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.
You are wrong, and the care given to Obama's grandmother was correct. The reason being, his grandmother was bedridden with terminal cancer. If you replaced her hip, she would still be bedridden. She would get no benefit from the artificial hip.
People get new hips so they can walk. If Obama's grandmother was not expected to walk because she was already bedridden for other reasons, then operating on her would have only exposed her to the risks of surgery/anesthesia. Hip replacement is major surgery. You could die from complications of this procedure. Why expose yourself to a risky procedure with zero expected benefit?
You would have killed his grandmother faster if you went ahead with the surgery.
So let me see if I have this correct now. BO's grandmother was laying in bed (already bedridden) when her hip broke?
You are wrong, and the care given to Obama's grandmother was correct. The reason being, his grandmother was bedridden with terminal cancer. If you replaced her hip, she would still be bedridden. She would get no benefit from the artificial hip.
People get new hips so they can walk. If Obama's grandmother was not expected to walk because she was already bedridden for other reasons, then operating on her would have only exposed her to the risks of surgery/anesthesia. Hip replacement is major surgery. You could die from complications of this procedure. Why expose yourself to a risky procedure with zero expected benefit?
You would have killed his grandmother faster if you went ahead with the surgery.
Thank you for injecting reason into this issue.
The problem with this entire discussion is people with absolutely no medical knowledge are giving opinions about medical issues
You are wrong, and the care given to Obama's grandmother was correct. The reason being, his grandmother was bedridden with terminal cancer. If you replaced her hip, she would still be bedridden. She would get no benefit from the artificial hip.
People get new hips so they can walk. If Obama's grandmother was not expected to walk because she was already bedridden for other reasons, then operating on her would have only exposed her to the risks of surgery/anesthesia.
Hip replacement is major surgery. You could die from complications of this procedure. Why expose yourself to a risky procedure with zero expected benefit?
You would have killed his grandmother faster if you went ahead with the surgery
Hip surgeries are a relatively safe procedure you only run into complications if there is some sort of heart issue or a reaction to the anesthesia.
My gram was late 70's and btw has rheumatoid arthritis when she had her knee done it was a great operation for her she recovered from it just fine too!
By obama's plan she would not have been able to get said operation because of her age and rheumatoid and probably not able to walk on her own without the surgery now if she had not gotten it done, well let me tell you she is almost 90 and she drives still too.
Can you give some links or data that shows "Obama's plan" would not have covered your "grams" surgery?
Bedridden does not mean you never get up. It simply means you require a lot of assistance to get out of bed.
That's true, anyone can be propped out of bed by assistants. But the point of getting new hips is so the person can be ambulatory with little assistance. If a person is terminally ill of other diseases and is practically in bed the whole day because she is too weak, doing a hip replacement would be absolutely the wrong thing to do. It would even be a case of malpractice. The surgeon can very well be accused of performing surgery just to fatten his wallet, even though he knows the procedure is of little benefit to the patient. I've seen MDs' licenses be revoked precisely for this reason: performing inappropriate surgeries for the purpose of profiteering.
So let me see if I have this correct now. BO's grandmother was laying in bed (already bedridden) when her hip broke?
Think about what you post please?
Absolutely! When cancer metastasizes to the bones, fractures are very common resulting from something as simple as a position change in bed!
Quote:
The first symptom of metastases to the bone is usually pain near the metastases. However, a patient may also experience a pathological fracture as the first sign that their cancer has metastasized to bone.
MediGuide News - First Signs or Symptoms of Bone Metastases (http://www.mediguide.com/individuals/news/_yahoo-health022706.shtml - broken link)
That's true, anyone can be propped out of bed by assistants. But the point of getting new hips is so the person can be ambulatory with little assistance. If a person is terminally ill of other diseases and is practically in bed the whole day because she is too weak, doing a hip replacement would be absolutely the wrong thing to do. It would even be a case of malpractice. The surgeon can very well be accused of performing surgery just to fatten his wallet, even though he knows the procedure is of little benefit to the patient. I've seen MDs' licenses be revoked precsiely for this reason: performing inappropriate surgeries for the purpose of profiteering.
Not to mention, the patient would never heal from the surgery!
I think some families want "everything done" because they really believe in these "miracle recoveries" that people on this thread are talking about. My mother-in-law was reluctant to pursue a DNR for her 97 yr old husband, I think mostly b/c she didn't want to lose him. My sister-in-law finally talked to her about it and she did it (the DNR). My FIL then went into a hospice where he got great care and MIL couldn't have been happier.
Well, she had terminal cancer. I'd say that is a complicating factor. And what "plan" of Obama's are you talking about? He's talking about families making informed decisions. What on earth is wrong with that?
The government is broke because they have made a series of wrongly motivated financial decisions, and they are sleazy individuals who couldn't care less about you or anyone else. Crackheads are broke because they have made a series of wrongly motivated financial decisions, and they are sleazy individuals who couldn't care less about you or anyone else. Why would you trust either of them to make important healthcare decisions on your behalf when they have something to gain by screwing you? I personally just don't see a difference. Your mother in law making this decision is far different from some heartless beancounter beurocrat deciding on her behalf.
In addition to the fact that with advanced age and osteoporosis, it is incredibly easy to break a hip, even just by being moved or assisted into the bathroom.
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.
