Posts tagged: rationing

New tactics of the left in pushing Universal Health Care

By Cassandra Effect, September 1, 2009 8:24 pm

Question: How to sell America on the DESPERATE NEED for sweeping changes to our health care system? 

Answer:  have the NY TImes run stories featuring photos of  thousands of Americans lining up  for free care, and suggest that without the free clinics they would not ever, ever, ever get the health care they need.

For the second day in a row, thousands of people lined up on Wednesday — starting after midnight and snaking into the early hours — for free dental, medical and vision services, courtesy of a nonprofit group that more typically provides mobile health care for the rural poor.

Like a giant MASH unit, the floor of the Forum, the arena where Madonna once played four sold-out shows, housed aisle upon aisle of dental chairs, where drilling, cleaning and extracting took place in the open. A few cushions were duct-taped to a folding table in a coat closet, an examining room where Dr. Eugene Taw, a volunteer, saw patients

The problem with this scenario? 

Many of those here said they lacked insurance, but many others said they had coverage but not enough to meet all their needs — or that they could afford. Some said they were well aware of the larger national health care debate, and were eager for changes.

For those willing to endure the long waits, the arena was like a magical medical kingdom, where everything was possible once a person got through the door.

Well – then lets all hope that that free universal health care does not result in rationing…….

  • Share/Bookmark

Newt Gingrich on Trusting the Government on Health Care

By Cassandra Effect, August 16, 2009 3:39 am

Outstanding op-ed from Newt Gingrich which really hits home on the key issues on the health care debate in our country right now – that is whether will will have freedom from big brother rationing and be at the mercy of a bureaucrat for the kind  of health care we will be able to receive.  Free sounds oh so good from the politicians mouths until you wake up and can’t pay for everyone.  And then you turn to rationing without alternate choices because you have a single payer system without competition.

Trust the Government
   
How much is one additional year of your life worth?

Or one more year of life for your father or your wife?  For your child?

In Great Britain, the government has settled on a number: $45,000.

That’s how much a government commission with the Orwellian acronym NICE has decided British government-run health care will pay for one additional year of life for a British subject.

Think it could never happen here?  Then you need to pay closer attention to what Washington is planning for your health care.

British Government Bureaucrats Literally Decide if Your Life is Worth Living

The British single-payer bureaucrats arrived at the price of an additional year of life in the same way they decide how much health care all British people will get, through a formula called “quality-adjusted life years.”

That means that if you’re sick in Great Britain, government bureaucrats literally decide if your life is worth living and, if so, how much longer and at what cost.

If it’s more than $45,000, you’re out of luck.

Read the whole op-ed HERE

  • Share/Bookmark

Obama’s Health Policy Advisor Ezekiel Emanuel an avowed Atheist

By Cassandra Effect, August 15, 2009 11:49 am

The author of The Health Care Chart that Will Scare YOU to DEATH  is an “ethicist” who goes to temple religiously but says he is a “Practicing Atheist”.  He likes his synagogues to be without a rabbi  (?) but full of “incredibly smart” people.  He claims he has no faith but lots of religion.  So being Jewish is more like a lifestyle?  Wow.  At least we have good food!

I am shocked that he can claim Judaism is not a religion of faith, but one of practice!  The most holy Jewish Prayer, the Sh’ma declares:
Hear O Isreal, the Lord is our G-D, the Lord is One

And how about Maimonides 13 Principles of Faith?

I  think I’m going to plotz!  An Atheist Ethicist advising President Obama on how to ration healthcare!

 

  • Share/Bookmark

Sarah Palin rebuttal to Obama’s Health Care Rationing

By Cassandra Effect, August 13, 2009 9:47 am

Sarah Palin strikes back (with footnotes!) after Obama dismissed Palin’s statement that his health plan would lead to rationing of care.  

Want to know what started this firestorm?  Cassandra Effect readers knew about Ezekiel Emanuel’s rationing program, the Complete Lives System last month when I reported on The Health Care Chart that Will Scare YOU to DEATH

Full text of Palin’s post below (bold emphasis mine) Source: Official Sarah Palin  facebook page.

 

Concerning “Death Panels”

Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these “unproductive” members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.

The President made light of these concerns. He said:

“Let me just be specific about some things that I’ve been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we’ve decided that we don’t, it’s too expensive to let her live anymore….It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they’re ready on their own terms. It wasn’t forcing anybody to do anything.” [1]

The provision that President Obama refers to is Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled “Advance Care Planning Consultation.” [2] With all due respect, it’s misleading for the President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.

Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual … or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility… or a hospice program.” [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]

Now put this in context. These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is “to reduce the growth in health care spending.” [5] Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care? As Charles Lane notes in the Washington Post, Section 1233 “addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones…. If it’s all about obviating suffering, emotional or physical, what’s it doing in a measure to “bend the curve” on health-care costs?” [6]

As Lane also points out:

Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren’t quite “purely voluntary,” as Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) asserts. To me, “purely voluntary” means “not unless the patient requests one.” Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive — money — to do so. Indeed, that’s an incentive to insist.

Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they’re in the meeting, the bill does permit “formulation” of a plug-pulling order right then and there. So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233 would “place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign,” I don’t think he’s being realistic. [7]

Even columnist Eugene Robinson, a self-described “true believer” who “will almost certainly support” “whatever reform package finally emerges”, agrees that “If the government says it has to control health-care costs and then offers to pay doctors to give advice about hospice care, citizens are not delusional to conclude that the goal is to reduce end-of-life spending.” [8]

So are these usually friendly pundits wrong? Is this all just a “rumor” to be “disposed of”, as President Obama says? Not according to Democratic New York State Senator Ruben Diaz, Chairman of the New York State Senate Aging Committee, who writes:

Section 1233 of House Resolution 3200 puts our senior citizens on a slippery slope and may diminish respect for the inherent dignity of each of their lives…. It is egregious to consider that any senior citizen … should be placed in a situation where he or she would feel pressured to save the government money by dying a little sooner than he or she otherwise would, be required to be counseled about the supposed benefits of killing oneself, or be encouraged to sign any end of life directives that they would not otherwise sign. [9]

Of course, it’s not just this one provision that presents a problem. My original comments concerned statements made by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor to President Obama and the brother of the President’s chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens….An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.” [10] Dr. Emanuel has also advocated basing medical decisions on a system which “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.” [11]

President Obama can try to gloss over the effects of government authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of his top health care advisors are clear enough. It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to health care rationing, and more evidence that the top-down plans of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform.

[1] See http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/president-obama-addresses-sarah-palin-death-panels-wild-representations.html.
[2] See http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
[3] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1); Sec. 1233 (hhh)(3)(B)(1), above.
[4] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1)(E), above.
[5] See http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
[6] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html].
[7] Id.
[8] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/10/AR2009081002455.html].
[9] See http://www.nysenate.gov/press-release/letter-congressman-henry-waxman-re-section-1233-hr-3200.
[10] See http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Where_Civic_Republicanism_and_Deliberative_Democracy_Meet.pdf
[11] See http://www.scribd.com/doc/18280675/Principles-for-Allocation-of-Scarce-Medical-Interventions.

  • Share/Bookmark

The Health Care Chart that Will Scare YOU to DEATH

By Cassandra Effect, July 31, 2009 6:21 pm

age based priority PIIS0140673609601379_gr1_lrg

This chart reflects President Obama’s health policy adviser’s argument that health care resources should be allocated to the young adult population, and limited in the older and youngest populations.   In other words  – if your too young or too old you are NOT GOING TO RECEIVE  all the care you may NEED!

Who wrote this?  Why Obama’s special advisor to the Office of Management and Budget for health policy, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel.  If the name sounds familiar, that is because he is the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.  Dr. Emanuel is the chair of Bio-Ethics at the NIH as well as an Oncologist.  He co-authored a paper earlier this year titled, Principles for Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions. (free registration may be required to view) . 

The paper examines a number of methods of allocating scarce resources, and the authors introduce their own hybrid model called the “COMPLETE LIVES SYSTEM.” 

When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.

While the authors recognize that their  system has flaws:

The complete lives system discriminates against older people

but….and there’s always a but….

Accepting the complete lives system for health care as a whole would be premature. We must first reduce waste and increase spending.

And they even bring up on, their own, the NAZI like nature of this notion!

Ultimately, the complete lives system does not create “classes of Untermenschen whose lives and well being are deemed not worth spending money on”, but rather empowers us to decide fairly whom to save when genuine scarcity makes saving everyone impossible. [emphasis mine]

In other words – once we’ve squeezed out waste, fraud, abuse and eliminated the profit from the system – we’ll still have more demand for services than we can afford.  And WHEN THAT HAPPENS – we need a SYSTEM to allocate the resources. 

While this is an interesting intellectual exercise at best, it should SCARE THE LIVING HELL out of anyone who plans on living past 60 years of age.  In essence, only “productive workers” would be eligible to receive the maximum amount of care.  Once your use to society is limited, or, in the case of children, a significant investment has not yet been made in you,YOU WILL BE ON YOUR OWN.  

Dr. Emanuel has also has published a book  – “Guaranteed Access Health Care” (at least the title makes it clear where he stand on this issue!)

In a nutshell, his health care system would be universal mandatory care, funded by a Value Added Tax (VAT).  Its not clear how Dr. Emanuel reconciles the conflicting notions of selling the population on  ”Guaranteed Access Health Care” and his recommendation for allocating scarce medical resources.  The American people are being sold down the river by the shiny object of “FREE” Health Care.  Don’t listen America – NOTHING IS FREE – and Universal Government Funded Care is a placing your health care treatment in the hands of faceless, nameless, and more importantly, unaccountable bureaucrats.

A complete review of his book can be found at the New York Review of Books (and no do not expect it to be too balanced!)

Share this chart with EVERYONE you know – we MUST NOT allow our country to become an amoral nation without mercy for the young and the old. 

Hat Tip to Rightsoup.com for their an excellent article Rahm’s Brother Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel: The Death Czar

Previously:

Obama Health Care like sci fi movie Logan’s Run

Health Care Rationing Is ALREADY Here in the USA

Obama promises middle class no sacrifice for ‘free’ healthcare

Oncologists recommend rationing of Cancer Drugs

  • Share/Bookmark

Panorama theme by Themocracy