sookster
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,838
- Reaction score
- 452
- Location
- In my own world.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I think money is a key factor because it is what keeps this system somewhat stable. I think if you want costs to be reasonable, we have to be reasonable and decide what procedure to do or not to do. So for an extreme example, a 90 year old leukemia patient shouldn't try to prolong his or her life, it is his or her time to die.
Death is a part of life. There are times when it is our calling, and it is sooner and later than others. It's reality. And if you want these outrageous costs to come down, then we can't have the mindset that everyone should get every possible procedure done to prolong their lives at all times. That isn't sustainable. We have to be reasonable and say, "That person is going to die, it is his or her time."
I think money is a key factor because it is what keeps this system somewhat stable. I think if you want costs to be reasonable, we have to be reasonable and decide what procedure to do or not to do. So for an extreme example, a 90 year old leukemia patient shouldn't try to prolong his or her life, it is his or her time to die.
Death is a part of life. There are times when it is our calling, and it is sooner and later than others. It's reality. And if you want these outrageous costs to come down, then we can't have the mindset that everyone should get every possible procedure done to prolong their lives at all times. That isn't sustainable. We have to be reasonable and say, "That person is going to die, it is his or her time."
I havent at all claimed that it isnt worth discussing. Pointing out that the topic isnt new doesnt in anyway devalue the topic it just takes into account that it isnt a new concept.
Technological advances have done what exactly in the last decade? What would be different today as opposed to 2004? What technological devices exist now that did not exist before that make the questions that you ask any different than 20 years ago much less ten? What are the new the ethical Dilemma that exist now that did not exist before?
Insurance companies have had "death panels" ever since they started. Try running over your policy limit and see what happens ...So you support death panels?
Insurance companies have had "death panels" ever since they started. Try running over your policy limit and see what happens ...
Since my wife recently had her hip replaced I can tell you for a fact that a bad hip isn't fatal. You're stretching ...More preemie babies can be kept alive (at a greater cost) than before; multiple births are more likely to be kept alive; older people have more treatments open to them; hip replacements are "common" now, open heart surgery, etc etc etc. are more common now. Organ transplants.
Oh, one of those entitlement people, I see ... LOL!A hospital can't deny you life-saving medical care based on inability to pay.
Oh, one of those entitlement people, I see ... LOL!
Hospitals are not required to R&R your heart.
Since my wife recently had her hip replaced I can tell you for a fact that a bad hip isn't fatal. You're stretching ...
More preemie babies can be kept alive (at a greater cost) than before; multiple births are more likely to be kept alive; older people have more treatments open to them; hip replacements are "common" now, open heart surgery, etc etc etc. are more common now. Organ transplants.
Yes some of that is true but it doesnt largely change the premise. But enough of that (it wasnt even important to me). Ill just concede and assume that the situation has evolved into a different problem.
Three years a go, my Mom was at the end of a long battle with COPD. Her doctor asked if I wanted to basically unplug her. At the end stage of COPD the mind is but a shell of its old self. And she was on a ventilator. Technology could have kept her alive for who knows how much longer. The ethical thing to do at that point was to let her die. SO technology isnt always the panacea of ethics.
What it comes down too is quality of life and the decisions made by the patient and or the loved ones responsible for their well being. As I said (but you ignored in lieu of defending the legitimacy of the premise of this thread) every case should be dealt with by a case to case method and nothing short of that would be ethical technology or not its still the same outcome. A decision is called for and IMHO the decision should always be personal not a cookie cutter one size fits all.
I would hope we stick with that case by case method. I'm just not sure that will work out on the large scale of our country.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?