I disagree but...Mushrooming health subsidies are creating sick incentives for government to push suicide

Mushrooming health subsidies are creating sick incentives for government to push suicide (link). Let me start off by saying that I do not agree with the thrust of this article, though I do agree with certian of its assertions. Let me explain, but first some excerpts:

“Any society that rejects that truth about life as a gift from our creator and adopts a culture of death . . . is in the process of crumbling,” Johnson (R-La.) warned.
He’s right. Alas, parts of America already welcome assisted suicide.
Eight states and Washington, DC, permit medically assisted death for their own residents....

Together, Medicare and Medicaid account for nearly 40% of national health expenditures, or more than $1.7 trillion.Those are eye-popping figures. One day soon, medical assistance in dying may look appealing as a way for the government to avoid paying for expensive procedures for those who need them.
When the state is charged with paying for someone’s health care, its incentives don’t always align with those of its citizens.

Click to expand...

In 1965 Congress passed and LBJ signed a bill creating the Medicare system. It was certainly well-intentioned. Among many problems, it permitted and incentivized treatment of enough illnesses that people started living longer. To a point that's a good thing. People began routinely surviving into their 90's and triple-digits. The medical means exist to do this though they are increasingly expensive; Congress cannot supply nonagenarians and beyond things that are useful and enjoyable to do. Even ones that are not demented may be bored out of their minds, as their friends, spouses and relatives become addled or worse, dead. In my family, my wife's stepmother spends her days ferried to and from various kinds of doctors. This has forced what amounts to rationing of health care to younger people.
How does this rationing work? Musical holds for talking to "doctor practice groups" and insurance companies for "pre-approvals." What should be done? I think there is nothing immoral about people deciding to exit in an orderly, compassionate manner.

I think it makes sense to allow compassionate / painless way to die if someone of sound mind truly chooses to. At the very least beyond a certain age or for people with disabilities but really, for everyone.

I don't think this is because of monetary considerations but more so just for humanitarian purposes and allowed people to make their own choices.

RWE posters are thoroughly captivated by the Murdoch owned media properties infotainment stream.

IOW, yet another thread with the OP linked to NYPost.com or other “taintment” brought to you by Murdoch and its advertisers and political allies.

post said:

RWE posters are thoroughly captivated by the Murdoch owned media properties infotainment stream.

IOW, yet another thread with the OP linked to NYPost.com or other “taintment” brought to you by Murdoch and its advertisers and political allies.

Click to expand...

I totally disagree with Murdoch on this issue, though I started the thread.

Yet despite the massive spend on healthcare. Twice the OECD average, and the highest p/p spend in the world, the US has one of the lowest life expectancies among developed nations. The question shouldn't be so much about how much healthcare to supply the elderly with, but what the hell are we doing wrong to let so many younger people die and end up with such a bad return on our healthcare investment.

JBG said:

In 1965 Congress passed and LBJ signed a bill creating the Medicare system. It was certainly well-intentioned. Among many problems, it permitted and incentivized treatment of enough illnesses that people started living longer. To a point that's a good thing. People began routinely surviving into their 90's and triple-digits. The medical means exist to do this though they are increasingly expensive; Congress cannot supply nonagenarians and beyond things that are useful and enjoyable to do. Even ones that are not demented may be bored out of their minds, as their friends, spouses and relatives become addled or worse, dead.

Click to expand...

I suppose Medicare is indeed a victim of its own success in that respect.

Greenbeard said:

I suppose Medicare is indeed a victim of its own success in that respect.

Click to expand...

Exactly what I argue.

Slavister said:

I think it makes sense to allow compassionate / painless way to die if someone of sound mind truly chooses to. At the very least beyond a certain age or for people with disabilities but really, for everyone.

I don't think this is because of monetary considerations but more so just for humanitarian purposes and allowed people to make their own choices.

Click to expand...

The way we have it structured in many places turns it into a cruel trap.

They're of sound mind when they make the final decision that they will want to euthanize themselves when the pain becomes too great. But the pain often doesn't become too great until they are also not entirely sound of mind. And then they're told nope... can't do it now.

I ten to think you should be able to make a final decision when in a sound mind that you want to be able to later request euthanasia even if your mind is no longer sound.

If dogs can be put down in a compassionate way to alleviate suffering, it makes sense to offer people the same option. However, we like to delude ourselves that we are not animals and that we are special and more important somehow. "Natural causes, Billy! Natural causes!"

Mr Person said:

-snip/
I ten to think you should be able to make a final decision when in a sound mind that you want to be able to later request euthanasia even if your mind is no longer sound.

Click to expand...

Not a criticism, I do not understand and I think you know a lot more about this than I do. My recent understanding is “sound mind.” Is specific to the subject.., for a binding will it is kniowng the extent and descriptions one’s assets and their market value, the names of those you want to leave assets to and their relationship to you.

As long as you are aware of and have an understanding of those things and that your will can be amended, you are determined to be competent even if you misname , day to day, people you are familiar with in your family or you talk to people who no one else can see.

In competency to draft a power of attorney an awareness is required that it is revocable and you have the option of making it durable and then your designee acting as if it he were you even if you become incompetent or unconscious. You need to understand that the person you designate becomes an alternate to you as your bank account holder and can sell your house or car just as if it was you doing it but cannot draft a will.

Aside from that you can see things that aren’t there and interact with a deceased spouse as if they were present, yet still be considered competent to draft an enforceable instrument as I described

I don’t see how a request to be euthanized can still be binding if the conditions consenting to it are all met but the subject is no longer of sound mind. It removes a buyer ‘s regret option a competent person would still have. Why not require a durable power of attorney as a safeguard to protect someone who has become incompetent?

JBG said:

Mushrooming health subsidies are creating sick incentives for government to push suicide (link).

Click to expand...

NY Post. Not even fit for wrapping fish.

Spare us the Murdochian pretzel logic. The reality is that Medicare and Medicaid are keeping seniors alive longer, and generally improves their quality of life. The idea that this causes the US to "ration care" is absurd, because that's not how these plans work.

The US is the most affluent nation in the history of the world. It can easily afford to pay for seniors' medical care. If it fails to do so, that's not because of an inability to do so, it's because of a choice not to do so. And if you want to talk about a "sick incentive" to compel people into suicide? Try taking away Medicare and see what happens.

Meanwhile, the reason why insurers make ratepayers jump through hoops has nothing whatsoever to do with Medicare/Medicaid. It's because the insurers are motivated by profits, which are enhanced by paying out the minimum possible for care.

Decisions about how to handle end-of-life scenarios shouldn't be based on fiscal considerations. Nor should it be decided by conservatives who so utterly despise government so much that they are gleefully willing to let people die rather than admit that government can actually do something right. The choice about how to handle end-of-life decisions should be based on ethical principles, not fiscal ones.

Visbek said:

NY Post. Not even fit for wrapping fish.

Spare us the Murdochian pretzel logic. The reality is that Medicare and Medicaid are keeping seniors alive longer, and generally improves their quality of life. The idea that this causes the US to "ration care" is absurd, because that's not how these plans work.

The US is the most affluent nation in the history of the world. It can easily afford to pay for seniors' medical care. If it fails to do so, that's not because of an inability to do so, it's because of a choice not to do so. And if you want to talk about a "sick incentive" to compel people into suicide? Try taking away Medicare and see what happens.

Meanwhile, the reason why insurers make ratepayers jump through hoops has nothing whatsoever to do with Medicare/Medicaid. It's because the insurers are motivated by profits, which are enhanced by paying out the minimum possible for care.

Decisions about how to handle end-of-life scenarios shouldn't be based on fiscal considerations. Nor should it be decided by conservatives who so utterly despise government so much that they are gleefully willing to let people die rather than admit that government can actually do something right. The choice about how to handle end-of-life decisions should be based on ethical principles, not fiscal ones.

Click to expand...

Helix said:

If dogs can be put down in a compassionate way to alleviate suffering, it makes sense to offer people the same option. However, we like to delude ourselves that we are not animals and that we are special and more important somehow. "Natural causes, Billy! Natural causes!"

Click to expand...

I have often thought that we treat our dogs better than other humans.