8/21/2009

So much for Obama's denials about rationing for old people

Bush stopped this "death book" and Obama reinstated it. A copy of the death book with a just added disclaimer, can be found here.

If President Obama wants to better understand why America's discomfort with end-of-life discussions threatens to derail his health-care reform, he might begin with his own Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). He will quickly discover how government bureaucrats are greasing the slippery slope that can start with cost containment but quickly become a systematic denial of care.

Last year, bureaucrats at the VA's National Center for Ethics in Health Care advocated a 52-page end-of-life planning document, "Your Life, Your Choices." It was first published in 1997 and later promoted as the VA's preferred living will throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes. After the Bush White House took a look at how this document was treating complex health and moral issues, the VA suspended its use. Unfortunately, under President Obama, the VA has now resuscitated "Your Life, Your Choices."

Who is the primary author of this workbook? Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing.

"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug'?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family." . . . .


Follow-up:

"This is a slippery slope," he said Sunday. "When you look at the book it makes people feel like they're a burden and they should do the decent thing and die. ... When a veteran comes back from Iraq, they shouldn't be given a book like this."

Towey called the guide "fundamentally flawed" and said it should be pulled from the Web site. . . . .

[Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary for the Department of Veterans Affairs] said it was one of many options for injured veterans, calling it "simply a tool."

"This ultimately is about the ... health care for veterans," Duckworth said.

Though Duckworth said the document has not been fully vetted, an official directive from July tells VA health practitioners to refer veterans to the document. Duckworth questioned whether that directive had been authorized at the highest levels. . . .


For another discussion see this.

Labels:

3 Comments:

Blogger Martin G. Schalz said...

Everyday it seems that I am bombarded with opinions and news reports via various means of distribution. TV, magazines, and internet.

Accusations that the BHO administration is pushing for death panels, and those who say he is not.

Rhetoric of all sorts from both sides, yet where's the proof? It is extremely rare to even see someone put forth a proof that can prove either side of the argument.

As an experiment, I decided to see what if, if anything can be proven by what Dr. Lott posted.

Here's one proof that is irrefutable.

http://www.ethics.va.gov/about/staff/pearlman.asp

On the other hand, I cannot find anything of value that unequivically proves that the Bush WH actually had Your Life, Your Choices pulled from the VA. Can anyone provide proof of the aforementioned?

As to the existence of the booklet, there is absolutely no doubt, as evidenced by this link; http://www.rihlp.org/pubs/Your_life_your_choices.pdf

If the above link is not true and or correct, I am sure someone will come forward seeing as how this issue is gathering steam on the internet, yet not the 'Regular Media'? On second thought, perhaps I should say that it is receiving coverage in newspapers via the net, but damn few at that.

Most google hits on this subject are copies of what Dr. Lott posted. That, in and of itself, does not prove anything.

Dr. Lott does a great job backing up his claims with proofs, yet why does not the WH, the Media, or politcal parties do so?

At any rate, House Bill H.R. 3200 can be viewed here;

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text

Take a look at number of folks who have visited the site. Rather pathetic, isn't it? I myself would love to read the darn bill, but I am having trouble connecting to the site. I'll try again, and see what I can gather from it later.

Good luck to those who try to read it, as I have failed so far.

8/21/2009 3:12 PM  
Blogger TooMuchTime said...

I think this quote sums up the entire disgusting affair.

The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional as to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation.

- George Washington


This is part of the plan. Treat the veterans poorly and fewer people will want to join. Enrollment goes down so the socialists can claim that the country spends too much money on the military. The budget for the military goes down and the socialsts get to declare a "peace dividend" and spend the money on unconstitutional things like a national health care plan.

No wonder why socialism doesn't work.

8/21/2009 7:08 PM  
Blogger Martin G. Schalz said...

I see that Fox News has picked up the story, yet no other National outlet has as of post.

Highly disturbing it is.

Then again, having Arlen Spector jumping onto the bandwagon is disturbing too. Is it election time already?

8/23/2009 12:54 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home