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 won't need to since he worst parts will be made public, whether the left likes it or not. Actually I am one of the first to get his consultation under this bill that was largely written by Ezekiel Emanuel. I am 76 and in very excellent health for people that old, but they will come for me soon after this thing is passed.
If you are about 60% through it can you please tell us what is on page 425 about those consultations so I can see if my source is lying. I don't think she is.
You, and the rest of the conspiracy theorists, have gotten this all wrong.
Reading is fundamental.
Page 425-426 discusses an amendment to Section 1861 of 42 U.S.C. 1395x, otherwise known as the Social Security Act.
All it is saying is that Medicare will reimburse physicians for consultations discussing Advance Care Planning, once every 5 years.
That's all.
I defy any of you, including the mod above me, to contradict that with proof.
NO. You just don't get it. People are not going to be "scheduled" for such consultations every five years.
If it's 5 years since your last consultation, then obviously after another 5 years passes, you're going to have to renew it even after the bill passes (IF it passes)
If it's 5 years since your last consultation, then obviously after another 5 years passes, you're going to have to renew it even after the bill passes (IF it passes)
Wrong. It is NOT MANDATORY. It is only a reimbursement provision for Medicare recipients over the age of 65.
It took me a while to finally find it, but I found out why this discussion is even taking place. Yet another wingnut has opted for the tried-and-true method of Scare Tactics. Isn't anyone else fed up with what we suffered through under Dubya?
Betsy McCaughey, chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and former lieutenant governor of New York state, says the bill goes too far to encourage senior citizens to end their lives.
On the radio show of former Sen. Fred Thompson on July 16, 2009, McCaughey said that, "the Congress would make it mandatory -- absolutely require -- that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner."
She said those sessions would help the elderly learn how to "decline nutrition, how to decline being hydrated, how to go in to hospice care... all to do what's in society's best interest or in your family's best interest and cut your life short."
Her point has caught on with conservative pundits. On his July 21 show, Rush Limbaugh said the following:
"Mandatory counseling for all seniors at a minimum of every five years, more often if the seasoned citizen is sick or in a nursing home... That's an invasion of the right to privacy. We can't have counseling for mothers who are thinking of terminating their pregnancy, but we can go in there and counsel people about to die."
Quote:
Medicare will cover one session every five years, the legislation states. If a patient becomes very ill in the interim, Medicare will cover additional sessions.
Jon Keyserling, general counsel and vice president of public policy for the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, which supports the provision, said the bill doesn't encourage seniors to end their lives, it just allows some important counseling for decisions that take time and consideration.
"These are very serious conversations," he said. "It needs to be an informative conversation from the medical side and it needs to be thought about carefully by the patient and their families."
In no way would these sessions be designed to encourage patients to end their lives, said Jim Dau, national spokeman for AARP, a group that represents people over 50 years of age and that has lobbied in support of the advanced planning provision.
McCaughey's comments are "not just wrong, they are cruel," said Dau. "We want to make sure people are making the right decision. If some one wants to take every life saving measure, that's their call. Others will decide it's not worth going through this trauma just for themselves and their families, and that's their decision, too."
Both Keyserling and Dau were particularly troubled that McCaughey insisted - three times, to be exact - that the sessions would be mandatory, which they are not.
For his part, Keyserling said he and outside counsel read the language carefully to make sure that was not the case.
"Neither of us can come to the conclusion that it's mandatory." he said. "This new consultation is just like all in Medicare: it's voluntary."
"The only thing mandatory is that Medicare will have to pay for the counseling," said Dau.
Section 1233 of H.R. 3200. The section, titled “Advanced Care Planning Consultation†requires all senior citizens to meet at least every 5 years with a doctor or nurse practitioner to discuss dying with dignity and their options.
If some jackazz from the obama squad would show up at my house I would council them on their options if they didn't leave.
Dr. Obama knows more about treating patients than us physicians. Leave it up to a lawyer to determine the health care delivery model while leaving free reign for personal injury lawyers to file frivolous lawsuits and drive up the cost of health care; Obama said he would not place caps on punitive damages in lawsuits meaning Obama would allow lawyers to sue for millions of dollars outside of the fees that would be used to pay for all costs including losses of future earnings. One lawyer said that if caps were placed on lawsuits, the average attorney fee would only be $85,000 per case, yeah, it shows who the President supports. He would rather have doctors and nurses earn less than the trial attorneys you see on TV who are racking up millions
So you like the way that Insurance Companies can determine your treatment plan for the patient.
Says a lot about your practice of medicine.
Glad you'll never treat me. It's clearly evident that you're more interested in saving your butt from punitive damages than providing quality care to the patient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by azriverfan.
That the President would rather curb costs in areas of need and spend it frivolously on unnecessary patient visits. You are welcome
Yeah, it's a terrible thing to have a person see their PCP every 5 years or so when they receive Medicaid benefits; Horrors.
I don't know anyone over 40 who doesn't visit the doctor more frequently than every 5 years.
What's the real beef here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by azriverfan.
So then what does it specify. It's open you tell us
You're making stuff up, it's up to you to validate your point.
It's a credibility issue.
Hell, azriverfan might be a podiatrist or someone who the practice would never allow to see patients, or work for SSI or a number of related things.
He may not be a physician at all: I'm not really a physician, I just play one on the internets
Dr. Obama knows more about treating patients than us physicians. Leave it up to a lawyer to determine the health care delivery model while leaving free reign for personal injury lawyers to file frivolous lawsuits and drive up the cost of health care; Obama said he would not place caps on punitive damages in lawsuits meaning Obama would allow lawyers to sue for millions of dollars outside of the fees that would be used to pay for all costs including losses of future earnings. One lawyer said that if caps were placed on lawsuits, the average attorney fee would only be $85,000 per case, yeah, it shows who the President supports. He would rather have doctors and nurses earn less than the trial attorneys you see on TV who are racking up millions
Tort reform is high on our list. Keep the snakes out of the ER and perhaps prices would come down some. Many of our clients are doctors and we were shocked at how much their malpractice insurance runs.
Umm... little bit of double speak there wouldn't you say. By your own admission, you are required to update your plan if it has been over 5 years. Thus, there is a requirement. The "IF" you are referring too has no bearing, because it refers to the 5 year time limit. You have to do this "if" it has been 5 years. There should be no directives at all when it comes to your person. There is no room in a truly free country for this type of control that they plan to exert over the populace. Obama's plan is simply not a good one. It isn't even real healthcare reform, it's insurance reform. Just another attempt by our government, not just Obama, to seize control of the very bodies we inhabit. If we are to be put on a socialized healthcare plan, then let's come up with something that doesn't turn the government into my insurance provider/warden. Because the current plan will reform nothing except the American way of life.
No, I don't think what I said is doublespeak. It's possible not to go to the dr for 5+ years. The reason there needs to be this directive is that way too many people, as evidenced by some of the stories on these threads, come to the end of their days with absolutely no plan in place and the family has no idea what they pt. wanted, or one family member says they "know" the pt. wants "everything", while another says they know the pt. was nothing done, etc.
You need to know that insurance companies have all sorts of mandates on docs as to what the "standards of care" are. This is not that unusual.
If it's 5 years since your last consultation, then obviously after another 5 years passes, you're going to have to renew it even after the bill passes (IF it passes)
Well, now we know that's not true. The consultations aren't mandatory. See post #113.
Your post is very contradictory: you both want to die with dignity, yet you balk at the prospect of a physician providing information about Advance Directives, hospice care, etc.
You are lucky, in that you have previous exposure to this issue. MANY patients--especially the elderly, hence the provision in the bill--do NOT.
There are many abuses made against the elderly in their final years, days, and hours by uninformed family members in the absence of Advance Directives.
I don't have a problem with discussing these things with doctors. I have a problem with government directives and government appointed doctors doing so. We already have these things in place and you can sign a form far in advance regarding death with dignity. You seem to believe that health care is a right, well so might life be another right.
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.
