Can anyone verify this?

[Medusa]

I believe we have a good health care system. It's the insurance companies that need overhauled. We have good health care and people from other countries come over here to get it. I do not want the govt. to be an intercessor between me and my doctor. It's unnecessary and downright scary. They don't need to advise my dr. of available options for treatment. My dr. and I can do this on our own.

This line from the Pants on Fire link posted above bugs me: "We want to make sure people are making the right decision. If some one wants to take every life-saving measure, that's their call. Others will decide it's not worth going through this trauma just for themselves and their families, and that's their decision, too." Excuse me but that's the way it is already. Now because the govt. steps in suddenly it'll be the right decision? According to whom exactly? The govt.? If our decision differs from theirs, that makes it wrong? Government, stay out of my health care decisions. I do not need you telling, cautioning or advising me as to what to do. I'll decide that for myself.

[cassiesmom]

I believe we have a good health care system. It's the insurance companies that need overhauled. We have good health care and people from other countries come over here to get it. I do not want the govt. to be an intercessor between me and my doctor. It's unnecessary and downright scary. They don't need to advise my dr. of available options for treatment. My dr. and I can do this on our own.

"We want to make sure people are making the right decision. If some one wants to take every life-saving measure, that's their call. Others will decide it's not worth going through this trauma just for themselves and their families, and that's their decision, too."

I worked for a couple of Fortune 500 insurance companies. I (and other nurses I worked with) did not want to be intercessors between patients and physicians. But at times it felt like that was exactly what we were doing, in a rather thinly-veiled way (McCaughey refers to it as "embedded clinical decision support -- computers telling doctors what to do").

Who is to say, ultimately, whether that decision is right or wrong? It might be right for you, but wrong for me. Or right for me now, but wrong for me later. Giving information to patients and families so they can make an informed decision is good. Creating a government panel that decides who gets what is very bad. (What kind of a physician would agree to serve on a panel like that anyway?)


Here's a link.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ome_editorials

[Prairie Purrs]

This line from the Pants on Fire link posted above bugs me: "We want to make sure people are making the right decision. If some one wants to take every life-saving measure, that's their call. Others will decide it's not worth going through this trauma just for themselves and their families, and that's their decision, too." Excuse me but that's the way it is already. Now because the govt. steps in suddenly it'll be the right decision? According to whom exactly? The govt.? If our decision differs from theirs, that makes it wrong? Government, stay out of my health care decisions. I do not need you telling, cautioning or advising me as to what to do. I'll decide that for myself.

The article is addressing (and refuting) the specific claim that people on Medicare will be required to have counseling regarding end-of-life decisions. I think you're taking the quote out of that context.

There is no proposal that would require anybody to be counseled about such things as hospice care and living wills. There is a proposal that would require Medicare to cover such counseling if a covered person wants it. There's no government intrusion into health care decisions involved. Just because Medicare covers appendix removal, for example, doesn't mean that everybody is required to have their appendix taken out.

[Medusa]

The article is addressing (and refuting) the specific claim that people on Medicare will be required to have counseling regarding end-of-life decisions. I think you're taking the quote out of that context.

There is no proposal that would require anybody to be counseled about such things as hospice care and living wills. There is a proposal that would require Medicare to cover such counseling if a covered person wants it. There's no government intrusion into health care decisions involved. Just because Medicare covers appendix removal, for example, doesn't mean that everybody is required to have their appendix taken out.

I read the entire article so I didn't take anything out of context. It said what it said and I don't like what it said. Period.

[lizbud]

I read the entire article so I didn't take anything out of context. It said what it said and I don't like what it said. Period.

Wow, chill out already. I think you've made yourself clear.

[Medusa]

Wow, chill out already. I think you've made yourself clear.

No need for me to chill out. I'm not upset to begin with, only stating that I didn't take anything out of context, liz.

[Laura's Babies]

Did anyone watch this video? (same one posted above)
http://www.frcaction.org/health-care-webcast

I suggest anyone refrain from making any remarks until they have hear what our president says about the 105 year old woman.. Hear it directly from him so there is NO misunderstanding about WHAT was said! That is about at the 30 minute mark..

and go to the 36 minute mark and hear about Oregon and how they are already treating people there on public medical assistance... so it IS already happening in the good ole USA..... It just depends on where you are!

[blue]

Did anyone watch this video? (same one posted above)
http://www.frcaction.org/health-care-webcast

I suggest anyone refrain from making any remarks until they have hear what our president says about the 105 year old woman.. Hear it directly from him so there is NO misunderstanding about WHAT was said! That is about at the 30 minute mark..

and go to the 36 minute mark and hear about Oregon and how they are already treating people there on public medical assistance... so it IS already happening in the good ole USA..... It just depends on where you are!

I cant wait for the pro abortionists to chime in on this video. But I think we all know they wont watch it.

Saw the answer about the 105 year old woman, Im joining everyone who is scared by this legislation. If there was any questions as to why John Holdren is a Czar I think it has been answered.

Logans Run, and Soilant Green here we come.

From the bill I posted allready.

An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available

Im not even half way through the video and this bill will provide more public funding for abortions and fund nation wide euthanasia, sweet! It would be sweet if this was a movie, but its not.

Can anybody convince me, after watching this video, that the USA will continue to be the leader in medical breakthroughs with this HCR bill?.

So far the 1 thing I dissagree with this video is gays in the military. The Dont Ask Dont Tell policy is BS, homos should be allowed to serve, if they love this country enough to serve, LET THEM!

Were they all wearing the same tie?

[lizbud]

The article is addressing (and refuting) the specific claim that people on Medicare will be required to have counseling regarding end-of-life decisions. I think you're taking the quote out of that context.

There is no proposal that would require anybody to be counseled about such things as hospice care and living wills. There is a proposal that would require Medicare to cover such counseling if a covered person wants it. There's no government intrusion into health care decisions involved. Just because Medicare covers appendix removal, for example, doesn't mean that everybody is required to have their appendix taken out.

From all that i've read on this issue, you are correct in the real facts
involved in health care reform. Health care has been a serious issue in
this country for a long time. Previous Bills have come up to reform care.
This current effort did not just sprung up overnight. The issue has been
simmering for a long time. Each previous change proposed have been
met with scare tactics & outright misinformation by people who know
better, but have a vested interest in keeping the system unchanged.

Think money, Think insurance companies, think Phamacutical Companies.