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.
Frankly, you shouldn't be making assumptions.
In 1965 I was already a parent and 3 years into ownership of a business ....by 26, on the second one...or maybe the 3rd.
Also,my parents were always open about financial matters, knowing it was a teaching process.
Perhaps your grandparents had to rely on charity.
Mine, and I'm sure, many others, didn't.
Mother was still practical enough to buy a supplement to Medicare for her last 30 years........the last 20 of them being with only less than $900 SS a month.
So you were raising a young family. You were probably not involved in the heatlh care financing of the elderly.
Everyone has different circumstances. My grandparents were farmers. My gf never even made enough money to pay income tax.
Your mom bought a Medicare supplement. The purpose of such a policy is to supplement what Medicare provides, not replace it. e.g., it pays for deductibles, co-pays, etc. The primary ins. for her is/was Medicare.
What about the people who have knocked on deaths door had their last rights read to them and come back from it when all hope was gone. What about them they would not be given that chance.
??? No one is talking about euthanasia. Yes, many patients have been at death's door and bounced back. No one is talking about simply abandoning the person. There's a difference between supportive treatment and extraordinary treatment.
At a healthcare town hall, he says stopping futile procedures for the terminally ill can lower costs.
By Peter Nicholas
June 25, 2009
Reporting from Washington -- President Obama suggested at a town hall event Wednesday night that one way to shave medical costs is to stop expensive and ultimately futile procedures performed on people who are about to die and don't stand to gain from the extra care.
In a nationally televised event at the White House, Obama said families need better information so they don't unthinkingly approve "additional tests or additional drugs that the evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve care."
So you were raising a young family. You were probably not involved in the heatlh care financing of the elderly.
Everyone has different circumstances. My grandparents were farmers. My gf never even made enough money to pay income tax.
Your mom bought a Medicare supplement. The purpose of such a policy is to supplement what Medicare provides, not replace it. e.g., it pays for deductibles, co-pays, etc. The primary ins. for her is/was Medicare.
So, again, what's your point?
They didn't need my 'help with health care finanacing"
They had planned for themselves.
That doesn't mean I was unaware of their situation or planning.
Before Medicare my parents had private insurance.
After 65 there was no choice...Medicare became primaryat which time she got a supplement.
And since there is no cure for AIDS or HIV infections, how about we stop paying for the futile health care? HIV patients are costing us an ungodly amount of dollars and they're not going to be cured.
Who gets to decide who can live and who will be allowed to die?
You can afford $1000/mo plus for health insurance for a family? Good for you. You must be doing pretty well.
Not that it's any of your damned business, my health insurance is less than half that, but we don't have all the bells and whistles. We pay cash for office visits, carry high deductibles, etc. We also are very active, concentrate on healthy activities, and don't go to the doctor for a sniffle or sneeze.
But we PLANNED for our old age, lived frugally, saved and invested for our retirement. Times were hard during our youth, so we as a family we made a commitment that our later years would be better than our parents and grandparents. But, we didn't do anything that couldn't have been done by ANYONE else.
??? No one is talking about euthanasia. Yes, many patients have been at death's door and bounced back. No one is talking about simply abandoning the person. There's a difference between supportive treatment and extraordinary treatment.
I think there is some truth to what you say.. many times there comes a point where the doctors say.. this is really all we can do from a certain point.. and from there they usually give various options.. and many times families in their awful moment of grief... push for any and everything to be done.. even if it is not forseable to really do anything to help...
I worked with an elderly guy a few years ago.. and his wife was diagnosed with cancer, in the process she had suffered a stroke in which it severely weakened her body and system on top of the fact of being 80 some odd years old.. her family pushed for having cancer treatment, and she ended up dying from the treatment itself.. because it was too much for her body to handle...but without the treatment she would have died from cancer...
It was really sad..
And since there is no cure for AIDS or HIV infections, how about we stop paying for the futile health care? HIV patients are costing us an ungodly amount of dollars and they're not going to be cured.
Who gets to decide who can live and who will be allowed to die?
People with aids can be stabilized an live long productive lives.
What we need to look at is supportive care given to elderly people in the last year of their lives. There are many sudies that prove the most amount of health care dollars are spent in the last year of a persons life often prolonging the inevitable, with a poor quality of life. We need to come up with a way of balancing what technology will simply prolong the dying process and that which is curative.
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.