Section 1233, HR 3200 "End of Life Council/Euthenasia talk origins"

[jillian]

that's cause some of us are working, living life, going to broadway shows with family and friends, yadda, yadda, yadda.... i don't sit at the computer all day

and the purpose of the section has already been explained to you by someone in the health field.

i can't help it if you can't read with comprehension.

oh...and i'm going back to work now... so i may or may not think about this thread again.... and may or may not bother answering you if i do think about it, depending on how ignorant and nasty your answer is. Farshtey?

and perhaps this, from another thread on this board, which you've clearly ignored, will be in simple enough english for you to follow:

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill - Yahoo! News

So you had time to come in here, read the posts, and type in a response telling us . . . that you didn't have time to read the posts and respond?

Jill's just a troll who plays a lawyer on the internet.

RAFLMAO!! And once again, allie squeals like a pig because she got her butt kicked.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Read Sarah Palin's Facebook Notes on this. She does an excellent job of explaining how 'end of life counseling' will lead to rationing and that seniors have every right to be concerned about all of this.

http://www.new.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/sarahpalin?v=app_2347471856&viewas=1429924401&ref=nf

This 'end of life counseling' is a moot point now. They dropped this provision.

Sens. Drop End-of-Life Provision from Bill - CBS News

 

[veritas]

as I stated eariler I do think this section of the bill does send a message and treads on an aspect of family matters that is uniquely private

How so? It doesn't. It's part of what one intends, is not mandated and it is offered as part of the coverage. How does this differ from agreeing to be an organ donor on your driver's license? What if you have no family? Maybe you want to talk to your doctor about how you want to handle things or what options are available. Maybe you want counseling so you can talk to your family and let them know what you have decided.

 

[veritas]

Read Sarah Palin's Facebook Notes on this. She does an excellent job of explaining how 'end of life counseling' will lead to rationing and that seniors have every right to be concerned about all of this.

Login | Facebook

This 'end of life counseling' is a moot point now. They dropped this provision.

Sens. Drop End-of-Life Provision from Bill - CBS News

Sarah Palin does an excellent job on nothing except whipping the trog base into a foaming frenzy.

 

[Cecilie1200]

that's cause some of us are working, living life, going to broadway shows with family and friends, yadda, yadda, yadda.... i don't sit at the computer all day

and the purpose of the section has already been explained to you by someone in the health field.

i can't help it if you can't read with comprehension.

oh...and i'm going back to work now... so i may or may not think about this thread again.... and may or may not bother answering you if i do think about it, depending on how ignorant and nasty your answer is. Farshtey?

and perhaps this, from another thread on this board, which you've clearly ignored, will be in simple enough english for you to follow:

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill - Yahoo! News

So you had time to come in here, read the posts, and type in a response telling us . . . that you didn't have time to read the posts and respond?

uh...try reading,dearie... my response was for allie ijit who was whining that I didn't respond to her quickly enough.

I did read, "dearie". You clearly read the thread, but you picked only one post to respond to - which had to have taken time, since included links - and that one was merely so you could say, "I'm a busy woman and don't have time to respond to posts. In fact, I'm going back to work now, and can't answer anything else." So why is it, if you're SO pressed for time, THAT was the post you took the time to answer, instead of something more substantive?

 

[rdean]

Read Sarah Palin's Facebook Notes on this. She does an excellent job of explaining how 'end of life counseling' will lead to rationing and that seniors have every right to be concerned about all of this.

Login | Facebook

This 'end of life counseling' is a moot point now. They dropped this provision.

Sens. Drop End-of-Life Provision from Bill - CBS News

Don't forget, she was for it before she was against it.

Healthcare Decisions Day

WHEREAS, Healthcare Decisions Day is designed to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care and medical decision-making whenever patients are unable to speak for themselves and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions. WHEREAS, in Alaska, Alaska Statute 13.52 provides the specifics of the advance directives law and offers a model form for patient use.
WHEREAS, it is estimated that only about 20 percent of people in Alaska have executed an advance directive. Moreover, it is estimated that less than 50 percent of severely or terminally ill patients have an advance directive.
WHEREAS, it is likely that a significant reason for these low percentages is that there is both a lack of knowledge and considerable confusion in the public about Advance Directives.
WHEREAS, one of the principal goals of Healthcare Decisions Day is to encourage hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, continuing care retirement communities, and hospices to participate in a statewide effort to provide clear and consistent information to the public about advance directives, as well as to encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to improve public knowledge and increase the number of Alaska’s citizens with advance directives.
WHEREAS, the Foundation for End of Life Care in Juneau, Alaska, and other organizations throughout the United States have endorsed this event and are committed to educating the public about the importance of discussing healthcare choices and executing advance directives.
WHEREAS, as a result of April 16, 2008, being recognized as Healthcare Decisions Day in Alaska, more citizens will have conversations about their healthcare decisions; more citizens will execute advance directives to make their wishes known; and fewer families and healthcare providers will have to struggle with making difficult healthcare decisions in the absence of guidance from the patient.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the state of Alaska, do hereby proclaim April 16, 2008, as:
Healthcare Decisions Day in Alaska, and I call this observance to the attention of all our citizens.

 

[veritas]

Healthcare Decisions Day

WHEREAS, Healthcare Decisions Day is designed to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care and medical decision-making whenever patients are unable to speak for themselves and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions. WHEREAS, in Alaska, Alaska Statute 13.52 provides the specifics of the advance directives law and offers a model form for patient use.
WHEREAS, it is estimated that only about 20 percent of people in Alaska have executed an advance directive. Moreover, it is estimated that less than 50 percent of severely or terminally ill patients have an advance directive.
WHEREAS, it is likely that a significant reason for these low percentages is that there is both a lack of knowledge and considerable confusion in the public about Advance Directives.
WHEREAS, one of the principal goals of Healthcare Decisions Day is to encourage hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, continuing care retirement communities, and hospices to participate in a statewide effort to provide clear and consistent information to the public about advance directives, as well as to encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to improve public knowledge and increase the number of Alaska’s citizens with advance directives.
WHEREAS, the Foundation for End of Life Care in Juneau, Alaska, and other organizations throughout the United States have endorsed this event and are committed to educating the public about the importance of discussing healthcare choices and executing advance directives.
WHEREAS, as a result of April 16, 2008, being recognized as Healthcare Decisions Day in Alaska, more citizens will have conversations about their healthcare decisions; more citizens will execute advance directives to make their wishes known; and fewer families and healthcare providers will have to struggle with making difficult healthcare decisions in the absence of guidance from the patient.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the state of Alaska, do hereby proclaim April 16, 2008, as:
Healthcare Decisions Day in Alaska, and I call this observance to the attention of all our citizens.

99 bottles of beer on the wall, 99 bottles of beer, take one down.........pass it around it'll take 99 million bottles of beer to sink in if ever it does........

 

[Navy1960]

as I stated eariler I do think this section of the bill does send a message and treads on an aspect of family matters that is uniquely private

How so? It doesn't. It's part of what one intends, is not mandated and it is offered as part of the coverage. How does this differ from agreeing to be an organ donor on your driver's license? What if you have no family? Maybe you want to talk to your doctor about how you want to handle things or what options are available. Maybe you want counseling so you can talk to your family and let them know what you have decided.

You do realize that almost everything you posted are matters of a personal nature that involve decisions that between yourself,family,Doctor, etc. So why then would the Govt. see it as a repsonsiblity to legislate such issues that clearly are matters that belong in your hands. In fact on organ donation you do realize that even by signing you DL that only expresses your wishes and does not automatically make you an organ donor. Again that is a matter between your loved ones and Doctors. While the promotional aspect of it i.e. DL is done by the state and you may see the provision as akin to that and you might be correct, however I tend to disagree because just by encouraging end of life counsel to some that implies several things to groups that may not see that a positive thing. Thus the reason why this matter needs to remain in private hands, much the same with abortion , to me it would be rather like the Govt, adding a provision in the healthcare bill that would advocate abortion counsel for young women every 5 years. While not mandatory it is a matter that belongs in private hands. I respect the nature of this though deeply don't get me wrong IMHO the Govt. involved in this matter seems to me to send a very wrong message that can be better sent through funding programs that already do this in local communties as not part of an overall healthcare bill.

 

[Care4all]

You're the lawyer. Do we currently have to have ORDERS defining whether or not we can opt for life saving treatments?

All "life sustaining treatment" requires a physician order.

Do you have a link to the section you quoted? So I can read it all in context. Thanks.

However, there's never been a "panel" picked by the president to approve what procedures are paid for. Nor has there ever been a requirement that if older ppl want any of their medical care paid for, they have to sit through end of life counseling every 5 years.

allie...geez louise! you and others are being played a fool...

hint....do a little reading instead of accepting the word of who you politically parrot!!! google what life sustaining orders or POLST or MOLST are...and the laws now, already in 27 plus states on life sustaining orders and their boards....this is nothing new, created by Democrats to kill you BULL CRAP silly!!!

POLST.ORG - Physicians Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment Paradigm

 

[veritas]

Your end matters are not personal if people have to know what you want. What if you wanted to refuse another round of chemo, but had a stroke in the meantime and couldn't say you didn't want it and just wanted to be let go? How is anybody going to know? What if you have alzheimers?

It can't be that personal, it has to be documented and verified should the need arise if there is any contention. Your concerns are groundless. Death is a public happenstance. It's recorded. People are responsible for keeping track of these things. Not personal at all.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Section 1233, however, addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones. Supporters protest that they're just trying to facilitate choice -- even if patients opt for expensive life-prolonging care. I think they protest too much: 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?

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.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html

 

[Care4all]

life sustaining orders - Google Search

POLST.ORG - Physicians Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment Paradigm

please, please educate yourselves!

 

[Cecilie1200]

Your end matters are not personal if people have to know what you want. What if you wanted to refuse another round of chemo, but had a stroke in the meantime and couldn't say you didn't want it and just wanted to be let go? How is anybody going to know? What if you have alzheimers?

It can't be that personal, it has to be documented and verified should the need arise if there is any contention. Your concerns are groundless. Death is a public happenstance. It's recorded. People are responsible for keeping track of these things. Not personal at all.

Actually, it doesn't. You run the risk of having your next-of-kin deciding something other than what you wanted, but you don't HAVE to have a living will or DNR order or medical power of attorney or any of that if you don't want to.

You're right about one thing. PEOPLE are responsible for it. They're responsible for deciding whether or not they want to be responsible. The government has no business stepping in and trying to legislate whether or not they do it.

Just because it's a good idea to do something doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea for the government to make you do it.

 

[veritas]

Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive -- money -- to do so. Indeed, that's an incentive to insist.

Once every 5 years.......what a profit center that's going to be...NOT.

Should we burden health care providers with sleuthing to find out what you might want? While keeping you alive to find out? When you don't want it? Track down all of your relatives? Find out you have no relatives?

I don't see any incentives other than knowing what you want.

 

[veritas]

You're right about one thing. PEOPLE are responsible for it.

I wasn't referring to the individuals who make the choices, I was referring to the individuals with the government that record these things, and provide the appropriate information to whomever is entitled to it....like coroners and courts and records clerks.

 

[veritas]

you don't HAVE to have a living will or DNR order or medical power of attorney or any of that if you don't want to.

No you don't. This bill isn't making it mandatory either.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I can't help thinking this "end of life counseling" is going to end up being a lot like the "genetic counseling" I was given when I became pregnant at the age of 39. What it basically came down to was this woman sitting in a room, doing her best to scare the bejesus out of me about all the things that could be wrong with my baby and how difficult it would be to take care of a special-needs child, and trying to convince me to have an abortion should there be a problem. I would much have preferred to have waived the consultation, but the clinic refused to give me an amniocentesis unless I let them "counsel" me.

Maybe I'm cynical, but I see "end of life counseling" turning out to be some doctor trying to scare the bejesus out of old/sick people about how awful a lingering illness might be, how horrible for their families, how expensive, etc. and trying to convince them to "die with dignity" instead. As with the decision about keeping my baby (who was perfect in any case), I would prefer to make that decision with my husband and forego anyone else's "helpful" input unless I have a specific question.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You're right about one thing. PEOPLE are responsible for it.

I wasn't referring to the individuals who make the choices, I was referring to the individuals with the government that record these things, and provide the appropriate information to whomever is entitled to it....like coroners and courts and records clerks.

It's for them to record any official decision you choose to make. It's not for them to have any input in the decision, or to even have any input in the decision to make an official decision or not.

 

[Cecilie1200]

you don't HAVE to have a living will or DNR order or medical power of attorney or any of that if you don't want to.

No you don't. This bill isn't making it mandatory either.

Uh huh. You'll excuse me if I've seen leftist incrementalism too many times to be all that trusting of it remaining that way. I'd prefer it if you folks just minded your own business on that topic entirely, thanks.

 

[veritas]

It's for them to record any official decision you choose to make. It's not for them to have any input in the decision, or to even have any input in the decision to make an official decision or not.

How'd you make that leap? Got your super sneakers on there, Sonic?