a living will or if they would want to be "coded" should they arrest... that is not abnormal. (any patient that survives a code is then on life-support- even if only temporarily until they recover)

However- doctors play a large part in the decision making process of when enough is enough... and speak with family about that- but can not "pull the plug" without consent. I don't think your situation is what normally happens.

Millions of dollars are spent to keep brain dead patients alive because family can't let go- and yes that does sometimes go to the ethics board of the hospital (and sometimes to court) but I have never heard a story like yours.. after 2 days? I do n't believe it... sorry.

Why does someone always take a topic like this and turn it into an "us" vs. "them" scenario?

Pretzelchoked and DJ, the country is in the mess it's in because liberals and conservatives alike have spent the last hundred years or so slowly chipping away at our legal rights and stealing our money. BOTH parties have been doing it and continue to do it. Yeah, Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanistan. Kennedy and Johnson got us into Vietnam. And taxation? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! "Conservatives" like taxes just as much as "liberals". Quit trying to make it sound like one party is any different than the other. People are so busy blaming "them" because it couldn't be "us". THAT'S the reason "we are where we are as a nation".

Liberals, in general, are just as crooked, stupid and one-way as conservatives are. As soon as you define yourself by one of those labels, you've taken yourself out of any rational discussion.

And Pretzelchoked, admit it. You're hot for Sarah Palin, aren't you?

George Bush while he was governor of Texas sign a "death Squad bill" . I wonder if Sarah Palin knows that. Follow this link

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0322-03.htm

we are where we are as a nation because of garbage like them.

===========

Huh????? the "garbage like them" aren't in power . . . blame the other "garbage"

Bob, I applaud you. And I hope you live a long, healthy life, and when your time comes, it is quick.

I am Muslim, and sadly, in this society (the USA, and mind you...I was born and raised here, raised Catholic), death is taboo. It's hush hush and not polite talk, or considered morbid talk. I am always asking my family or friends about death, and they say why am I talking about such DEPRESSING topics, etc.

Yet, we plan our vacations, college savings funds for kids, retirement....and never our death. It WILL happen, no one can escape it, yet we are ostriches when it comes to the subject. As a Muslim, I understand that my time is written already, and nothing I may wish for or dream of is guaranteed....so I should always know that today may be that day and try and live in such a way that I will be accepted into Heaven. We should all try and live that way, maybe we'd be nicer as a society.

NASA space project...brilliant!

No, Garrick. You are spot on. And so is Bob O'Connor (just above you--post #8).

Pretzelchoked. Pardon me, I thought we lived in a free country where we can choose our fate and where people are actually entitled to their individually decided opinions on the value of death over life.

If you want to die without any treatment then go for it but don't sermonize on what the rest of us should do.

getalife..., The problem is costs. Yes, costs. We (society) can not afford: "Dr., do every thing possible for XXX." And insurance, be it private or govt., must have limits imposed on individuals that society must workout and agree to. We must learn to live by and die by these rules.

Pretzel - while we may be happy (hoping) they are in paradise, it is their presence we miss. Sorry, but if I knew FOR A FACT that my husband, father-in-law, mother, etc, would for sure be in heaven, I would still cry and be sad, because I couldn't just call them up or see them or visit them any longer. And THAT is what people cry over. The memories remain, and that's all that is left.

Cutter - your statement is morally obscene. Money governs EVERYTHING in this country. It must NEVER govern life and death!

thank you laura
.you've said exactly what has been going on for many years. let patients die with some type of dignity and comfort

Do you really believe that Sarah Palin and other right wingers are against end of life counseling? You are perpetuating lies and hatred. There is no one on earth opposed to end of life counseling, right wing or not. What many right wingers and others are conserned with is that hospital staff will decide when to stop treatment or pull the plug rather than the patient or family of the patient. This is a legitimate concern.

Reasonable limits. No, you do everything you can to save me.

I do not want some guy that had a bad weekend to give up on me.

Wingman, even if you were riding a motorcycle, with or without a helmet, crashed and burned, AND didn't have health insurance? Or you engaged in very dangerous nonwork related activities such as technical mountain climbing, paragliding, etc.?

I ride a motorcycle. I wear a helmet. But if I'm knocked down by some texting teenager,please let me try to heal. I've seen doctors mis-diagnose problems. I've also seen doctors that really could care less. Next patient please, pay at the window when you leave.

cutter, your statement is irrelevant. Doctors are not supposed to get their feelings involved in how they treat their patients. So, even if YOU think a someone deserves to die from an accident for riding without a helmet, or going hangliding or rock climbing, not everyone feels that way. Hopefully you are not a doctor. I'd hate to have to take my kid to the hospital someday for falling off the monkey bars only to be told he doesn't deserve treatment because he took the risks of playing at a playground. Or if he got food poisoning from a restaraunt, should he be denied treatment in a hospital because he took the risk of eating in a public place? Risk are everywhere. People are not going to stop living their lives or having children simply because they don't have health insurance, or might not someday. And I agree with Wingman...if I get hit by someone texting, even if I don't have insurance I think I have a right to be treated the same as someone that does. Save my life, whether you think I deserve to live or not. To reiterate my previous post, I think that anyone who thinks that people should just be left to die because it's "better in the end" for everything economical and environmental - well, please set the example and kill yourself first. The day will come when you are dying, and I hope you handle it with as much dignity as you claim everyone else should.

These are not government panels and they do not tell you how to lead your life. It's this kind of ignorance and falsehood that makes the situation worse and deprives people of the information, support and options they really need.

Mitchell,

Just make sure you use yourself and your immediate family members for these "new" techniques, since this is how "you" physicians learn things.

Having a terminal, painful illness is hardly defending the Alamo. Sometimes there is no shame in defeat.

jm387 you are right and having an ageing extended family i know about death.i`m the oldest of 18 first counsins.of course grandparents and fathers go first,but when younger relatives are taken it is a shock.i feel like we are little ducks on the pond and regardless of age or life style we are all going to be taken.one thing i have learned,the complaining hard to get along with wimp of a person can become heroic and strong when faced with their own immortality.that 18 was on my fathers side,few more on moms side.my point that i didn`t make was that my father died a much more painful death because he was a fighter with some resourses.