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.
Those of us who voted for this President thought we were voting for a real change of direction for this country, for a man who would stand up for principles, who would take on the powerful, monied interests which drive the GOP.
Instead, we've got a President whose first impulse is to run for cover when the going gets tough, who responds to pressure by cutting and running.
How disappointing. James Carville was right when he remarked that if Hillary would give Obama one of her balls, they'd both have one.
Mr. President: We didn't elect you to cave in to the GOP and their corporate buddies. We elected you to fight for what's right. If you can't do that, we'll find someone who can and send you back to Chicago next year.
U.S. Alters Rule on Paying for End-of-Life Planning
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 4, 2011
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, reversing course, will revise a Medicare regulation to delete references to end-of-life planning as part of the annual physical examinations covered under the new health care law, administration officials said Tuesday.
Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir (December 26, 2010)
The move is an abrupt shift, coming just days after the new policy took effect on Jan. 1.
Many doctors and providers of hospice care had praised the regulation, which listed “advance care planning” as one of the services that could be offered in the “annual wellness visit” for Medicare beneficiaries.
While administration officials cited procedural reasons for changing the rule, it was clear that political concerns were also a factor. The renewed debate over advance care planning threatened to become a distraction to administration officials who were gearing up to defend the health law against attack by the new Republican majority in the House.
Although the health care bill signed into law in March did not mention end-of-life planning, the topic was included in a huge Medicare regulation setting payment rates for thousands of physician services. The final regulation was published in the Federal Register in late November. The proposed rule, published for public comment in July, did not include advance care planning.
An administration official, authorized by the White House to explain the mix-up, said Tuesday, “We realize that this should have been included in the proposed rule, so more people could have commented on it specifically.”....
Those of us who voted for this President thought we were voting for a real change of direction for this country, for a man who would stand up for principles, who would take on the powerful, monied interests which drive the GOP.
Instead, we've got a President whose first impulse is to run for cover when the going gets tough, who responds to pressure by cutting and running.
How disappointing. James Carville was right when he remarked that if Hillary would give Obama one of her balls, they'd both have one.
Mr. President: We didn't elect you to cave in to the GOP and their corporate buddies. We elected you to fight for what's right. If you can't do that, we'll find someone who can and send you back to Chicago next year.
U.S. Alters Rule on Paying for End-of-Life Planning
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 4, 2011
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, reversing course, will revise a Medicare regulation to delete references to end-of-life planning as part of the annual physical examinations covered under the new health care law, administration officials said Tuesday.
Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir (December 26, 2010)
The move is an abrupt shift, coming just days after the new policy took effect on Jan. 1.
Many doctors and providers of hospice care had praised the regulation, which listed “advance care planning” as one of the services that could be offered in the “annual wellness visit” for Medicare beneficiaries.
While administration officials cited procedural reasons for changing the rule, it was clear that political concerns were also a factor. The renewed debate over advance care planning threatened to become a distraction to administration officials who were gearing up to defend the health law against attack by the new Republican majority in the House.
Although the health care bill signed into law in March did not mention end-of-life planning, the topic was included in a huge Medicare regulation setting payment rates for thousands of physician services. The final regulation was published in the Federal Register in late November. The proposed rule, published for public comment in July, did not include advance care planning.
An administration official, authorized by the White House to explain the mix-up, said Tuesday, “We realize that this should have been included in the proposed rule, so more people could have commented on it specifically.”....
The Eskimos had enough sense to put their older folks on a block of ice and let them float away when they could no longer fend for themselves. People who retire at 60-65 and live to 90-95 are a non productive block of our society and we keep living longer.
My mom is 98 and still walks every day. We visit her and two hours later she might remember that someone came by but she gets it mixed up about which one of us it was. She may live five more years and not be able to remember anything. Should she be granted a heart bypass or transplant at a cost of 10's or 100's of thousands?
My wife and I are well into the "aging" group. We both have a living will with DNR clause and have stated that we do not want to be kept alive by machines or artificial methods. Each has appointed the other with "power of attorney."
Everybody's gonna die and if we let our elderly take down the remainder of our system we're fools and deserve what we get.
Last edited by Melvin.George; 01-05-2011 at 05:42 AM..
Those of us who voted for this President thought we were voting for a real change of direction for this country, for a man who would stand up for principles, who would take on the powerful, monied interests which drive the GOP.
Instead, we've got a President whose first impulse is to run for cover when the going gets tough, who responds to pressure by cutting and running.
How disappointing. James Carville was right when he remarked that if Hillary would give Obama one of her balls, they'd both have one.
Mr. President: We didn't elect you to cave in to the GOP and their corporate buddies. We elected you to fight for what's right. If you can't do that, we'll find someone who can and send you back to Chicago next year.
U.S. Alters Rule on Paying for End-of-Life Planning
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 4, 2011
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, reversing course, will revise a Medicare regulation to delete references to end-of-life planning as part of the annual physical examinations covered under the new health care law, administration officials said Tuesday.
Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir (December 26, 2010)
The move is an abrupt shift, coming just days after the new policy took effect on Jan. 1.
Many doctors and providers of hospice care had praised the regulation, which listed “advance care planning” as one of the services that could be offered in the “annual wellness visit” for Medicare beneficiaries.
While administration officials cited procedural reasons for changing the rule, it was clear that political concerns were also a factor. The renewed debate over advance care planning threatened to become a distraction to administration officials who were gearing up to defend the health law against attack by the new Republican majority in the House.
Although the health care bill signed into law in March did not mention end-of-life planning, the topic was included in a huge Medicare regulation setting payment rates for thousands of physician services. The final regulation was published in the Federal Register in late November. The proposed rule, published for public comment in July, did not include advance care planning.
An administration official, authorized by the White House to explain the mix-up, said Tuesday, “We realize that this should have been included in the proposed rule, so more people could have commented on it specifically.”....
Maybe you would have a better shot at selling this crap if liberals would drop the Orwellian newspeak.
Names like "advanced care planning" and "annual wellness visits" don't fly when everyone knows what we're actually talking about is really old people in nursing homes and hospices who already have a foot in the grave and trying to find ways to cut half a trillion caring for them per Obamacare.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,428,613 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melvin.George
The Eskimos had enough sense to put their older folks on a block of ice and let them float away when they could no longer fend for themselves. People who retire at 60-65 and live to 90-95 are a non productive block of our society and we keep living longer.
My mom is 98 and still walks every day. We visit her and two hours later she might remember that someone came by but she gets it mixed up about which one of us it was. She may live five more years and not be able to remember anything. Should she be granted a heart bypass or transplant at a cost of 10's or 100's of thousands?
My wife and I are well into the "aging" group. We both have a living will with DNR clause and have stated that we do not want to be kept alive by machines or artificial methods. Each has appointed the other with "power of attorney."
Everybody's gonna die and if we let our elderly take down the remainder of our system we're fools.
Now that you've talked the talk, are you going to walk the walk and have enough sense (your characterization) to put your older folk on a block of ice and let her float away?
The Eskimos had enough sense to put their older folks on a block of ice and let them float away when they could no longer fend for themselves. People who retire at 60-65 and live to 90-95 are a non productive block of our society and we keep living longer.
My mom is 98 and still walks every day. We visit her and two hours later she might remember that someone came by but she gets it mixed up about which one of us it was. She may live five more years and not be able to remember anything. Should she be granted a heart bypass or transplant at a cost of 10's or 100's of thousands?
My wife and I are well into the "aging" group. We both have a living will with DNR clause and have stated that we do not want to be kept alive by machines or artificial methods. Each has appointed the other with "power of attorney."
Everybody's gonna die and if we let our elderly take down the remainder of our system we're fools.
That's YOUR free will.
That's YOUR decision.
That's they way it should be.
So, when your wife is 80, and needs a heart bypass, you will let her die?
If you develop diabetes, or some other chronic disease, will you agree to volunteer to jump on the block of ice?
It is if your Christmas present was a large block of ice
Any responsible Doctor does end of life counseling anyway, they are just not yet going to be allowed to bill for their time. When this no longer becomes a hot button phony issue, our HC system will deal with it correctly. The Doctors should be paid for their efforts, eventually, they will when it no longer is a political ping pong ball. Basically, when FOX decides it's OK for the GOP to let this go.
My father in law is 87. Two years ago this month, he had the flu and had a bad fall while trying to make it to the bathroom.
While in the hospital, they found that he was not only in renal failure, but heart failure as well.
Today, he is in perfect health. Should they have let him die?
He is a proud WW2 Veteran who served in the Pacific Theater for 37 months starting at the age of 18.
He is also starting to feel like a burden, even though he enjoys life.
He is a proud man. If given the choice of "getting out of the way", he would be too proud to fight for his right to life.
Multiply his story be millions
Yet again, liberal/progressive's show their lack of respect for innocent life.
"In 1985, while Hawking was working on his first book A Brief History of Time, he fell ill with pneumonia while at CERN (a large particle accelerator) in Geneva, Switzerland. It was suggested that Hawking be taken off life support, but his family chose against this. He was flown to Addenbrooke's Hospital in Cambridge, England where a tracheotomy was performed. The tracheotomy saved his life, but left him without use of his voice. As a supplement, he uses a computer system equipped with an electronic voice."
That was 1985. He has already lived another 25 years beyond the point at which this "death panel" wanted to pull the plug, and he is still alive today.
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.
