Patterico's Pontifications

12/11/2013

Cancer Patient: I Am “Devastated” By ObamaCare

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:31 am

An update from Joan Carrico, the cancer patient we heard from in November:

I thought I was prepared for any outcome, but I wasn’t. I can’t begin to describe how devastated I am. Many people like me, who are in a difficult health crisis and fighting to regain good health, are finding it very difficult — if not impossible — to make sure that we can keep our doctors and receive the chemotherapy and other treatments and medicines that are keeping us alive. I feel stupid for not being better prepared. I’m scared and wondering what surprises are around the corner.

Here are a few more things I’ve learned: The policy I’m considering has approximately 10 percent state and federal taxes added to the premium. My out-of-pocket maximum will increase to $6,350 from $1,500. But, my monthly premium cost will decrease, which will offset some of that difference. I can say my total annual costs are increasing significantly — by about $3,000. Another change is many American taxpayers have historically taken an income-tax deduction for their medical expenses. In the past, this deduction has been limited to the amount of medical expenses in excess of 7.5 percent of a person’s adjusted gross income. Beginning with the year 2013, that threshold will jump to 10 percent. This change will increase my income-tax liability.

I’m coming to the conclusion that the government wants to treat all Americans as the same — rich, poor, old, young, black, white, sickly, healthy — one policy fits all. May sound OK, but is it? How inefficient is that? I personally feel that we are going backwards. Admittedly, our health-care system did need some adjustments to deal with issues like pre-existing conditions. But to re-invent it? I personally don’t think so. What else does the government do efficiently? Wait, I’m still thinking …

The necessary “adjustments” — in my view — consisted of removing government’s thumb from the scale and letting the market work. In my view, a fix would have included such concepts as abolishing favorable tax treatment for employer plans (making the individual market functional again); removing restrictions on buying policies across state lines; and generally wiping away similar government restrictions and policies that impede competition and distort the natural workings of the marketplace. But, in order to fix a problem with the “free market” — a problem that I believe was actually caused by government — we have chosen to impose more governmental restrictions.

Just because the market (especially when hampered by regulation) is not perfect, that does not mean that government can handle it better.

People like Joan Carrico are starting to see that now. As millions lose their previous coverage over the next year or so, others will start to see it too.

UPDATE: But hey, things are looking up for government:

Oregon, once touted as a model for President Obama’s health care law, signed up just 44 people for insurance through November, despite spending more than $300 million on its state-based exchange.

That’s about $7 million per person. How can private industry compete with results like that?

169 Comments

  1. I feel sorry for Ms. Carrico and others in her position, but when I read stories like this, the first thing I want to know is: did they vote for
    Obama? Because if they did, they’ve gotten exactly what they voted for.

    Comment by rochf (f3fbb0) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:43 am

  2. It is terrible, especially in a place (and that would be almost every place these days, but fortunately that’s changing) whose tyrannical government uses force to stop people from gaining the means or exercising their right to peacefully and reliably depart from life when faced with such present and impending horrors.

    Of course, I’m not saying that he or anyone in particular should do so, but to deny someone their cancer treatment and also insist they stay to the bitter end or surreptitiously, hiding like a criminal, try to end their suffering with violent and unreliable means is beyond cruel. It’s par for the course for our species. It’s very human.

    In short, people don’t have a right to any and all possible treatments, but they should have self-ownership. Morally they do. Legally this isn’t respected.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:43 am

  3. Oregon, once touted as a model for President Obama’s health care law ….

    Speaking of Oregon, at least they have their Death with Dignity Act. It still isn’t perfect as it is restrictive, but it is a start on the road toward freedom and decency.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:46 am

  4. There is also the principle of implied consent for medical treatment. If a person is diagnosed as too impaired to make his own medical decisions, he is deemed to have given consent to the treatment the physician deems appropriate for him. (It’s real, I’m not making it up. It’s practiced in emergency rooms, and is taught in first year residency. It’s part of licensing and certification exams too.) Combine that with “Death With Dignity” laws and we have solved the problem of the chronically ill, the old, the disabled, all who “overuse” medical resources. Right, FC?

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:56 am

  5. Did we hear from her before?

    This is a different cancer patient than the one in the Wall Street Journal.

    She’s in Michigan.

    This is the November 5 story on CNBC.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (ca4c0f) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:04 am

  6. *she

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:15 am

  7. I have really gotten utterly furious at the “well, what’s your plan?” retort from Dem shillls. You know what my plan is, trolls? Not f’ing up things worse, that’s my plan.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:21 am

  8. In short, people don’t have a right to any and all possible treatments, but they should have self-ownership. Morally they do. Legally this isn’t respected.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:43 am

    I’ll keep this short:

    Pretty much everything in history has happened within the gravitational forces of three schools of thought.

    1. We are property of the state.

    or

    2. We are property of ourselves.

    or

    3. We are property of God.

    I will leave it to others to explain what happens when people are treated as the propery of the state.

    Judeo/Christianity teaches that we are all property of God, and as such, should treat each other as we would treat ourselves, an idea that represents a floor below which our care for others may not fall. The ideal that we all must strive for concerning God’s creation, above all, Man, is to give your life for others- “No greater love…”

    If you are your own property then you get to be Miley Cyrus, The president of the U.S., the president of Planned parenthood, and anarchy. But what do I know?

    Comment by felipe (70ff7e) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:23 am

  9. This only begins to touch on how bad these policies and costs will be for people. Wait until people really start finding out how much their choices have been limited. Wait until they understand how much more out of pocket they will have to pay. Wait until they see what their copayment for doctor visits and prescriptions are. Wait until they see how limited the prescription formularies are. If your prescription is not on the formulary, you have to pay out of pocket, and it does not apply to your deductible.

    Comment by JD (b12e6e) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:36 am

  10. Judeo/Christianity teaches that we are all property of God

    To be sexually tortured, abused, and permanently mutilated as children, to be threatened with hell with all the trauma that entails, also as children, to be stoned, to be enslaved, to be subjected to genocide or rape at “God’s” orders, etc.

    Pass.

    I’m for self-ownership, but only self-ownership. Respect for one’s autonomy and the non-aggression principle. (The initiation of aggression, that is.)

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:44 am

  11. Anyway, poor woman. And why couldn’t she have been allowed to keep her plan? As usual, when you initiate force or the threat of force against others, it has bad consequences.

    The government ought to butt out of almost everything

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:47 am

  12. Apparently Jim Hoft of Gatewaypundit has been cancelled too. I’m sure I will next year as well. We have great insurance but no mental health or dental pediatrics!

    My solution: Change O-care to major medical only at a cheap price. Pre-existing conditions supported by the young and healthy who might buy such a policy if it’s low enough on price. Leave the rest of us alone.

    Comment by Patricia (be0117) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:47 am

  13. I have a friend who was cancelled, and now she has to change their therapist for their autistic son — both parents agree he was a great therapist.

    The massive increase in price isn’t going over well either.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:51 am

  14. 8. Good work.

    Yesterday’s budget agreement signals the 53% that they are on their own. Next October, regardless of any Imperial delay, employers will notify their employees once more.

    You are on your own.

    The estimable Mr. Eastwood gave us a hearty laugh with his reprise of the Newhart ‘Empty Chair’ skit, but the reality is that its the Whigs themselves who are absent.

    To suggest so much as they are a speed bump on the race to the bottom is a reprehensible lie.

    They present no greater obstacle to the Borg than a truant employee.

    And the elections of 2014 cannot change a thing.

    We are on our own.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:54 am

  15. If OR would send me $7MM, I would guarantee that I would never set foot in their state, or use their health-care -
    and my word is as good as Barry’s.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:54 am

  16. Circumcision is torture.

    Comment by JD (5c1832) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:58 am

  17. To be sexually tortured, abused, and permanently mutilated as children, to be threatened with hell with all the trauma that entails, also as children, to be stoned, to be enslaved, to be subjected to genocide or rape at “God’s” orders, etc.

    Pass

    I too, will pass on the straw-world you just created. I’m glad you are not God.

    What you describe is indeed a horror – and has nothing to do with being the property of God.

    “I’m for self-ownership, but only self-ownership”

    If you legally own yourself, it stands to reason that you may trandfer that ownership to another. Slaves, anyone? Welcome to FC’s new world where slavery makes a legal comeback.

    Comment by felipe (70ff7e) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:07 am

  18. felipe, I’ve said my piece. I’ll just add that, “… and has nothing to do with being the property of God,” is total nonsense. Clearly it does.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:11 am

  19. Supposedly there is a federal law that does not allow cancellation of insurence when one is under treatment. Unfortunately I can’t a direct statement about such a law, unless it is under the ADA or HIPPA laws.

    Comment by Al Reasin (959e2e) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:12 am

  20. 10. Miley Cyrus is happy she is on her own.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:12 am

  21. “Supposedly there is a federal law that does not allow cancellation of insurence when one is under treatment.”

    I suspect that might be true within the normal scheme of things, if only as a reflection of a routine part of an insurance contract. But Obamacare mandated changes, and there you go.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:13 am

  22. 18. Runaway, runaway.

    The nice thing about depending on Wisdom beyond your own is that some is occasionally found.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:17 am

  23. If you suck from the government teet, you may come to realize that is looks like a penis.

    Comment by DejectedHead (a094a6) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:20 am

  24. Fc, I respect many of the views you hold because of the merit they have. I believe my comments reflect that. that is my piece. I will only add that that #18 is total nonsense for the exact same reason – it has no merit.

    Comment by felipe (70ff7e) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:22 am

  25. Heh, #20.

    Cue theme song to That Girl!

    Comment by felipe (70ff7e) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:24 am

  26. Thanks, felipe. I’m sure we agree on other things.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:28 am

  27. I wonder, does taxation without representation amount to aggression?

    Is forcing one to buy insurance when respiring tantamount to aggression?

    Is insolence aggression?

    How does one respond to aggression?

    Is it a matter of degree; mere restriction of liberties elicits only a nasty look in response?

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:36 am

  28. Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:11 am

    If there’s one thing FC is an expert on, it is Total Nonsense.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:39 am

  29. I wonder, does taxation without representation amount to aggression?

    Taxation is aggression. It’s theft. It’s robbery, actually. 52% of people voting in favor of it doesn’t make it less aggression.

    Is insolence aggression?

    No.

    How does one respond to aggression?

    Usually, “I submit to your weapons.”

    Is it a matter of degree; mere restriction of liberties elicits only a nasty look in response?

    It can be worse than that: a weak smile.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:41 am

  30. “To be sexually tortured, abused, and permanently mutilated as children”

    Former Conservative – Are you talking about public school?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:45 am

  31. 29. That being said I submit war can be more economical in terms of the human and moral cost than submission.

    If you don’t agree, that’s fine, runaway.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:50 am

  32. As I said, initiating aggression is wrong. Responding to it decisively isn’t, at least not inherently.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:52 am

  33. So, the trick is in the definition of “agression”?

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:01 am

  34. 33. Yeah, I was sorta surprised to find I’m not regularly aggressive.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:03 am

  35. Non-Aggressipn Principle (NAP) — Ludwig von Mises Institute

    The non-aggression principle (also called the non-aggression axiom, or the anti-coercion or zero aggression principle or non-initiation of force) is an ethical stance which asserts that “aggression” is inherently illegitimate. “Aggression” is defined as the “initiation” of physical force against persons or property, the threat of such, or fraud upon persons or their property. In contrast to pacifism, the non-aggression principle does not preclude violent self-defense.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:05 am

  36. Ethical behavior knows no situational boundaries. Heh! http://lolsnaps.com/upload_pic/WaitIsThisATrickQuestion-76949.jpg

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:17 am

  37. I would also submit that resort to ‘reasoning together’ so as to find ‘solutions to social ills’ is founded in religious delusion.

    Reason is emotion’s biatch, and always will be.

    I’m only waiting to see the white’s of their eyes.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:19 am

  38. 36. Perhaps I could barter something?

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:22 am

  39. 2. “tyrannical government uses force to stop people from gaining the means or exercising their right to peacefully and reliably depart from life”

    Obviously, Holmes, Tsarnaev and Lanza are twisted cowards preying on the harmless.

    All the same I can’t fathom why one would want to quietly depart this life without taking a Federal employee along, involuntarily, screaming even.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:28 am

  40. Maybe it shows some hope for humanity that there are people who think that there are people who think (sic) that hookers should be paid and might be convinced that stealing music is bad like not paying a hooker is bad.

    Me, I just like the picture. And the giggle.

    Aggression is always bad for the one on the receiving end. If only lambs could get wolves to read philosophy. Nyuck, nyuck.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:36 am

  41. and how does the NAP apply to actions of one state upon another.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:36 am

  42. “Peacefully and reliably departing from life” is no farther away than the closest train. Hint: You don’t get aboard, you step in front of it.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:40 am

  43. 41. Me getting mine may well mean none for you.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:41 am

  44. The entire “ethics” of a response to aggression are contained in Jeff Cooper’s Rule Four.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:47 am

  45. nk, given that the RIAA is worse than prostitutes, that picture is hilarious.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:48 am

  46. “Peacefully and reliably departing from life” is no farther away than the closest train. Hint: You don’t get aboard, you step in front of it.

    Unless you put your head on the tracks, it is not as reliable as you’d think. And there’s nothing peaceful about getting your head chopped off in public. It’s unnecessarily traumatizing all around. Plus some people don’t have the remaining strength to get from A to B. There are better ways. We allow our pets better ways — just not human beings.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:52 am

  47. That’s really uncool of the RIAA to distribute the picture of that, uh, professional woman without, you know, her contact information. Jes’ sayin’.

    Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:54 am

  48. nk #36 – surely by definition, it is a trick question ? You are asking the customer the question, not the professional lady with the outstanding attributes, right ?

    Comment by Alastor (e7cb73) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:00 am

  49. Suicide by local commuter train is getting pretty common in our area… Including students under 18 years:

    http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_24316772/menlo-park-teens-death-by-train-being-investigated

    MENLO PARK — The death of a 16-year-old Menlo Park boy who was struck by a commuter train on the tracks north of Encinal Avenue on Monday is being investigated as a possible suicide, according to the San Mateo County Coroner’s Office.

    The boy was hit at 4:22 p.m. [posted: 10/16/2013 06:01:44 AM PDT] just north of the Encinal Avenue rail crossing, according to Jayme Ackemann, communications manager for Caltrain.

    The death was the 13th this year on Caltrain tracks. Last year, 12 people were killed on the Caltrain right of way, with eight of those considered suicides.

    They are installing miles of fencing, pedestrian gates, and suicide hot-line numbers along the line/at stations.

    These deaths have been very hard on the engineers and the people that have to “pickup” after the event.

    Comment by bfC (a1cf00) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:07 am

  50. 41. Cont. China has surpassed the U.S. as largest purchaser of Saudi oil. The Sauds are so pissed at the fecklessness of U.S. pursuit of chaos that they are negotiating with Russia on construction of a nuclear power station, have received Pakistani Shaheen two stage ballistic missiles, are courting Israelis in kingdom, etc.

    Exchanging oil for yuan is a logical next step. One wonders what it will be like for the U.S. to be locked out of OPEC supply with the demand for USD abroad effectively halved.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:18 am

  51. Its hard to get off the gravy train when you’re making money but time grows short:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-11/peak-greater-fools

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:32 am

  52. 50- I would think that the Chinese could pay for all the oil they want from the Saudi’s in Dollars; they certainly have plenty of them, and the Saudi’s have many Western bank-accounts to deposit them into.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:38 am

  53. Departing from life….
    Well, Kissing a Train is one option.
    The other is to max out the old credit cards and fly to Holland/Belgium (or Oregon if you’re on a budget), and enjoy a great week/week-end before having a local physician euthanize you.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:41 am

  54. 50. But for the fact China makes stuff and U.S. disposable income has been falling for 5 years. Japans exports have been falling despite devaluation.

    The yuan is now the second most traded currency and China has publicly announced a program for de-Americanization of the global economy. They are no longer a net purchaser of US Debt.

    No doubt the Fed’s proposed increase of monetization by 50% includes an adaptation to changes on those grounds. Hence the budget deal of yesterday. The Fed needs more debt to monetize.

    We are in a squeeze play and no longer fleet of foot.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:52 am

  55. Or go to Chicago’s West Side with $50.00 for heroin. If you make it out alive in the first place, go home and “self-medicate”.

    As for the bystanders, why are the sensibilities of the train crews and passengers important, and not the sensibilities of the hospital/clinic/hospice personnel who’d have to give you the stuff and remove your poopy corpse.

    But what really begs the question is why society should give the slightest f*** about someone who does not want to be part of it anymore.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:01 pm

  56. I wonder what Joan Carrico is going to think when the Obamacare policy she does manage to get for 2014 gets cancelled because it doesn’t meet the requirements for 2015. Via Powerline:

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/12/if-you-like-your-obamacare-plan-you-cant-keep-your-obamacare-plan.php

    But one might at least have hoped that if you like the Obamacare plan you select, you can keep it. Unfortunately, as Patrick Paule of InsureBlog explains, this isn’t necessarily the case:

    The reason is that the new figures set forth in 2015 increase the maximum deductible from $2000 to $2150 and the out of pocket limit from $6350 to $6850.

    Paule points out that, as a result of the change in these values, the actuarial value of plans (the AV) will change. And Obamacare establishes strict AV requirements. Insurance companies cannot sell plans that don’t meet these requirements.

    Plugging the 2015 deductible and out pocket limits into a typical insurance plan, Paule finds that the plan, though AV compliant in 2014, will be non-compliant in 2015. As such, consumers will not be able to keep it.

    If you want to go directly to the poste at Insureblog here’s the link:

    http://insureblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/if-you-like-your-obamacare-plan-dont.html

    Apparently the insurance companies can only deviate +/- 2% from the AV dictated by law to qualify as a bronze, silver, gold, or platinum plan. So since a bronze plan must have an AV of 60% and silver must have an AV of 70%, plans that are better than bronze but don’t have an AV of 68% can’t legally be sold.

    And Obamacare clearly requires changes to plans in the out years that will force insurance companies to cancel what in a previous year was a formerly Obamacare compliant plans.

    I feel badly for Ms. Carrico even if she did vote for Obama. Much the same as I feel badly for any elderly lady who falls for a con man no matter how obvious the con was. Of course I feel worse for her if she knew Obama would be a disaster. Because of course Obama isn’t only worse than we imagined, he’s worse than we can imagine.

    But beyond the personal tragedies that Obamacare is leaving in its wake before it’s even implemented, it’s the systemic disaster I find appalling. Obamacare, as Ms. Carrico is discovering, isn’t intended to deliver health care to anyone. It’s intended to empower government, and turn us into a nation of supplicants. For everyone who provides health care, or for everyone who is required to provide employees health insurance, it’s a compliance nightmare. Doctors will be turned into essentially government employees. Businesses will be turned into entities that exist to comply with government health care dictates or face fines, and will be forced to hire tax attorneys and consultants to help ensure they are within the constantly changing law. Only secondarily will they be restaurants or retailers. And for everyone else who just needs access to health care it will be merely a nightmare.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:05 pm

  57. “tyrannical government uses force to stop people from gaining the means or exercising their right to peacefully and reliably depart from life”

    gary gulrud – I thought it was lack of imagination that did that.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:05 pm

  58. nk-I think most people would say that watching a person die–being there at the moment when a living person’s life ends violently –as is experienced by the helpless train engineer and onlookers, is vastly different that medical or emergency personnel dealing with a corpse. YMMV.

    Comment by elissa (207170) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:13 pm

  59. 55: hear, hear, nk.

    Comment by Chuck Bartowski (11fb31) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:13 pm

  60. that than

    Comment by elissa (207170) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:15 pm

  61. as is experienced by the helpless train engineer and onlookers, is vastly different that medical or emergency personnel dealing with a corpse.

    Not to mention being able to talk it over with your loved ones, possibly find alternatives, and if not, be surrounded by the people you care about (who are willing) to say goodbye to each other. Further, it’s less traumatizing for them — because they know you didn’t suffer and had time to prepare themselves.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:20 pm

  62. Or go to Chicago’s West Side with $50.00 for heroin. If you make it out alive in the first place, go home and “self-medicate”.

    Yeah, that’s not reliable. Whereas 10 g of fast-acting barbiturates preceded by 60 mg of metoclopromide 30 to 45 minutes earlier (the Dignitas protocol) is. Plus you face the risk of arrest. And why should your last act have to be one of a criminal? Or to deal with criminals? And, again, not everyone has the physical strength and freedom of travel at this final stage.

    But what really begs the question is why society should give the slightest f*** about someone who does not want to be part of it anymore.

    What it begs the question of is, if society doesn’t care about a suffering person’s freedom to end their suffering, why should they care about minimizing trauma and risk to members of that society?

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:36 pm

  63. “Plus you face the risk of arrest. And why should your last act have to be one of a criminal? Or to deal with criminals? And, again, not everyone has the physical strength and freedom of travel at this final stage.”

    Former Conservative – Bulldookey. Isn’t what you are really after the legal ability of younger, healthier, people to end their lives with medical assistance and the blessing of the state? If not, it seems like you have no experience with terminally ill folks and the myriad of non-painful, legal ways they can check out of life.

    Did you also comment here as the suicide obsessed “random” for a period?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:45 pm

  64. Former Conservative – Bulldookey. Isn’t what you are really after the legal ability of younger, healthier, people to end their lives with medical assistance and the blessing of the state?

    That too. As well as to be able to talk about it openly and seek help.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:51 pm

  65. daleyrocks, you nailed it.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:56 pm

  66. 59. Second.

    Our social contract with this government has been voided.

    Collateral damage there will be. Expecting the ‘reasonable and compassionate’ to somehow look out for those outside their immediate sphere is religious delusion.

    Damn fanatics.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:58 pm

  67. 62. …What it begs the question of is, if society doesn’t care about a suffering person’s freedom to end their suffering, why should they care about minimizing trauma and risk to members of that society?

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 12:36 pm

    I don’t think “begging the question” means what you think it means. You’re committing that particular logical fallacy in what passes for your argument because you imagine the answer is contained in your premise. But people generally don’t advertise they’re “begging the question” if they know that’s a logical fallacy.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 1:02 pm

  68. Why euthanasia should never be legal.

    Further, it’s less traumatizing for them — because they know you didn’t suffer and had time to prepare themselves.

    FC illustrates why the “right to die” always becomes the “duty to die.”

    The transition occurs when the people around the terminally ill person lets the terminally ill person know it would be a lot easier on everyone else if they just offed themselves. As FC does above in #61.

    And yes, I’ve been with people when they died. And I also know and have known people with incurable conditions. They don’t want to die, and are appalled by newspapers who publish articles about how the “dignified choice” is assisted suicide. Always by someone who look at those people and say to themselves they wouldn’t want to live in their condition. Some pressures on people with conditions such as those I’m speaking to kill themselves are less subtle than others. But the pressure to kill themselves is always there.

    As when FC talks about how much less traumatic for the family if the afflicted person would just agree to do the “dignified” thing.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 1:16 pm

  69. Steve, most people choose to fight to the bitter end. That’s totally their right. It should not be forced on them.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 1:27 pm

  70. Plus you face the risk of arrest. And why should your last act have to be one of a criminal

    That’s only if you survive long enough to be both convicted AND sentenced (see: Enron/Ken Lay).

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/11/2013 @ 1:32 pm

  71. 68. Well done.

    66. I rest my case:

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/john-boehner-conservative-groups-reaction-to-budget-deal-is-ridiculous-20131211

    Trust us, you don’t know squat. As Ryan told Levin last eve, “Elections have consequences”, and you, hayseed, elected us to rule over you.

    All those TEAs who gave Boehner a standing O for the Slowdown fight, you who are not frauds are dumbsh*ts.

    When the shooting starts it will be a target rich environment.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 1:52 pm

  72. When the shooting starts ?

    Oh, Good Allah.

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/11/2013 @ 1:56 pm

  73. 72. In 2015 Federal healthcare spending will surpass SS.

    The budget deal dealing with discretionary spending only guarantees that nothing will be done about mandatory spending.

    Civil upheaval is a lock.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 2:19 pm

  74. Euthanasia is forced upon the elderly and terminally ill wherever it’s legal, or at least well established that it won’t be prosecuted.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/elderhealth/9343428/Elderly-patients-helped-to-die-to-free-up-beds-warns-doctor.html

    NHS hospitals are using end-of-life care to help elderly patients to die because they are difficult to look after and take up valuable beds, a top doctor has warned.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/elderhealth/9420794/Advance-refusal-cards-for-patients-fearing-death-pathway.html

    Terminally ill patients are being issued with special cards warning doctors not to place them on a controversial “death pathway” amid fears the practice is becoming routine.

    In the UK elderly patients have actually refused necessary hospitalizations because they fear the NHS would just rather kill them. In the Netherlands elderly and sick patients also carry cards saying they don’t want to be killed (Rick Santorum got ridiculed during the 2012 primary for mistakenly saying they wore bracelets). Doctors in the Netherlands do kill people without their consent routinely. An interview from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

    http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2005/s1377030.htm

    MARK COLVIN: A small group of doctors in the Netherlands openly admit to having ended the lives of desperately ill infants.

    The paediatricians have not been charged. They’re hoping that a 1995 test case, which saw a doctor who ended the life of a baby with spina bifida go free, will protect them from prosecution.

    But the doctors are calling on the Dutch Government to introduce new laws which would explicitly allow what they call “infant euthanasia” in the case of a baby born with intolerable and incurable illnesses.

    Such legislation would be a dramatic relaxation of the country’s already liberal euthanasia laws, which were the first in the world when introduced in 2002.

    From London, Kirsten Aiken reports.

    KIRSTEN AIKEN: A father of three, Dr Eduard Verhagen admits that by technical definition, he has helped commit murder.

    This represents a small group of doctors in the Netherlands who don’t feel bound by the “technical definition” of murder. There’s nothing technical about it. Even in Holland if you administer a lethal dose of drugs to anyone, for any reason, with the intention of ending their life you are committing murder.

    This guy just represents the doctors who admitted euthanizing infants that they decided would suffer unbearably. It’s important to note that in the Netherlands the definition of what constitutes unbearable suffering has evolved over the years from unbearable and continuous physical pain to simply having a disability to know include mere loneliness. Because this guy doesn’t speak for the doctors who have admitted to euthanizing older children, teenagers, and adults without their or their parents’ consent. Of course, more doctors actually engaging in the practice than admit to it. According to what these doctors consider the unenlightened and cruel laws of Holland these mercy killings still meet the “technical definition” of murder. So the numbers are artificially low.

    According to the results as reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, the Dutch Ministry of Health sponsored a survey of doctors in Holland. One of the goals of the survey was to discover reasons why doctors weren’t reporting shortening patients lives as required by the Dutch 2002 Euthanasia Act.

    http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmsa071143#t=articleTop

    In 2005, we performed a follow-up study to assess the effects of the 2002 Dutch law and changes in end-of-life care. We also assessed the reporting rates for euthanasia and assisted suicide and physicians’ reasons for nonreporting.

    As the saying goes, I s*** you not. This is like the Federal Elections Committee deciding to enforce laws against illegally using campaign funds for personal use by just sending out questionnaires to politicians asking how often they broke that particular law. The Dutch study itself admits that the only thing that their 2002 Euthanasia Act changed was to establish a commission that reviewed reports theoretically required when a doctor euthanizes a patient, written and submitted by the very doctor in question. In other words, if the doctor doesn’t report himself the commission that nominally has the power to review that report and forward it the public prosecutor if they violated the act, that commission (and consequently the prosecutor) would never know about it in the first place. Dutch law defines euthanasia quite narrowly:

    http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmsa071143#t=articleTop

    …euthanasia is defined as death resulting from medication that is administered by a physician with the explicit intention of hastening death at the explicit request of the patient.

    So if the doctors feel that the patient (projecting their own feelings onto the patient) wouldn’t want to live in their condition, they’ll still administer a lethal dose of medication even without an explicit request. They just won’t file the report. And all they have to do is deny that their primary intention was to hasten death. According to the survey the majority of Dutch doctors admitted they have or they would administer a lethal dose of medication without consent under those circumstances. Clearly euthanizing a patient without an explicit request is an obvious violation of the definition of legalized euthanasia, so they just simply wouldn’t report themselves to the commission. And they have nothing to fear.

    So, no, I’m not a fan of euthanasia or assisted suicide because it ends up not being a choice. Either the patient is pressured into it, or the decision is often simply taken out of their hands. Either way, that’s barbarous.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 2:46 pm

  75. I have been battling a grade III astrocytoma since july, 2012. ObozoCare will kill me. And no, I didn’t vote for Obozo.

    Comment by Kevin P. (5a8335) — 12/11/2013 @ 2:46 pm

  76. This is like the Federal Elections Committee deciding to enforce laws against illegally using campaign funds for personal use by just sending out questionnaires to politicians asking how often they broke that particular law.

    To make the analogy complete, if the FEC sent out anonymous surveys to politicians asking how often they broke campaign finance laws, then reported a low number self-reported such abuses and therefore concluded it wasn’t really a big problem, that would be akin to the methodology of the Dutch survey.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 2:53 pm

  77. In the case of campaign finance violations, people would be more willing to anonymously report using them for personal benefit.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (ca4c0f) — 12/11/2013 @ 3:00 pm

  78. 75. I have been battling a grade III astrocytoma since july, 2012. ObozoCare will kill me. And no, I didn’t vote for Obozo.

    Comment by Kevin P. (5a8335) — 12/11/2013 @ 2:46 pm

    I’m very sorry to hear that. I would offer my sympathies even if you had voted for Obozo.

    I am not being flippant or making light of your situation when I observe Obozocare will undoubtedly kill a great many of us. Even those of us who haven’t yet developed or learned we already have a life threatening condition.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 3:04 pm

  79. With this administration, being a Trotskyite could be a life-threatening condition (too conservative).

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/11/2013 @ 3:06 pm

  80. With his plummeting approval ratings I wonder if Hillary Clinton is thinking bad thoughts about Obama for possibly ruining her chances come 2016.

    Comment by The Emperor AKA the Size-ist. (be6d20) — 12/11/2013 @ 3:28 pm

  81. With his plummeting approval ratings I wonder if Hillary Clinton is thinking bad thoughts about Obama for possibly ruining her chances come 2016.

    She really ought to be pushed to support ObamaCare at every opportunity. The moment she flips, Obama is impeachable.

    Comment by Kevin M (536c5d) — 12/11/2013 @ 3:37 pm

  82. Maybe that won’t be a bad thing.

    Comment by The Emperor AKA the Size-ist. (4dcc08) — 12/11/2013 @ 3:50 pm

  83. As far as assisted suicide/euthanasia goes there were two articles I read in the UK papers that I wanted to mention.

    How I helped my mum to die

    The money quote:

    There was no pretending I hadn’t been part of her decision, and had arguably even encouraged it. Many experts say that old people often choose to end their lives, or say they don’t want them extended, not because of their own genuine wishes, but to spare their children trouble and expense. We needed to be certain that my mother was doing this for herself, not for me.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2021974/How-I-helped-mum-die-A-daughter-explains-agreed-aid-ailing-mother-starving-death.html#ixzz2nDCxKGrd
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    Arguably, she admits, she talked her mom into ending her life. So the pressure on the elderly or the terminally ill that they have a duty to die to spare the people around them bother and expense is always there. And who is the “we” who needs to be certain her mom is doing this for herself? The daughter who arguably convinced her mom to end her life. Does anyone imagine that if this elderly lady is in fact ending her life for her daughter’s sake, she’d never let on that was the case? Hint: elderly people who aren’t acting out of their own genuine desires but for their children’s sake don’t normally lay the kind of guilt on their kids that goes with telling them they only agreed to kill themselves because their family has made them feel unwanted and burdensome.

    Another more recent article.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2515815/Why-Ive-promised-help-beautiful-daughter-life.html

    Why I’ve promised to help my beautiful daughter take her own life after she was struck by terminal illness

    What kind of support was this girl getting from her mom at home?

    …I also spoke candidly to her about her condition and explained as best as I could that she was ill and would always need to go to hospital.

    Jennie was as bright as a button and was just nine when she turned to me and told me she knew she was going to die young from cystic fibrosis. I could not disagree: I simply was unable to lie to her.

    …For me, guilt was all-pervading. As I had told Jennie, in as simple a way as I could manage, I am a carrier of cystic fibrosis and, by a horrible coincidence, her father was, too.

    I gave her this disease. The feeling that I am responsible for her pain was, and still remains, crippling.

    …Jennie was just 11 when she wrote her first will.

    On a crumpled piece of paper she wrote in her childish hand that she wished to be cremated, not buried; she wanted to be wearing her favourite trainers; and that she absolutely had to have her treasured pink blanket with her.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2515815/Why-Ive-promised-help-beautiful-daughter-life.html#ixzz2nDFnhQoo
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    Yes, mom’s guilt was crippling. But for which one of these two? I don’t think it’s normal for a 9 year old to be convinced she’s going to die young unless her family creates that atmosphere. And, again, is this young lady making this decision for herself, or for the mom who has been crippled by guilt her entire life and deathly afraid of seeing her in pain?

    The reactions to the article in the comments were enlightening.

    djh1975, Telford, 1 week ago

    My best friend has cf and when were at school in the early 90s he was in very poor health. Since then his health has improved alot with new drugs developed over the last few years. He rides his bike everyday and we even climbed a mountain a few weeks back. It was 50/50 if he survived when we were at school together and now he is 38. People with the condition need to be positive because new research is always ongoing for help in the future.

    Maria, Ireland, United Kingdom, 1 week ago

    Wise up!! I have Cystic Fibrosis & been in hospital for 2 weeks twice within the space of 2 months, you don’t give in – you fight. I also had a friend who had this illness and she fought to the bitter end despite also having diabetes, lung transplants etc and went on to suceed in tests even though she knew her time was limited she was inspirational

    JilliCF, Longford, Ireland, 1 week ago

    As a person with CF I’m absolutely HORRIFIED at ur negative attitude towards CF, where on earth is your FIGHT against this illness???? You’re prepared to just give up when the going gets tough. I’m absolutely stunned at how quick you could end your life. There’s TRANSPLANT! And there’s so many MEDICAL ADVANCEMENTS happening right now. I don’t know whether you are looking for attention or what but my mind boogles to be quite honest. I’m very glad I’m strong & don’t have a silly negative attitude towards CF like you do, I’m so glad that the majority of CF sufferers don’t give up that easy. CF doesn’t need this type of attention. WRONG JUST WRONG.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2515815/Why-Ive-promised-help-beautiful-daughter-life.html#ixzz2nDH3oFUs
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    I don’t think the daughter Jennie is at fault. She’s been focused on the fact that she’s going to die young since she was a small child. Who did that to her? She was born years before scientists had discovered the most common gene that causes cystic fibrosis. There have been medical advances her entire life extending the lifespan of people with the disease. It’s entirely possible now to live into your 50s with Cystic Fibrosis.

    But it sounds like the only “medical advance” the daughter is interested in taking advantage of are the loosening of euthanasia/assisted suicide laws in Europe. I’d say she hadn’t arrived at that conclusion without more than a little bit of familial influence.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 3:58 pm

  84. 73. Cont. Following the budget deal killing the sequester giving the Fed their increase in spending to monetize, the Market, the USD and yields are all headed in the wrong direction.

    IOW, no change. No confidence was gained.

    At the beginning of Nov. a 5% reduction to the food stamp outlays generated near riots.

    Revenues were way up in April and the prior October because of the dread Fiscal Cliff as incomes slated for 2013 and after were moved forward to be taxed at the lower rates.

    Consumer spending is in a 5 year decline, and accelerating. The deficit, peaking at 10% of GDP in 2009 had shrunk to 4.5% but had already begun to grow prior to this deal.

    Credit rating agencies have a crystal clear call, the US has absolutely no willingness to curb themselves.

    Ryan knows all this but chose to play a pat electoral hand.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 4:14 pm

  85. So you don’t believe me. I can understand being the only one who called the 2012 election wrong, wait..

    But here are a couple guys with more experience having money and making plays:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-11/santelli-stockman-blast-festering-fiscal-budget-deal-betrayal

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 4:33 pm

  86. Einstein, says did you forget what I told you;

    http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-do-republicans-not-understand-that-the-whole-damn-thing-is-going-to-collapse/

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/11/2013 @ 4:34 pm

  87. 86. Indeed, confidence and the losing of it are under no one’s command or control.

    Many of us are amazed the Fed has managed its shell game ’til now.

    Not two weeks ago it was discovered China has printed $15 Trillion since Lehman. Japan is a dead man walking and will implode before Nov. 2016.

    Deutsche Bank, the world’s largest is also just awaiting the falling sword.

    Our housing industry is about to collapse again along with those of 17 other Western nations.

    Congress’ capitulation is criminal.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/11/2013 @ 4:51 pm

  88. Wait there’s more;

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/11/conservatives-praise-ousted-gop-staffer-paul-teller/

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/11/2013 @ 5:59 pm

  89. Steve57. Outstanding work today, sir!

    Daleyrocks. I remember Random’s silliness – what a mess that was.

    Gary. Amen about the feds shell game.

    Comment by felipe (6100bc) — 12/11/2013 @ 6:08 pm

  90. A classic Captain Tupolev move;

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/366106/ryan-deal-limits-senate-gops-power-block-tax-increases-jonathan-strong

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:07 pm

  91. we euthanize people all the time almost every hospital has hospice doctors and helpful nurses what help steer patients towards the end of their sufferings

    sometimes though it’s not an immediate hospice situation but in other situations for example if you live alone and you got the alzheimer’s coming on, well then pretty much if you want to hold on to any basic human dignity you just have to buy yourself a gun and pick a sunset

    and maybe a theme song

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:29 pm

  92. Unless Congress acts very quickly, some 1.3 million workers will lose their extended jobless benefits on Dec. 28.

    are people what’ve maxed out their “extended jobless benefits” properly classified as workers per se?

    I’m not sure this is accurate.

    Per se.

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:43 pm

  93. Maybe it’s just me, but has anyone else noticed that the deductibles on Obamacare will probably bankrupt most people who can barely pay the inflated premium prices?

    What was the point of this anyway?

    Comment by Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:47 pm

  94. Many of us are amazed the Fed has managed its shell game ’til now.

    I’ve been very cynical about the state of the economy for quite awhile now, and given the twirling, whirling nature of Wall Street, admit that so far I’ve been overly pessimistic about the stock market. But there’s a strange, unsettling tone throughout the world today and I can’t help but think we’re facing a house of cards.

    Then again, when I read about things like a Norman Rockwell painting recently selling for over $40 million — and similar stuff being sold for wildly inflated prices — that tells me there are some people out there with change to spare and who are making big bucks in today’s climate.

    As for the rest of us? Chumps, suckers and fools, particularly if we’re leading the life of blind donkeys in blue-state America.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:51 pm

  95. Mark:

    Quantitative easing is all fun and games right now to make Dems seem as if they are economic wizards.

    When it goes away, probably under a Republican administration, it will be like those zombie movies that everyone seems to enjoy today.

    Then, the Dems will be able to say we told you so.

    Doesn’t anyone else see this?

    Comment by Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:58 pm

  96. A rather sophisticated pillaging operation Ag, the Vikings would be impressed, the Vandals ecstatic.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:59 pm

  97. It’s a nifty scam, the bankers make out like bandits, you can’t save anything worth a farthing, so you have to invest in the market and food prices are ridiculous, this constitutes ‘recovery’ circa 2014.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:03 pm

  98. It’s more than a nifty scam. It is false economy benefiting investors who pump money into the stock market with the intention of creating some sort of semblance that the U.S. is in recovery.

    The only thing stopping a complete collapse is the resurgence of the U.S. energy market that the Dems are trying to kill.

    I have to ask again, who does not see this? More importantly, why?

    Comment by Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:11 pm

  99. you just have to buy yourself a gun and pick a sunset

    and maybe a theme song

    Any Nirvana song should do.
    http://www.jokes4us.com/celebrityjokes/kurtcobainjokes.html

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:14 pm

  100. it’s putting training wheels on an incompetent capitalism-hating food stamper whore president’s tenure so he don’t look like the butt-stupid soros-fellating tool he is

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:17 pm

  101. kurt cobain bless his heart

    he was a frail lil dude

    it’s tragic cause of I had so many extra hugs to spare during that whole decade

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:18 pm

  102. 91. we euthanize people all the time almost every hospital has hospice doctors and helpful nurses what help steer patients towards the end of their sufferings

    No, that’s not euthanasia. Good hospice care can actually prolong your life past what your original prognosis was when the doctors tell you there’s nothing more than they can do. A good hospice doesn’t rush to shuffle you off this mortal coil.

    Even honoring a DNR isn’t euthanasia. Because by doing so the hospital simply respects your wishes not to extend your life.

    Euthanasia is when someone intervenes to shorten someone’s life. It’s the difference between a natural death in the case of the former, and an unnatural death in the case of the latter.

    sometimes though it’s not an immediate hospice situation but in other situations for example if you live alone and you got the alzheimer’s coming on, well then pretty much if you want to hold on to any basic human dignity you just have to buy yourself a gun and pick a sunset

    and maybe a theme song

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:29 pm

    That’s exactly the problem. Once a society decides the proper prescription for certain diagnoses is a revolver, a shot of whiskey, and a nice quiet room where you can be alone it’s sort of expected of you to take that route. And people who don’t want to are pressured to do so against their will.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:25 pm

  103. Ag80,

    It seems to me that the higher deductibles will make medical-related bankruptcies more likely, so I suspect the Obama Administration will propose changes to the Bankruptcy Code to make it even easier to discharge unsecured debts. For instance, debtors can only file one Chapter 7 bankruptcy every 7 years. I wouldn’t be surprised to see legislation changing that to 3-4 years.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:28 pm

  104. Once a society decides the proper prescription for certain diagnoses is a revolver, a shot of whiskey, and a nice quiet room where you can be alone it’s sort of expected of you to take that route.

    it has nothing do to with “society” it has to do with cause of I’m a cowboy on a steel horse I ride and I’m not gonna spend the last decade of my one god-given life drooling all over an empty sippy cup sitting in a chair pointed generally in the direction of syndicated daytime television content produced largely by europeans

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:31 pm

  105. hospice care is not about prolonging life if the patient says ok let’s git r done

    i know me some hospice care I have like three relatives left

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:33 pm

  106. Actually, DRJ, I think the unlimited out of pocket costs for out-of-network care will be more likely to lead to medical related bankruptcies.

    That’s one of the beauties of Obamacare, so to speak. The narrow networks required by Obama, and state insurance commissioners, to keep premiums down and maintain the facade that Obamacare is affordable means that you may require specialty care outside that network. If you do, you’ll have to pay whatever it costs.

    Of course, we’ll see which one actually does lead to more bankruptcies. Either way, thanks to Obamacare more people will no doubt end up with unaffordable medical expenses rather than less.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:34 pm

  107. DRJ:

    Where did I read today that Obamacare is not just a failure, it is a fractal failure?

    Everything about it creates more “solutions” to make it work.

    And somehow, that is the responsibility of the right.

    Extra bonus points to Sebelius for saying she will launch an internal investigation to find out what went wrong with healthcare.gov.

    I’m thinking that the White House has too much confidence in the reproductive capabilities of squirrels.

    Comment by Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:41 pm

  108. 105. hospice care is not about prolonging life if the patient says ok let’s git r done

    i know me some hospice care I have like three relatives left

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:33 pm

    Mr. feets, I never said hospice care was about prolonging life. I said good hospice care can have that effect.

    What hospice care is about is supporting a terminally ill patient’s quality of life when the patient stops undergoing curative treatment.

    Hospice care is never about shortening the patient’s life. I realize this may surprise you, but if your relatives have been checking into the Jack Kevorkian Memorial Hospice and they’re telling you that’s what they’re about, what they’re doing is illegal.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:47 pm

  109. Hospice care is never about shortening the patient’s life.

    this is just naive, Mr. Steve, which is not a bad thing

    but real life is not like this

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:53 pm

  110. My naivete is a result of what I’ve seen, Mr. feets. I’ve seen hospice patients given hours to live last for days, and patients given days to live last for months.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:59 pm

  111. lasting for days

    kinda sucks ass

    this is why bullets

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:05 pm

  112. Then, the Dems will be able to say we told you so.

    Doesn’t anyone else see this?

    Ag80, I recall seeing a graph that showed Republican/right-leaning White House administrations throughout US history tend to be in charge when the country’s economy is shaky or mediocre, while Democrat-left-leaning presidents tend to be presiding over things during times of financial buoyancy.

    I have a theory — although it’s admittedly contradicted by debacles like Venezuela or cities like Detroit, etc — that when people are fat, content and happy, which they’re more liable to be during times when money is pouring in, they become very idealistic, sappy and liberal. But when an economic downturn sets in, many people respond in the opposite direction and are less enamored of the light, fluffy emotions of liberalism.

    That’s why I continue to shudder at the prospect of this society becoming a northern counterpart to Mexico, because no matter how corrupt and economically deficient that nation is, most of its people remain as blinded as ever before by the cheap, lazy promises of liberal politics and liberal politicians.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:18 pm

  113. Hospice care is sometimes about shortening a patient’s life. A former colleague recently passed peacefully after slightly less than a month in hospice care. After being told her cancer was beyond hope she gave up any more “treatments” for her incurable and worsening condition after fighting valiantly for 5 years. She was monitored and medicated for pain and was kept comfortable while she quit taking any form of sustenance. She was able to say goodbye to people who came from across the country to see her for the first 2 weeks. She planned and arranged her memorial festivities which she called her “birthday party”. Then she faded away. Not everyone in hospice does this, and not everyone approves of this approach. But it is done and is why many patients do choose hospice.

    Is it really necessary for commenters here to argue with each other about hospice and about the personal and sad`choices people must make and accept when entering hospice?

    Comment by elissa (207170) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:24 pm

  114. Steve57:

    Actually, DRJ, I think the unlimited out of pocket costs for out-of-network care will be more likely to lead to medical related bankruptcies.

    Maybe so, but medical providers (other than hospitals providing emergency care) aren’t required to accept patients. I think most will be very careful about accepting out-of-network patients unless they demonstrate an ability to pay.

    As for hospitals, several of the ones who are opting out of the networks gave up their ERs a long time ago, so I doubt they will accept out-of-network patients without substantial deposits. The remaining hospitals that have ERs and are required to provide care are often charity or county hospitals, so they likely are in-network because they also take Medicaid and Medicare patients.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:27 pm

  115. I think it’s helpful to talk about hospice because some people don’t understand how it works. Yes, it’s true it usually involves end-of-life care and it can also provide pain-relief techniques that may shorten a patient’s life.

    But it can also get people over the rough spots when they face terminal illnesses and need medical care that isn’t otherwise available, or specialized pain relief, or just some extra help. Did you know that patients can enter hospice, improve, and then leave hospice care? In my area, they call it “graduating” from hospice and it happens, too.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:35 pm

  116. we need a show about hospice care starring katherine heigl so we can understand it more better I think

    people say she’s difficult but I think she adds value

    she’s smart and pretty and a whole lot more down to earth than your average hollywood whore

    If I had to guess I’d bet they don’t like her cause she tells these goof-ass hollywood twits how the cow ate the cabbage, and they don’t like it

    no sir

    they don’t like it one bit

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:37 pm

  117. Here’s an example: With some diseases like cancer, the pain and side effects can become so overwhelming that patients give up and/or stop treatment. Hospice caregivers often are more experienced and have more latitude in dispensing pain medications. That can help patients get through the pain/side effects and keep going with treatment.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:39 pm

  118. I don’t mind talking about it because I know there are many forms and versions of hospice and I am a fan of hospice (not that “fan” is necessarily the best word choice). But I felt that the “Jack Kevorkian Memorial Hospice ” snark above was out of line, was cruel, and was quite jackwagonny.

    Comment by elissa (207170) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:43 pm

  119. elissa, I think it is necessary not to blur the distinction between euthanasia and hospice care. Because when we allow that to happen then actively shortening someone’s life who never asked or consented to that becomes thinkable.

    Nobody apparently gave your friend and colleague a lethal injection, and that makes all the difference.

    This isn’t about arguing about anyone’s personal choices. It’s about which practices are considered within the acceptable and legal bounds of medical care, and which aren’t. Once it becomes acceptable for doctors to decide when to administer lethal doses of medication, with or without the consent of the patient, then the patient no longer has a choice.

    It is, at least for me, about making sure they have those choices. Which euthanasia laws take away from them.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:45 pm

  120. Absolutely no one here but you has mentioned a lethal injection in the context of accepted and legal hospice care, Steve.

    Comment by elissa (207170) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:50 pm

  121. I think it is necessary not to blur the distinction between euthanasia and hospice care.

    I don’t think you get it Mr. Steve. A blurred blurred blurred (palliative) chimera is exactly what hospice care is, if that’s what the patient is of a mind for it to be. But the important thing, for me, is that we can talk, as a group, about “hospicecare” without Paul Ryan’s Republican Party weighing in.

    Man that would suck.

    They’re so intrusive.

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:51 pm

  122. You thought my reference to Jack Kevorkian was out of line, elissa? But this wasn’t?

    105. hospice care is not about prolonging life if the patient says ok let’s git r done

    i know me some hospice care I have like three relatives left

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 8:33 pm

    Because these sorts of patients were Jack Kevorkian’s target audience. The “let’s get r done” type.

    Or as Mr. feets also put it:

    sometimes though it’s not an immediate hospice situation but in other situations for example if you live alone and you got the alzheimer’s coming on, well then pretty much if you want to hold on to any basic human dignity you just have to buy yourself a gun and pick a sunset

    and maybe a theme song

    If pointing out the “death with dignity” crowd exploits vulnerable people and convinces them they ought to want to end their lives is snarky, cruel, and jackwagonny then I plead guilty. They may not realize it, many of them, but the result of going down that path is to put pressure on people by implying no sane person would want to live in that condition. Which is why I cited the UK papers, which note that many elderly patients don’t actually want to end their lives, but feel pressured to do so. They aren’t acting on their own wishes.

    I am sufficiently a jackwagon to think that’s wrong.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:58 pm

  123. 120. Absolutely no one here but you has mentioned a lethal injection in the context of accepted and legal hospice care, Steve.

    Comment by elissa (207170) — 12/11/2013 @ 9:50 pm

    Stop me if I’m wrong, elissa, but didn’t Former Conservative go on and on about Oregon’s “Death with Dignity Act?” Which would legalize exactly that.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:00 pm

  124. 3. Speaking of Oregon, at least they have their Death with Dignity Act. It still isn’t perfect as it is restrictive, but it is a start on the road toward freedom and decency.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:46 am

    Absolutely no one, elissa? Are you sure?

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:01 pm

  125. Steve57,

    I don’t think the issue is drawing a line between euthanasia and hospice care (or medical care, for that matter) because the delivery of care and medications is an art, not a science. For example, the therapeutic dose of a cancer medicine for one person could be fatal for a similar person and totally inadequate for yet another.

    Similarly, pain and other medications given to hospice and medical patients designed to be therapeutic may prove fatal, not because anyone was trying to do that but because it’s very difficult to balance the issues presented by people with serious medical problems. The medicines that help the kidneys function can slow down the heart and lungs, and lead to depressed breathing — so fixing one problem can lead to other problems that may ultimately prove fatal.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:03 pm

  126. maybe there should be different hospitals for so we, as Americans, can accommodate different thinkings about this subjekt

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:03 pm

  127. let the market speak

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:07 pm

  128. What I’ve seen is hospice and hospital care that tries to treat patients with those problems and some patients enter an endless circle where medicines solve one problem but lead to another, so the doctors change medicines that solve the second problem but lead to a third, and so on. It’s possible to get out of that endless circle — I’ve seen it happen — but sometimes it isn’t. However, that doesn’t mean the goal was euthanasia.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:08 pm

  129. the first rule of euthanasia club

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:09 pm

  130. Steve57,

    As I recall, Former Conservative was arguing for the right of a person with mental problems to be able to decide to die. I think that’s different than what we’re talking about here.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:10 pm

  131. I think my beloved colleague had a “let’s git r done” revelation which prompted her decisions and actions in hospice. She was cared for by caring professionals. I know the entire process was legal and humane and was her choice. That’s the only point I wanted to make. You clearly want to make different points.

    Comment by elissa (207170) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:11 pm

  132. DRJ @125, I agree with everything you said. But as you observe the issue becomes one of intent. If the the intent is to relieve suffering then that’s different from intending to shorten someone’s life. It isn’t clear whether it was the medication killed the patient or the underlying disease. But when a drug is administered with the intent of killing a patient then a line has been crossed that we must not allow to be crossed.

    I should also be clear to point out that Oregon’s “Death with Dignity” law would not legalize euthanasia. For the most part in these comments I’ve gone to pains to distinguish between euthanasia and physician assisted suicide (PAS). PAS involves a patient requesting and being prescribed a known lethal dose of drug. But the patient must take the drug him or herself. If any third party administers the drug, physician or family member or whomever, then the procedure becomes euthanasia and is no longer suicide.

    I consider it a small difference, but it’s a difference nonetheless. And the Oregon law legalized PAS and not euthanasia.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:15 pm

  133. Steve57 – I think you just need to accept that your experience or view of hospice care is not universal and deal with it. My experiences certainly do not parallel yours.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:18 pm

  134. DRJ – Former Conservative/Random/Christoph has a habit of returning to favorite subjects – anti-religious bigotry, race-based intelligence faux-science, and assisted suicide, among others.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:20 pm

  135. 131. …You clearly want to make different points.

    Comment by elissa (207170) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:11 pm

    Yes, I do. I was objecting to happyfeets characterization that hospice care equals euthanasia in #91.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:22 pm

  136. the whole terrain of euthanasia+hospice and hospice+euthanasia and hospinacea and euthanhospitalitah is etched on my soul like how…

    like how we all – all of us – Mr. Steve and Miss elissa and Miss DRJ and Mr. Beste – how we all remember – how we remember so, so viscerally – how it was, how it felt – back when we lived in a little country of unparalleled prosperity and opportunity and freedom

    but what i know in my kernel of awareness i keep separate from the consciousness described by PAUL RYAN’S REPUBLICAN PARTY

    i know that where we live now

    if it can be regulated?

    it will

    you can take that to the bank

    and what I know is that… all these maunderings about fetuses and euthanated sick, sick codgers and whatever lilaroser fever dreams might possess a fella of a mind to tune into the 700 Club once or twice a week

    these are indulgences of a wealthy and prosperous country with HORIZONS

    and we don’t live in that country no mores

    me i got mah ticket for the long way round

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:27 pm

  137. 133. Steve57 – I think you just need to accept that your experience or view of hospice care is not universal and deal with it. My experiences certainly do not parallel yours.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:18 pm

    I do accept that. I am pointing out that there is a line between giving a terminally ill person a choice about what care they want to receive, and legalizing the practice of allowing doctors to administer or prescribe drugs intended to shorten someone’s life.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:28 pm

  138. you’re talking about policy

    when this all is really happening in real life, policy is as malleable as Paul Ryan’s fiscal prudence

    it’s just a lot of people trying to do right by someone what’s

    dying

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:34 pm

  139. There are no DEATH PANELS, and Sarah Palin CAN’T SEE AND LIP READ, the KREMLIN without binoculars.
    We AS CONSERVATIVES, need to recognize that our opponents, DO NOT CARE about TRUTH.

    Comment by Gus (70b624) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:50 pm

  140. yeah i was just about to say that

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:54 pm

  141. hell, if you’re on hospice & want to check out, just bang 60ccs of room air into your IV line…

    /problem solved

    Comment by redc1c4 (abd49e) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:02 pm

  142. 138. …it’s just a lot of people trying to do right by someone what’s

    dying

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 10:34 pm

    Is that really what it’s about, Mr. feets? Can you explain to me how Alzheimer’s causes someone to be

    dying

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:15 pm

  143. How does that Alzheimer’s thing work?

    91. …sometimes though it’s not an immediate hospice situation but in other situations for example if you live alone and you got the alzheimer’s coming on, well then pretty much if you want to hold on to any basic human dignity you just have to buy yourself a gun and pick a sunset

    and maybe a theme song

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/11/2013 @ 7:29 pm

    Ok, Alzheimer’s won’t kill you for years. As a matter of fact, I’ve never heard a decent explanation how Alzheimer’s can kill you at all (hence the question).

    Please explain how killing yourself if you find out you have Alzheimer’s has anything to do with the dignity of he dying. Considering we’re not talking about the dying.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:24 pm

  144. “I am pointing out that there is a line between giving a terminally ill person a choice about what care they want to receive, and legalizing the practice of allowing doctors to administer or prescribe drugs intended to shorten someone’s life.”

    Steve57 – That was in the comments about good hospice care prolonging life, right?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:25 pm

  145. Most hospices are turning to this model. Also, if you think about it, a hospice doesn’t make money caring for someone after they die, so as a business model they want them happy and living. This doesn’t lend itself to euthanasia.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (e7ebd8) — 12/12/2013 @ 12:29 am

  146. No it is policy, as with NICE in the UK, and Holland’s equivalent, and Belgium etc, etc.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/12/2013 @ 4:40 am

  147. 144. “I am pointing out that there is a line between giving a terminally ill person a choice about what care they want to receive, and legalizing the practice of allowing doctors to administer or prescribe drugs intended to shorten someone’s life.”

    Steve57 – That was in the comments about good hospice care prolonging life, right?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/11/2013 @ 11:25 pm

    Could you please expand on this imaginary conflict between my previous statements. I’d like to address it, if only you could be clear about what the supposed conflict consists of.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/12/2013 @ 5:17 am

  148. As a matter of fact, I’ve never heard a decent explanation how Alzheimer’s can kill you at all (hence the question).

    At some point you’ll go to buy shoes and you won’t remember your way back home.
    Then you’ll forget who the people who are living with you are and beat them to get them out of the house.
    Then you’ll forget how to go to the bath room and how to clean yourself and the room up after you’ve gone on yourself. So Depends.
    Then you’ll forget how to pick up the food off the plate or how to raise the cup to your lips, so you’ll need to be spoon fed.
    Then you’ll forget how to talk.
    Then you’ll go blind, and it may be cataracts, but it would be silly to do the cataract operation because nobody knows how much vision centers you have left in your brain.
    And this will happen over twelve years if you have a strong constitution and a husband and two sons who also hired two Polish ladies to look after you.
    And your husband will die but you won’t know it and it would be pointless to take you to his funeral tied to a wheelchair. You’ll wander the house “looking” for something, and your sons will know that you’re missing him.
    And you’ll still be at your house with your two sons and the two Polish ladies ladies looking after you.
    Finally, you will forget how to swallow and the end will be near. Starvation, dehydration, aspiration pneumonia.
    And your son will sign a DNR order and the hospice will give him sublingual morphine to give you.
    And he will give you only enough to normalize your breathing because you are alkaloid from the dehydration but he will want you the Polish lady to get you of bed and walk you around and try to give you some hydration.
    And the Polish lady will love you and refuse to let you die and sit up all day with you feeding you a dewdrop of water and a pinhead of baby food with the tip of a spoon the whole day.
    And you will last for forty days this way.
    And the hospice will be really upset because your sons are not giving you enough morphine so you’ll be passed out on the bed and die quicker.
    And your sons and the Polish lady will tell them to go f*** themselves.
    And then one morning you won’t wake up.
    And because you were in hospice there is no need for an autopsy so you’re spared that indignity at least.
    And all kinds of ladies with too much time of their hand from hospice will be calling your sons to “offer comfort” about something they knew was going to happen twelve years ago.

    That’s pretty much how Alzheimer’s kills you, Steve.

    It may be a little different in a nursing home. http://imgur.com/j1yd6cz

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/12/2013 @ 6:15 am

  149. In addition:

    As Alzheimer’s disease progresses to later stages, brain changes begin to affect physical functions, such as swallowing, balance, and bowel and bladder control. These effects can increase vulnerability to additional health problems such as:

    Pneumonia and other infections. Difficulty swallowing may cause people with Alzheimer’s to inhale (aspirate) food or liquid into their airways and lungs, which can lead to pneumonia. Inability to control emptying of the bladder (urinary incontinence) may require placement of a tube to drain and collect urine (urinary catheter). Having a catheter increases your risk of urinary tract infections, which can lead to more-serious, life-threatening infections.

    Injuries from falls. People with Alzheimer’s become increasingly vulnerable to falling. Falls can lead to fractures. In addition, falls are a common cause of serious head injuries.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/12/2013 @ 6:21 am

  150. Steve57,

    I agree we shouldn’t legalize “the practice of allowing doctors to administer or prescribe drugs intended to shorten someone’s life” unless there is a law that authorizes doctors to prescribe them, like in Oregon. I don’t think many doctors do this, do you? Not only would it jeopardize their licenses and hospital privileges, it could also subject them to civil litigation and possibly criminal charges.

    I concede that some doctors know prescribing certain medications to certain patients could result in death — and it may even be likely. But here’s where I think we disagree: If giving those medications is the only way to have a chance at prolonging the patient’s life, then I don’t see those prescriptions as intending to shorten the patient’s life.

    Death may be a likely consequence but that is not the same as intending for the patient to die, because it may also be the best chance of prolonging the patient’s life. Unfortunately, that’s sometimes the difficult choice that doctors, patients and their families face.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/12/2013 @ 6:36 am

  151. @title of thread. That is very easy, all the Obama people need to do is get someone who is not “devastated” but “grateful” for Obamacare. I am sure that if they search they will find someone. It is still the politics of “he said” and “she said”.

    Comment by The Emperor AKA the Size-ist. (98014f) — 12/12/2013 @ 6:46 am

  152. 150. …I concede that some doctors know prescribing certain medications to certain patients could result in death — and it may even be likely. But here’s where I think we disagree: If giving those medications is the only way to have a chance at prolonging the patient’s life, then I don’t see those prescriptions as intending to shorten the patient’s life.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/12/2013 @ 6:36 am

    With all respect, here is where you misunderstand me.

    My focus has to do with the objective. If the objective is life, I’m all for it no matter how risky the procedure. If the objective is death, I’m against it.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:20 am

  153. If pointing out the “death with dignity” crowd exploits vulnerable people and convinces them they ought to want to end their lives is snarky, cruel, and jackwagonny then I plead guilty.

    A growing attitude of not just so much “death with dignity” but the trappings associated with it — meaning the quirks of human nature — will lead to a strange mix of liberal compassion (or “compassion”) and bottom-line (perhaps more right-leaning) attitudes. An unholy combination, to be sure, meaning that the existence of a slippery slope is a given.

    That’s why I’m fascinated and repulsed by the symbolism and reality of a Franklin D Roosevelt being a surprisingly anti-Jewish, pro-pure-bloodline bigot in private while his nemesis across the Atlantic, Adolph Hitler, was a supporter of both animal rights and veganism (not to mention his leading a personal life that would please the hearts of the rainbow-flag crowd). Keep that example in mind when dealing with the nature of just how corrupt and oddly screwed up humans can become.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:24 am

  154. You’re talking about intent, Steve57. It’s hard to know for sure what people intend but we do it all the time in criminal courts — based on conduct, statements, etc. It could be that some doctors intend to kill their patients, with or without the patient’s consent, when they believe death is a better option than life. But unless you are certain you have all the facts and understand the medical issues involved, I think you are imputing intent that may not be deserved.

    By the way, I’ve seen cases that made me suspect that was happening in my own family, only to learn later that the doctor was simply carrying out the family member’s wish to suspend treatment. End of life decisions are not easy for patients or doctors.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:30 am

  155. In my experience, what some would portray as the ideal philosophy behind hospice is often not in fact how many people function; and there are doctors who have no problem helping people die sooner as their intent.
    As with many things, usually it is done with an air of moral superiority.
    Just what the numbers and percentages are, I really don’t know.

    Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:33 am

  156. For example, if the amount of narcotic used to control pain makes a person sleepy, sometimes Ritalin or amphetamines could be used to “wake the person up”, so you have a person with their pain controlled and awake to interact with friends and family.
    Some would think that is nifty; others see it as “torture”, “making a person live”.
    Of course, in any specific instance there are many variables that get in then way of what is possible.

    Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:37 am

  157. I defer to MD’s experience.

    Do you think that happened to someone you know, Steve57, or are you speaking hypothetically?

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:52 am

  158. How did we get into another Christoph-driven suicide discussion?

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:53 am

  159. Well we took the track down the wonderful world of bio ethics, and the QUALY system.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:57 am

  160. “Could you please expand on this imaginary conflict between my previous statements. I’d like to address it, if only you could be clear about what the supposed conflict consists of.”

    Steve57 – It is not really worth the time and effort because it really represents another example of your failure to acknowledge the experiences of other commenters on this blog, as if you were the sole qualified expert on the subject.

    Mr. feets, I never said hospice care was about prolonging life. I said good hospice care can have that effect.

    What hospice care is about is supporting a terminally ill patient’s quality of life when the patient stops undergoing curative treatment.

    Hospice care is never about shortening the patient’s life.

    I think you came closest to saying something I would agree with above except the third part. I have had two relative elect to stop eating and drinking, deciding they had had enough, an experience similar to what elissa described in a comment above. One, my mother, was a cancer patient, the other, an aunt, suffered from other afflictions. Both received in home hospice care which helped ease their passing and helped the family with the dying process. The hospice people did not attempt to force fluids or food into either woman which I don’t believe anyone can argue shortened their life, but it was in accord with their wishes. There were no feeding tubes or IVs that you might have seen in a hospital situation.

    That is a perfect example of where hospice is not all about drugs being used to shorten lives, but to ease the dying process for both the patient and family.

    I’ve been involved with other family and non-family hospice situations as well.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:59 am

  161. I am sure people have many different experiences. I am not sure, myself, how to tell what is more normative/usual and what is atypical. I have seen even within a given hospice agency a range of opinion on what is and is not considered appropriate.

    Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/12/2013 @ 8:07 am

  162. How did we get into another Christoph-driven suicide discussion?

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/12/2013 @ 7:53 am
    Maybe you should do another thread on it. Death is so fascinating. :)

    Comment by The Emperor AKA the Size-ist. (082acd) — 12/12/2013 @ 8:36 am

  163. 160. It is not really worth the time and effort because it really represents another example of your failure to acknowledge the experiences of other commenters on this blog, as if you were the sole qualified expert on the subject.

    Well, such ass****ry certainly deserves to be dismissed out of hand.

    Even more when that was never the point, I guess.

    Is it really so hard to distinguish between euthanasia and physician assisted suicide on the one hand and hospice care on the other?

    Apparently so.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/12/2013 @ 2:51 pm

  164. Circumcision is of the debbil

    Comment by JD (5c1832) — 12/12/2013 @ 2:53 pm

  165. SMEGMA!!!!!!

    Comment by JD (5c1832) — 12/12/2013 @ 2:54 pm

  166. “Even more when that was never the point, I guess.”

    Steve57 – You should have been more clear and not made it the point, dickhead.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/12/2013 @ 5:22 pm

  167. Mrs. Smith had just gotten home from visiting her husband in the hospital. He had fallen ill and the doctors weren’t sure what was wrong with him so they wanted to keep him at the hospital for observation. Mrs. Smith had just walked in the front door and was setting her purse down when the phone rang.

    “Hello?” said Mrs. Smith.

    “Yes, Mrs. Smith, this is Mary calling from the hospital. I’m afraid I’ve got some bad news and some worse news about your husband.”

    “Oh dear,” said Mrs. Smith, “I guess I’ll take the bad news first.”

    “Well,” said the nurse, “The bad news is that we got the test results back for your husband but there’s been a bit of a mix-up. It seems that there’s another patient at the hospital with the same name as your husband, Bob, and we’re not sure which test result belong to which patient. One of the tests came back positive for Alzheimer’s disease and the other test came back positive for AIDS.”

    “Oh my goodness,” said Mrs. Smith, “Well that’s horrible. What news could be worse than that?”

    “The worse news is that we can’t find your husband. He left his room and we’re not sure where he went,” said the nurse.

    “Oh my god!” exclaimed Mrs. Smith, “What do you suggest we do?”

    “Well,” replied the nurse, “if your husband finds his way home, don’t have sex with him.”

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/12/2013 @ 9:46 pm

  168. 166. “Even more when that was never the point, I guess.”

    Steve57 – You should have been more clear and not made it the point, dickhead.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/12/2013 @ 5:22 pm

    How could I have been more clear when my first comment (other than what a general disaster Obamacare is) on the subject at #68 begins with the words “Why euthanasia should never be legal.”

    I’m thinking that my point, that acting to end an ill person’s life, is and should remain illegal was pretty clearly made.

    So how could I have made it more clearly? “Dickhead” being not especially constructive criticism.

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/13/2013 @ 2:52 am

  169. The Naval Academy’s Glee Club at the Arizona Memorial. For free. It comes with.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQOzUqdOVDU

    Comment by Steve57 (8cef00) — 12/13/2013 @ 9:34 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4771 secs.