The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.
That's right, Obama is planning to create secret "Death Panels" that will deny coverage to the elderly and handicapped based purely on eugenicist principles. And then she links to the Queen of Loony Tunes herself, Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, to lend credence to her distorted interpretations of Obamacare. Nice try Sarah. They're going to love you on The View and Fox and Friends.
What we keep hearing from the right is mere opposition for the sake of opposition. Where are the substantive criticisms of HR 3200? Why isn't anyone asking about medical malpractice reform? Or student loan subsidization to encourage medical students to go into primary care medicine (and not the loan forgiveness written into the bill as it stands now where you are obligated to go to underserved areas, i.e. Nowheresville, USA in return for the government's largesse). There is plenty to debate. But rambling on about death panels and euthanizing granny only serves to marginalize those who have legitimate concerns with the bill as it now stands.
OK, in all of the Sunday talk shows, they said that
the new strategy to sell Obamacare would be to
demonize the insurance companies over getting in
between the Dr and patient.
The strategy is that they will tell people that under
Obamacare, no one will dictate what a Dr. can or
cannot order for their patient.
Under today's system, a Dr. can't order a colonoscopy
for a person under 50 for peace of mind, because
insurance won't pay for it.
Under Obamacare, do you think this will be allowed?
Absolutely Not! In fact the age will be raised to 60.
Cutting costs means taking insurers guidelines and making
them more aggressive, not less.
This is why people are so upset. Obama is lying about
the fundamentals of the program and where the
cost savings are coming from ---- more stringent
rationing of diagnostic procedures, and rationing of
treatment at end of life.
I appreciate your perspective, but disagree with your continued mention of med mal reform. The myth of runaway juries letting victims hit the lottery has as much basis in the truth as Palin's death panels. Isn't the standard for these cases that a doctor has to treat within the "standard of care?" If ordering 50 expensive, unneeded tests for a 20 year old with heart palpatations is not within the standard of care, a doctor does not face liability for refusing to do them. A physician's fear of getting sued does not justify modifying one of the most basic parts of our democracy -- a trial by a jury of your peers.
I believe this is called "Attacking the Messenger"...
She didn't put the part about End of Life Counseling in there...and talk about Inept, Uninformed, and Unintelligent, how bout' those money grubbing pediatricians snatchin out kids tonsils???... And might wanta take those Rose Colored Glasses off before scrubbin, Rush Limbaughs gotta better chance of a Supreme Court seat than Malpractice Reform does...
Anonymous 7:25 AM.
You are correct that we should not deny citizens the right to trial by a jury of peers. However, you do need to add to the debate that performing within "the standard of care" does not make a physician immune from legal suits. In fact, it does not make you immune from losing a law suit in front of a jury. The fact that people can bring frivolous suits can be very damaging not only to the physicians reputation, but also to his/her finances and mental health.
Our society has clearly went overboard in its desire to sue (not only in the medical community). I just saw an article of a young woman from New York that is trying to sue her technical college because she cannot find a job after graduation. This behavior needs to be found abhorrent by society. But for some reason it seems to continue to be fostered. Of note, she graduated with a 2.7 GPA.
Bit by bit we may see some return to personal responsibility here. Insurance companies should not be required to pay for "peace of mind" procedures. If I want something and my insurance company says, sorry, that is not indicated for your age group or your family history (all males die between 35-45 of colon cancer)then achieveing peace of mind should be on my tab.
Interesting that no one complains about their face lift/tummy tuck etc. not being a covered benefit.. they just fugure out a way to pay for it.......
Buckeye I have a question on the Standard of Care.. Let's say you are the only Board Certified G/S in a community that has "5 surgeons".. the other 4 always get an ID consult to address certain infections and you never do..are you practicing within the community standard
You know, I'm really sick of the knee-jerk hatred of Sarah Palin. We hardly know that much about her.
What I have seen is a competent, uncomplicated woman with good American values.
Does this mean I think she should be president? No! It means I think she should have a chance to prove herself.
Sarah Palin is NOT the staus quo. I think that's a good thing. The status quo SUCKS BIG TIME!!!
Sarah Palin responds http://ur.lc/6oh . I think she has a valid point well supported with facts (including footnotes) and logic, not the "inept, uniformed" view that you have smeared her with
Regarding Obama's trustworthines, his recent claim at a townhall meeting that "I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter" is a demonstrable lie http://ur.lc/6oi . You can criticize the townhall protesters all you want, but they instinctively know that neither Obama or Congress has been straight with them.
But don't worry about any of that, the REAL PROBLEM are those older vets and AARP members who are too "ignorant" to understand that taking $500 billion out of Medicare to finance a massive govt controlled healthcare plan might be something of concern. http://ur.lc/6oj .Just ig'nernt hayseeds is what they are
Mrs. Palin doesn't even mention the word "death panels" in her new Facebook "defense". Clearly she is backing off from her wrongheaded, inflammatory previous op-ed. This is just an attempt to save a little face. And besides, what does end of life counseling for the elderly have to do with health care for Trig? If you're impressed by the "footnotes" (must be intelligent if it has footnotes, right?) then I'm happy for you. It must be exciting to read something from the ex-governor that isn't a rambling incoherent syntactical mess. Hopefully her forthcoming book will provide the same solace for you...
Post a Comment