SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A US National Health Care System?

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: longnshort who wrote (8673)8/25/2009 9:56:26 AM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) of 42652
 
how many decades in the future did this occur ?

I really don't understand what you're getting so exercised about. Treatment has always been "rationed" in that payment for life-prolonging treatment is not made available. People have always died because there was no medical provider available when and where they needed it, because they couldn't afford it, because their insurance company denied it, because there was no treatment available that would be effective, even because the provider chose not to treat the patient because he was the wrong color, etc. Medical care has always been rationed and will always be rationed. There's nothing extraordinary about this woman's situation other than that someone chose to frame it for political advantage.

When viable treatment is not offered, the end result is death. Nowadays providers in this country affirmatively offer the option of an easier death in the form of palliative care. They offer to make death as easy as possible through various comfort-giving mechanisms. Medicare, for example, affirmatively offers hospice care. Oregon offered palliative care including hospice care to this woman. That's SOP. The only thing unique about this particular example is that Oregon has an additional tool in the hospice toolkit. It can legally relieve suffering more directly and actively than other health care providers in the country via assisted suicide.

Now, I understand that you may be incensed that assisted suicide is legal in Oregon. But that's not what the issue is with this woman at this time. What's going on is that, due to her inability to pay, she is being denied treatment just like patients all over the world for as long as there have been doctors and patients. I found myself liking that woman and wishing she were not dying, but I would feel the same about everyone who has run out of options. Nonetheless, as an example of rationing, there's nothing unique about this woman and her situation. She is dying of cancer. She may die a bit sooner because she can't afford the one last-ditch option out there that might postpone her death and no one is offering to pay the bill for her. That happens every day everywhere. Nothing new here. Except the skewed political frame.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext