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.
What I have difficulty to understand is the following scenario:
Dude X is working at a job that pays him 40K. No benefits. He can't afford healthcare. Works his tail off for 35 years. Gets a heart attack at the age of 55 as he skipped many early warnings and does not get preventive care and poor folk dies. For his 30 years of working, he contributed to medicare via SS taxes. Can't enjoy any of it as he died before reaching 65.
Dude Y is a college graduate who works a desk job making a 100K. Excellent benefits. Goes to check up every 6 months. Does everything right in terms of preventive care as he has the means to do so. Retires at 65 and obviously gets medicare. He lives to 95, stays on medicare for almost 30 years, gets the best care, millions spent on him over his retirement through medicare
Somebody please explain me how is this right? Why does the poor folk have to finance the well-off guy who lives longer because he had an easier life? How is this fair? Why is not anyone outraged because the poor folk has to spread his "wealth" to the better-off?
I guess you could say the same thing about why we don't put a value to society i deciding who gets healthcare really. Who is more valuable;the unborn for example or the juvenilke deliquent that has dropped out of school and has a hiustory of selling vehilces and a member of a gang.Then was Einstein more valueable at a elderly age than any teenager? But thern i disagree with the OP and just hope she/he isn't working at a hospital near me.
My Dad was one of those seniors who had good genes and took care of himself. He was pretty healthy, mobile, and still living on his own at 85. He really didn't think he was old, ever. He had Medicare and bought the supplemental health insurance. He had botched hip replacement around age 65, and I know it caused him pain (though he'd only take Tylenol once in a while), and threw off his balance as he got older, since one leg was now more than 2" shorter than the other.
At around 80, he started thinking about having another hip replacement (his uncle lived to 100). Even with full medical insurance, and a perfect credit rating since he always paid his bills, no doctor would even talk about such a thing. He lived another 7 years, and I'm not arguing that he SHOULD have had this surgery. But I don't think over-treatment of the elderly happens very often.
Welcome to the future of ghouls of Solvent Green . The people the movie Body Snatchers remind me of . The higher the education the lower the charactor . It use to be the higher the education the better the charater .
As has been stated, why not just cut the military budget in half?
That would do it in one fell swoop.
I agree. In the modern economic world, you take over other countries economically (China), or by simply walking across the border (Mexico). We seem to gain absolutely nothing by our constant war-making, other than the collective disgust from the rest of the World for our imperialistic ways.
Of course, I was originally taught that a country had a military to defend its borders--something our leaders apparently haven't thought for a long time, since all our servicemen are immediately sent overseas.
We all ose with this plan . . I bet the euthenasia wannabe nurse will go out kicking , screaming and clinging to the lifeline , even if she's 120 .
No kidding. Like good old Ted Kennedy drained his options to the end, so will most people who face end of life issues. I see Doc Kervokian is looking pretty old and feeble, maybe he would like to move over, or off the planet so others can have more resources? A broken hip is required to be surgically fixed, or so I was told, because of the excruciating pain. I may be wrong, but that is what I understand. Why does the op only reference old people and not the countless illegal aliens who don't mind sticking their loved ones on resporators for extended care up to millions of dollars of our tax money being spent? If she is so quick to throw the 98 year old off the tax rolls, how about folks here illegally?
I agree. In the modern economic world, you take over other countries economically (China), or by simply walking across the border (Mexico). We seem to gain absolutely nothing by our constant war-making, other than the collective disgust from the rest of the World for our imperialistic ways.
Of course, I was originally taught that a country had a military to defend its borders--something our leaders apparently haven't thought for a long time, since all our servicemen are immediately sent overseas.
So we gained nothing in WWII? With your attitude we may as well just hand Iran our keys.
This topic is here to get us use to the idea.
They will keep chipping away until enough say "Oh yeah!"
Then they will go a little further until it is the "right" thing to do.
They are stripping you of your soul and you don't even know it.
Say goodbye to your grandmother,
like you have said goodbye to everything else that made this world beautiful.
Oh, they ALWAYS have their reasons.
Have you ever noticed though, after they get their way?
Things are not quite as beautiful, have you noticed?
Are you saying the OP is a paid operative for the Obama administration?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdgoldilocks
I am a nurse. I can kind of see the point the OP is trying to make. The point is this: how is it fair that some people get approved for medical procedures when others don't. I have seen a 97 year old woman with dementia have a hip replacement. I have also seen a 22 year old young male without health insurance that was newly diagnosed with cancer get denied care. I have seen children in need of liquid nutrition be denied their food, but we will give a 102 year old total parenteral nutrition (tpn). It can be frustrating to watch the disparity. I am not saying that one person deserves care more than another. I am saying insurance companies and society seems to. Is it because our elderly vote more? I am trying to figure it out.
I think in this changing medical and health insurance reform that is to come, people are going to have to get VERY proactive to get their medical needs met. If refused care or equipment, people are going to have to fight and appeal. It is something that I don't look forward to.
Give the OP a break. As nurses, we are the ones who have to comfort the family denied care. It is heartbreaking to understand why their family member "isn't worthy" when someone else might be.
Although many patients who undergo hip replacement surgery are 60 to 80 years of age, orthopaedic surgeons evaluate patients individually. Recommendations for surgery are based on the extent of your pain, disability, and general health status-not solely on age.
Many private insurances deny care to people on a regular basis. This problem could become worse if the RW got their wish and people were allowed to buy insurance across state lines to access policies from states that have very lax regulations about what insurance should cover, and/or allow people to buy "just what they need" and no more. Who would ever need liquid nutrition, medical equipment, etc, according to some of these folks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerseygal4u
And also the child would benefit more from the surgery that's why.
I have to disagree with you. Reimbursing physicians for end-of-life counseling is not the same as a death panel. The first thing medical, nursing, and admissions staff do once a patient is admitted is to see if there are any orders for DNR (with orders to either utilize all heroic measures, some, or none) and who, if anyone, the patient has appointed to make decisions for them should they become incapacitated.
In the absence of those orders and provisions, hospitals do their best to care for patients with grave prognoses...often with well-meaning family members who insist on painful or unnecessary interventions that ultimately do not prolong the patient's life nor diminish their suffering.
I'm afraid that some already do, by ignoring mandates from private insurance companies and sometimes Medicare in order to care for their patients, regardless of cost.
I remember the debate(s) about Mr. Emanuel, and it is not true that he wants all elderly patients to go without care. There is a dire misunderstanding of his articles' intent.
Medical ethics is a very emotional subject regardless of which side you're on, patient or medical staff. Keeping a dying patient indefinitely on life support makes no more sense than vaccinating an end-stage-diseased patient against influenza during the last weeks of their life.
In a nutshell, those were some of the things Mr. Emanuel discussed in one of his papers.
There are several factors that determine who arrives in the OR first, and that is ultimately up to the medical staff's assessment of each patient's condition...and insurance approval.
Roy, you already have social medicine. Medicare. Not only did you contribute to your coverage, the rest of America did as well.
I'm very glad to hear that you've been so pro-active in your health. I'm also happy to hear that you received what sounds like very excellent care.
All Americans deserve that level of quality and attention.
I don't know where people get the idea I'm for death panels or euthanasia. What I'm essentially saying is no more surgeries at a certain point or age.
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.
. I bet the euthenasia wannabe nurse will go out kicking , screaming and clinging to the lifeline , even if she's 120 .
I'm also happy to hear that you received what sounds like very excellent care.
