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.
A Springfield woman's doctor hoped a new chemotherapy drug would help her but the Oregon Health Plan told her the treatment was not approved. Instead, the state would pay for assisted suicide. "I'm not ready, I'm not ready to die," the Springfield woman said.
The doctor interviewed by the news station seems offended at the suggestion that Oregon would decide to save a few bucks by denying expensive health care and offering a case of hemlock in its place. However, saving money was the raison d’etre of single-payer systems, and the incentives all drive towards that decision. Single-payer systems have to handle medical services as a shortage market, rationing them by using “comparative effectiveness” paradigms to determine who gets medical attention, and who gets “physician-aid-in-dying” instead of it.
The woman who drew the short end of the stick in this case wonders who these people think they are. They think they know better than us who needs to live and die. Has that lesson still not been made clear?
You do realize "assisted suicide" has been in place in Oregon for years...and that Oregon's plan allows further treatment for people with a better than 5% chance to live one year.
You do realize "assisted suicide" has been in place in Oregon for years...and that Oregon's plan allows further treatment for people with a better than 5% chance to live one year.
Well, how would YOU like the state, or federal government, telling you they won't pay for YOUR mother's, father's, aunt's, uncle's, child's Chemo treatment and instead determine that the best recourse is for YOUR relative to just ...... die.
It's tax payer money they are trying to use, since she has no insurance (OHP is Oregon Medicaid), to fund chemo drugs for a woman at $10,000+ a dose who has a slim chance at best in order to even survive to Christmas (0% for even longer). This isn't "saving a few bucks", this is hundreds of thousands of dollars in a time the state is already cutting everything it can to stay afloat...there is no money to pay for it even if they wanted to. Unless people would approve more taxes.
If people really cared they wouldn't be complaining and b**ching on a blog, they would donate money to her and put their money where their mouth is. It's easy to complain when you aren't going to be paying the taxes to fund it.
This was not a "blog" story. Did you watch the video from the news station?
Does it really matter who is reporting such a story?
You totally and intentionally MISS the point - for the obvious reasons.
The second link is from "Hot air BLOG". I read the copy. I can't watch videos on my computer, and I certainly wouldn't want to watch every one posted here on CD, anyway. Yes, it really matters who is reporting a story. And what IS the point? Is the chemo this patient wants recommended for her cancer? Is it a modern day laetrile? Does the reporter even know what chemo is/does?
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.
