Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ken Connor: Seniors Left Behind?
Townhall ^ | 8/9/09 | Ken Connor

Posted on 08/09/2009 9:40:50 AM PDT by wagglebee

One of the most controversial issues of the current health care reform debate is the concept of health care rationing—allocating medical care according to predetermined criteria that dictate how much and what kind of care a given patient will receive under a government-run system. Setting aside the comparative merits of various reform proposals on the table in Congress, Americans—particularly the elderly—should be wary of any plan that would limit access to health care based on the arbitrary and discriminatory criteria of age.

As many have pointed out in the course of the ongoing national discussion on health care, America's population is aging rapidly, placing a growing strain on entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security. Health care costs continue to rise, and America's younger population cannot long foot the bill for elderly retirees and their significant health care requirements. This conundrum (caused not by taxpayers but by decades of gross government mismanagement of taxpayer dollars) seems to have bred an underlying antipathy towards seniors, the undisputed "resource hogs" of public health care. This feeling of resentment is exacerbated by an increasingly utilitarian view of human life that sees no value in prolonging one's twilight years, especially on the public dime.

This situation makes proposals for "comparative effectiveness" research seem like a pretty good idea. Who, after all, wants to waste their taxpayer dollars on treatment for old folks who are going to die soon anyway? Wouldn’t it be better to allocate the bulk of our health care resources towards more productive members of society while reducing the spectrum of costly options available to seniors and the terminally ill among us?

But do Americans really want government bureaucrats dictating access to care based on their perception of one’s worth to society? This question goes to the heart of the problem with rationing: a stranger far from the scene decides who gets care and who doesn't. The person making these decisions knows neither the patient nor the healthcare provider, yet he or she is charged with the responsibility of allocating scarce resources among a demanding population rather than providing the best possible care.

Instead of allowing the market to dictate cost and availability, the buck will stop with the government. Instead of allowing doctors to work dynamically with their patients to tailor a health care approach best suited to the individual in question, the government will use its regulatory power to force physicians into applying narrow "quality of life" criteria when evaluating treatment options for society's elderly citizens. This utilitarian approach to life and death is already affecting seniors in North America, in places like Canada (no surprise there), Texas, and Wisconsin.

A health care system that bases its fiscal solvency on rationing undermines the fundamental American values of self-determination and choice. This nation has always been known as a land of opportunity and innovation. For hundreds of years, people have traveled from all over the globe at risk to life and limb just for a chance to build their own dreams here in America. This includes the opportunity to live a full and free life, even into one's golden years of retirement and senior citizenship. But what criteria will America's elderly citizens have to meet in order to retain access to the best health care if our leaders institute a Brave New World of "comparative effectiveness" in health care? Age? Productivity? Societal "usefulness?" Level of sentience?

The elderly often don't score well along these lines, and once American society becomes comfortable with the idea that certain members may be deemed less worthy than others in the eyes of the government, we have rendered the heart and soul of our Constitution meaningless. Once we decide that the elderly are expendable, not worth their share of society's resources and attention, we are setting a dangerous precedent that opens the door for government bureaucrats to assign other vulnerable members of the human community to the same second-class status.

The idea that senior citizens are less deserving of the best medical care our system has to offer smacks of gross ignorance and ingratitude. Among the ranks of America's elderly are countless American heroes—veterans of numerous wars, entrepreneurs, farmers, businessmen, teachers, scientists... men and women who have worked hard and paid taxes their whole lives. Our society wouldn't be what it is today without their contributions, and they deserve just and equitable treatment as they live out their final years.

As the August recess commences and our leaders head home for some straight talk with their constituents at Rotary Clubs, community centers, and town halls, hopefully they will recognize that America's seniors are vital members of our nation's communities and integral to our democratic way of life. If Uncle Sam is determined to assume the mantle of responsibility for health care in America, the elderly should not automatically be relegated to the back of the bus.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: euthanasia; moralabsolutes; obamacare; prolife; socializedmedicine
The elderly often don't score well along these lines, and once American society becomes comfortable with the idea that certain members may be deemed less worthy than others in the eyes of the government, we have rendered the heart and soul of our Constitution meaningless. Once we decide that the elderly are expendable, not worth their share of society's resources and attention, we are setting a dangerous precedent that opens the door for government bureaucrats to assign other vulnerable members of the human community to the same second-class status.

The moment this happens, the American Republic will have FAILED.

1 posted on 08/09/2009 9:40:52 AM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; Salvation; 8mmMauser

Pro-Life Ping


2 posted on 08/09/2009 9:41:21 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP; 230FMJ; 50mm; 69ConvertibleFirebird; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


3 posted on 08/09/2009 9:41:46 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

bttt


4 posted on 08/09/2009 9:48:21 AM PDT by Guenevere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Obama's plan:

DeathCare for Grandma...



Free healthcare and amnesty for illegal aliens.


5 posted on 08/09/2009 9:49:11 AM PDT by jimbo123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimbo123

Obamacare
Finally, Democrats embrace the death penalty
http://www.zazzle.com/obamacare_3_tshirt-235341680860146652

Obamacare + Cap-n-trade = Soylent Green
http://www.zazzle.com/obamacare_2_tshirt-235439043872849285

Obamcare
“Cash for cripples”
http://www.zazzle.com/obamacare_tshirt-235668055276900107


6 posted on 08/09/2009 9:53:50 AM PDT by ak267
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Can anyone point out the sections of this “Health Care” program that allows for rationing? I want to cite it in my letter to the criminals holding public office.


7 posted on 08/09/2009 10:04:57 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
”Can anyone point out the sections of this “Health Care” program that allows for rationing? I want to cite it in my letter to the criminals holding public office."

Of course I’m no expert (like Obama) but it seems like common sense to me. When a limited supply meets an unlimited demand, something’s gonna give. Don’t forget the 30 million illegal aliens that will be added to the system (hundreds of millions before its all over). You do the math.

8 posted on 08/09/2009 10:33:10 AM PDT by ArchAngel1983 (Arch Angel- on guard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
"Shovel Ready" health care for seniors..
9 posted on 08/09/2009 10:35:06 AM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

bump!


10 posted on 08/09/2009 10:56:02 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS; Jeff Head
Can anyone point out the sections of this “Health Care” program that allows for rationing? I want to cite it in my letter to the criminals holding public office.

Check this thread by Jeff Head, he has everything on the death counseling and he can probably tell you exactly where to look for the rationing.

Full Text of the House Dem "Advanced Care Planning" end-of-life consultation


11 posted on 08/09/2009 11:31:43 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Using the twisted ‘logic’ of NObama, this means that a person who is 63 y/o and owns a company which hires 200 people will NOT be given health care...

BUT—the 24 y/o person who has been on welfare and food stamps all their life, with 6 kids none of whom know who their father is WILL get healthcare—her and her 6 bastards.

This is exactly the kind of upside-down logic that has people yelling at Congress members at ‘town hall’ meetings and other gatherings.

All of this is fertile ground for Sarah Palin, IMO.


12 posted on 08/09/2009 11:34:56 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles

If there is a “silver lining” to any of this, it is that Zero and his thugs seem so out of touch with the American public that they are totally unaware that everything is collapsing all around them.


13 posted on 08/09/2009 11:40:34 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Thank you.


14 posted on 08/09/2009 11:55:14 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles
I have been saying this for a long time.

For example:

A fat 65 year old engineer who needs more than average health care but has lead a productive life and is the prime “knowledge holder” for a plant or process has economic value most likely well above his “cost” to society. In fact, it may be that his expert knowledge that benefits us all has come at a cost to his health. Should we use this against him in the end? In the world of the “young/healthy” crowd, this person is not worth the price of a new knee, hip, or ongoing drug treatment.

A 25 year old skinny surfer dude who does not plan to get a job and gets chronic exposure to to UV rays and a high risk for melanoma later in life is thought to be “worth” something to society and worthy of any medical treatment.

The example is extreme to point out that one cannot and should not make worth judgments about people. We all run risks of health problems as we grow older. We all make some decisions and have some risk factors that bring on health costs later in life. Some bureaucrat in an ivory tower should not be making decisions based on stats and age. There are so many different factors involved in a persons worth to society.

15 posted on 08/09/2009 12:15:41 PM PDT by SteamShovel (When hope trumps reality, there is no hope at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Yes, a little sticking point called equal protection under the laws. Does not have a disclaimer for age or disability.
16 posted on 08/09/2009 2:31:06 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles
Using the twisted ‘logic’ of NObama, this means that a person who is 63 y/o and owns a company which hires 200 people will NOT be given health care... BUT—the 24 y/o person who has been on welfare and food stamps all their life, with 6 kids none of whom know who their father is WILL get healthcare—her and her 6 bastards.

You may wish to recall that the racist jerk-off artist Jocelyn Elders, our erstwhile surgeon general, once opined for the record that a young drug addict was worth more than a fifty-odd year old man with a heart condition.

Yes, she did.

17 posted on 08/09/2009 2:34:57 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jimbo123

Excellent graphic.


18 posted on 08/09/2009 4:08:32 PM PDT by Albion Wilde ("Media: quit making things up." --Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles
All of this is fertile ground for Sarah Palin, IMO.

I hope Sarah Palin continues to speak out. But I do want to point out to you — and others here who fervently wish for her to run for president — that the layers and layers of Federal bureaucrats who would remain in place, even if there were a 99% Republican Congress, will mount the same kind of opposition against her and her family members that you have already seen, only worse.

This country needs a united Republican "machine" to mount an opposition, so that whomever runs will have some layers of protection. Those who want to save the Republic have to stop shooting into the circle and get organized behind a candidate and a few more or less universally appealing conservative points, then hammer them repeatedly.

Many who love Sarah do not want to see her destroyed. She is too good for the job.

19 posted on 08/09/2009 4:18:03 PM PDT by Albion Wilde ("Media: quit making things up." --Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

If people over 65 are expendable, then there shouldn’t be any serving in Congress or on the USSC. Especially sick ones.


20 posted on 08/09/2009 4:43:34 PM PDT by silverleaf (If you can't be a good example, at least don't be a horrible lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Pinged from Terri Dailies


21 posted on 08/10/2009 4:22:09 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson