Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As the article that you didn't read points out, one of the highest costs paid out by Medicare (GOVERNMENT) is for futile "life prolonging" care. Here we go, making assumptions. I did read it. I did not address that maybe was more critical to you. That does not mean I did not read it. Calm down, don't come with this jerky type reaction. Life is so short. I get a kick of people reacting as you do. Got my attention? LOL I noticed you did the same on the OP. Of course we get ANYBODY's attention once they post anything. Have a self esteem problem or what?
In Arizona the state (GOVERNMENT) has placed limits, if not out and out eliminated funding for certain transplant procedures, in each and every case GOVERNMENT is REQUIRED to "interfere" at some level or another. So let's drop the canard and address the issue of the thread; be it through private insurance, trust fund, or government subsidies Americans pay absurdly exorbitant fees for services DEMANDED not always by the patients themselves but by a culture that believes that it is capable of deterring death. Yes let us drop the cannard. Because I did not adrees the point as you seem to want it, I did replied based on the title of the OP. Absurdly is a very subjective word. What is absurb to you may not be to others. You did not like my point, great, I just say do not confuse difference of views with not addressing the title of the OP. Is it prohibited to comment on the subject from another angle but still related or what I may consider beneficial?
So to repeat.
Now that I have your attention, this thread doesn't have a thing to do with "government panels" but it has everything to do with the expense both in terms of money and quality of life that comes from a culture that seemingly can't come to grips with the simple fact that death, is the price we pay for life. So instead of accepting that fact we pursue absurdly futile attempt to prolong life well past any rational point, at great cost and with little regard for the quality of life of the terminally ill.
I strongly suggest, In fact I insist that folks read the linked article before jumping into the fray.
Did I address government panels? No I did not. Well, the OP title simply says prolonging lives of the terminally ill vs. quality of life? Did I address that? I sure did. If people may not address the EXACT point you wanted to address there is a possiblity you were not 100% clear what was that point. So instead of reacting the way you react, ask yourself the question, was I clear on my intent? If you are honest enough than you may then clarify your point instead of demanding as you said.
So, for the sake of the debate, in one sentence what is EXACTLY the point you want to discuss? (No cannardying OK). Take care.
We cannot play God, first of all. Let me say that I have been mounting efforts to write a paper on death and the expansion of life where possible without causing harm. Harm would, as always, be defined by excess and inhumane suffering.
After all the decades that medical science has existed, and all of the things medical science knows now, and with all the specialties....there is no reason why that community cannot come together formally to have a forum on warding off death. The medical community needs to do two things for this to happen:
They need to compile all of their knowledge in a way that is organized and orderly, and then gather all of the things they don't know. They need to prioritize and seek out that which they do not know so as to stop spending time and money on things that are not harmful to the existence of people.
I spoke, about three years ago, with a Doctor who is just one of a handful of doctors who are researching death for this very purpose. I found out many great things!
We cannot play God, first of all. Let me say that I have been mounting efforts to write a paper on death and the expansion of life where possible without causing harm. Harm would, as always, be defined by excess and inhumane suffering.
After all the decades that medical science has existed, and all of the things medical science knows now, and with all the specialties....there is no reason why that community cannot come together formally to have a forum on warding off death. The medical community needs to do two things for this to happen:
They need to compile all of their knowledge in a way that is organized and orderly, and then gather all of the things they don't know. They need to prioritize and seek out that which they do not know so as to stop spending time and money on things that are not harmful to the existence of people.
I spoke, about three years ago, with a Doctor who is just one of a handful of doctors who are researching death for this very purpose. I found out many great things!
'We cannot play god'...
Interesting statement...
I remember when medical technology first came out (or any technology)...it was always hesitantly accepted by the religious community...as being 'unatural'...
Now...certain people in that community insist that the very technology that early generations deemed 'evil'...now be used to keep people alive indefinatly...
And now most are so guilt riddled, that when it's obviously time to go, if they have POA...they just can't...even though the person is beyond repair or quality of life...and only being kept alive through medical machinery...
That's why it's so important that people write this stuff ahead of time, so that family doesn't split and divide over such issues should the day come you can't speak for yourself...
I really have to wander what the Op sees as terminally ill. That coud include long term alcoholics;obese people ;drug addicts amoung others at a very early age.
I really have to wander what the Op sees as terminally ill. That coud include long term alcoholics;obese people ;drug addicts amoung others at a very early age.
If you know someone in the hospital suffering...you wouldn't even ask such a question...or make such a comparison...you would just know...
For myself, I'd never want to be kept alive if I were terminal. I still feel the patient should have the right to end their lives if they should choose to do so. I have and always will feel that it's not right to keep someone alive, especially when there is no quality of life.
It's easy to say that, until faced with that situation...people, others involved, will try to make you feel like the 'devil'...and guess and play over your motives...
There's so many variables and factors that come into play, that most never take account for, when theorizing over such events that have yet to occur in their lives...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
