FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill

[Jay Canuck]

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill
AP – Tue Aug 11, 3:04 am ET
...Sarah Palin says the health care overhaul bill would set up a "death panel." Federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors are worth enough to society to deserve life-sustaining medical care. Palin and other critics are wrong.​

 

[Jay Canuck]

[SIZE=+1]Palin says Obama's health care plan is 'evil'[/SIZE]
That's a sure sign that she's running in 2012
Link
Excerpt:
Sarah Palin called Obama's health plan "downright evil" Friday in her first online comments since quitting, saying in a Facebook posting that he would create a "death panel" that would deny care to the neediest Americans. "The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care," the former swimsuit model wrote. "Such a system is downright evil," Palin wrote on her page. She encouraged her supporters to be engaged in the debate.
Translation:
Stop Obama's 'evil death panel' - whatever it takes - before he comes for poor Trig.

 

[Jay Canuck]

 

[Jay Canuck]

Is Palin's Schlafly-style fear rhetoric ethical politics?

Sarah Palin's beloved child Trig, born with Down Syndrome, is safe and so is everyone else who has been terrified by her hyperbolic "death panel" rhetoric on President Obama's health care reform efforts.
I'll leave it to our editorial page to debunk the unsubstantiated and preposterous Palin press release -- a wild distortion of an optional benefit already offered under Medicare to pay doctors for helping patients and their family face end-of-life decision making according to their own values.

 

[Care4all]

of course there isn't, no politician would be stupid enough to put something as inhumane as such in a legislated bill...

what's sad, is that some, even some on this board, followed their talking point leaders without researching such themselves, and parroted the lies....and maybe they believed it, who knows? Sad if they did....without trying to find out the truth on it, on their own...but maybe they did try...

Because there is the possibility that they did try to read the bill sections on these things and couldn't make out the mumbo jumbo way that these bills are written....and seriously, why things have to be written in the manner they are, where you have to go back in to the bill to see what section 3, subsection 1a of chapter 2, yahdeedah is in order to move off of the first line that states patients meeting this subsection yadeedah are qualifying customers for Yahdeedah of section 8 subsection yadeedah of the same chapter yadeedah....

I mean, for goodness sakes!!!!!

jimminee Christmas...the way these things are writen could wear anyone in their right mind down...seriously!!!

Care

 

[concept]

Try a little harder, silly lib apologist.

Here is an interesting (and by interesting I mean pathetically sick) video of your savior, the enlightened and articulate Barack Hussein Obama, telling a poor woman to take a pill.

No surgery for you.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-dQfb8WQvo[/ame]

 

[Immanuel]

The "death panel" is hyperbole and had no place in this debate.

That being said, I do believe that government bean counters will be deciding the type of care we can receive and that does concern me. What if a cancer patient is deemed terminal and those same bean counters determine that future taxes coming from the patient will not cover the cost of continued medical services? Cut 'er off!

Granted it can happen now with private insurance, but if it does, we can turn to other services. When everything belongs to the government...?

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

no politician would be stupid enough to put something as inhumane as such in a legislated bill...

Don't count on it. After all, they are not you and don't have your compassion.

Immie

 

[Jay Canuck]

 

[PoliticalChic]

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill
AP – Tue Aug 11, 3:04 am ET
...Sarah Palin says the health care overhaul bill would set up a "death panel." Federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors are worth enough to society to deserve life-sustaining medical care. Palin and other critics are wrong.​

Let's begin with a definition of terms, such as 'Fact Check."

This is not FactCheck.Org, it is the Associated Press which is allied with administration thinking.

It is misleading to imply that the AP is objective. In fact, it would have been more inclusive to comment on the kind of thinking of those involved in the compilation, and the essence of ObamaCare. The Stimulus already has a 'death panel' of sorts, the CER.

Consider the following:

Slipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age. Economists are familiar with the formula already in use in the U.K., where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYS or quality-adjusted life years) the patient is likely to benefit. In the U.K., the formula leads to denying treatments for age-related diseases because older patients have a denominator problem -- fewer years to benefit than younger patients with other diseases. In 2006, older patients with macular degeneration, which causes blindness, were told that they had to go totally blind in one eye before they could get an expensive new drug to save the other eye. It took nearly two years to get that government edict reversed. Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., a Louisiana heart surgeon, warned to no avail that it would lead to "denying seniors and the disabled lifesaving care."

If this philosophy is inferred in ObamaCare, can you see where there is reason to tread carefully?

And the infamous Dr. Emanuel:
"True change, writes Dr. Emanuel, must include reassessing the promise doctors make when they enter the profession, the Hippocratic Oath. Amazingly, Dr. Emanuel criticizes the Hippocratic Oath as partly to blame for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he wrote. Physicians take the "Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others." (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008.) Of course that is what patients hope their doctors will do. But Dr. Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere. Many doctors are horrified at this notion, and will tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time. "
Defend Your Health Care


And, finally, that could be considered to be a 'Death Panel' as described by George Will:
lipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age.” The CER would identify (this is language from the draft report on the legislation) medical "items, procedures, and interventions" that it deems insufficiently effective or excessively expensive. They "will no longer be prescribed" by federal health programs.” Are you thinking ‘seniors’? George F. Will - How the GOP Should Measure the Stimulus - washingtonpost.com

 

[MaggieMae]

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill
AP – Tue Aug 11, 3:04 am ET
...Sarah Palin says the health care overhaul bill would set up a "death panel." Federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors are worth enough to society to deserve life-sustaining medical care. Palin and other critics are wrong.​

Every time Palin opens her mouth, she steps in it.

 

[Care4all]

no politician would be stupid enough to put something as inhumane as such in a legislated bill...

Don't count on it. After all, they are not you and don't have your compassion.

Immie

Oh, not for compassionate reasons would they never put it in legislation, they just are self serving and they would never do anything that would lose them their seat in office. (If they were really to do it, which i don't believe for one nanosecond, but if they were to do it, it would be put in to a bill passed in the middle of the wee hours or it would not be legislated at all and just be slipped in to some regs or governing rule modification.)

care

 

[editec]

Palin is a moronic tool.

Why anyone cares what she thinks does or says I don't know.

 

[concept]

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill
AP – Tue Aug 11, 3:04 am ET
...Sarah Palin says the health care overhaul bill would set up a "death panel." Federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors are worth enough to society to deserve life-sustaining medical care. Palin and other critics are wrong.​

Every time Palin opens her mouth, she steps in it.

Where is my mini violin when I need it?

 

[007]

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill
AP – Tue Aug 11, 3:04 am ET
...Sarah Palin says the health care overhaul bill would set up a "death panel." Federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors are worth enough to society to deserve life-sustaining medical care. Palin and other critics are wrong.​

Let's begin with a definition of terms, such as 'Fact Check."

This is not FactCheck.Org, it is the Associated Press which is allied with administration thinking.

It is misleading to imply that the AP is objective. In fact, it would have been more inclusive to comment on the kind of thinking of those involved in the compilation, and the essence of ObamaCare. The Stimulus already has a 'death panel' of sorts, the CER.

Consider the following:

Slipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age. Economists are familiar with the formula already in use in the U.K., where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYS or quality-adjusted life years) the patient is likely to benefit. In the U.K., the formula leads to denying treatments for age-related diseases because older patients have a denominator problem -- fewer years to benefit than younger patients with other diseases. In 2006, older patients with macular degeneration, which causes blindness, were told that they had to go totally blind in one eye before they could get an expensive new drug to save the other eye. It took nearly two years to get that government edict reversed. Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., a Louisiana heart surgeon, warned to no avail that it would lead to "denying seniors and the disabled lifesaving care."

If this philosophy is inferred in ObamaCare, can you see where there is reason to tread carefully?

And the infamous Dr. Emanuel:
"True change, writes Dr. Emanuel, must include reassessing the promise doctors make when they enter the profession, the Hippocratic Oath. Amazingly, Dr. Emanuel criticizes the Hippocratic Oath as partly to blame for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he wrote. Physicians take the "Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others." (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008.) Of course that is what patients hope their doctors will do. But Dr. Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere. Many doctors are horrified at this notion, and will tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time. "
Defend Your Health Care


And, finally, that could be considered to be a 'Death Panel' as described by George Will:
lipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age.” The CER would identify (this is language from the draft report on the legislation) medical "items, procedures, and interventions" that it deems insufficiently effective or excessively expensive. They "will no longer be prescribed" by federal health programs.” Are you thinking ‘seniors’? George F. Will - How the GOP Should Measure the Stimulus - washingtonpost.com

Not surprising... the liberals in this thread just blew past this informative, factual post like a runaway train full of insults.

 

[Dr.House]

Palin is a moronic tool.

Why anyone cares what she thinks does or says I don't know.

Seems to be mostly libs starting threads on her...

Maybe you should ask them...

 

[Jay Canuck]

"Let's begin with a definition of terms, such as 'Fact Check."

This is not FactCheck.Org, it is the Associated Press which is allied with administration thinking."

and you will verify that the AP is allied with administration thinking how?

 

[WillowTree]

The "death panel" is hyperbole and had no place in this debate.

That being said, I do believe that government bean counters will be deciding the type of care we can receive and that does concern me. What if a cancer patient is deemed terminal and those same bean counters determine that future taxes coming from the patient will not cover the cost of continued medical services? Cut 'er off!

Granted it can happen now with private insurance, but if it does, we can turn to other services. When everything belongs to the government...?

Immie

get somebody to explain the two eugenicists he appointed as czars..

 

[Jay Canuck]

GOP govs sidestep Palin 'death panel' comments
The Associated Press - 8-11-09
NEW YORK - Republican governors said Monday that Americans are justifiably frightened by health care proposals but stopped short of embracing Sarah Palin's..​

 

[Immanuel]

The "death panel" is hyperbole and had no place in this debate.

That being said, I do believe that government bean counters will be deciding the type of care we can receive and that does concern me. What if a cancer patient is deemed terminal and those same bean counters determine that future taxes coming from the patient will not cover the cost of continued medical services? Cut 'er off!

Granted it can happen now with private insurance, but if it does, we can turn to other services. When everything belongs to the government...?

Immie

get somebody to explain the two eugenicists he appointed as czars..

Willow,

It is still hyperbole.

What the bill states and what its intentions are may very well be two different things. For instance, they state in the bill that private health insurance will be allowed to continue, but reading the bill shows very clearly that the intention is to destroy the industry.

They do not set up a "death panel" yet you might want to place a bet that when this is all said and done, when they sit their own people in the position of determining coverage, they will be people who will limit coverage for unproductive members of society.

Immie