Skip to comments.Dehydrate dementia patients to death to save money: British Medical Journal editorial
Posted on 07/16/2012 6:10:54 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
Lives not worth living = not worth anything to him.
Allowed to die when they are not even dying = killed.
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE
IPAB, Obamacares Super-Legislature
By Michael F. Cannon & Diane Cohen
June 15, 2012 4:00 A.M.
The individual mandate isnt Obamacares only unconstitutional provision, or even its most unconstitutional provision. That distinction belongs to the Independent Payment Advisory Board. A heretofore unreported feature of this super-legislature makes it even more authoritarian and dangerous than anyone knew.
IPAB consists of up to 15 unelected government experts. Its stated purpose is to restrain Medicare spending. If projected spending exceeds certain targets, Obamacare requires IPAB to issue legislative proposals to reduce future spending. Those proposals could include drastic cuts that jeopardize seniors access to care, leading some critics to label IPAB a death panel.
But the really dangerous part is that these are not mere proposals. Obamacare requires the secretary of Health and Human Services to implement them which means they become law automatically unless Congress takes certain steps to head them off. Congress may replace the Boards proposal with its own cuts, at least initially. But Obamacare requires a three-fifths vote in the Senate to pass any replacement that spends more than the Boards proposal. In other words, to override IPABs proposal completely, opponents must assemble a simple majority in the House and a three-fifths majority in the Senate and the presidents signature.
That makes IPAB more than an advisory board. Its a super-legislature whose members are more powerful than members of Congress. If eight members of Congress propose a bill, all thats necessary to block it is a majority of either chamber, or one-third of either chamber plus the president.
Worse, Obamacare forbids Congress to repeal IPAB outside of a brief window in the year 2017 and even then requires a three-fifths supermajority in both chambers plus a presidential signature. Under Obamacare, after 2017 Congress could repeal Medicare, but not the board it created to run Medicare. Congress and the states could repeal the Bill of Rights but not IPAB.
What kind of laws will these super-legislators impose? Obamacare supposedly prohibits these super-legislators from raising taxes or rationing care. Yet those restrictions are unenforceable and meaningless. For instance, the statute lets IPAB define rationing and protects that definition along with the secretarys implementation of IPABs edicts from administrative or judicial review. The prohibition on raising taxes is likewise toothless. IPAB can raise taxes as surely as it can cut Medicare spending.
In effect, Obamacare gives IPAB the power to raise taxes, spend money, place conditions on federal grants to states, and exercise other powers the Constitution reserves solely to Congress. If the Supreme Court upholds Obamacares mandated Medicaid expansion, states may soon see IPAB imposing similar mandates on states. And if President Obama fails to appoint any IPAB members, all these powers fall to Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius...
Coming soon to a hospital near you.
I’m sure I don’t need to tell you that dehydration is a painful thing—very painful.....
Time is being wasted.
To even have this discussion shows how disgusting and vile humanity has become.
Why not just stab ‘em to death? Why make them suffer? Afraid you will spend too much washing the sheets?
D!ckhead...hope its you one day.....
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
If you don't have money or insurance, you should die. Who is willing to pay for the deadbeats?
Why in hell did the Brits try to defend themselves in WW2?
The Nazis would have provided the same standard of “medical care” for them....
Changing Pattern of Feeding and Hydration Needs in Terminal Care
Dehydration is nature at work and can bring relief from distressing symptoms such as
Vomiting from increased stomach secretions
Pressure from the tumor causing pain
Shortness of breath
There are certain circumstances where some of these statements may be true, but to use this across the board to discourage or refuse simple IV hydration among all cancer patients is wrong.
I won't even go into the details of the battle we had to fight just to get her the IV in the first place.
All you need is a fast and loose definition of dementia.
Look up how Yuri Andropov utilized the “psychiatric hospitals”.
Food and water are basic human rights, not medical treatments that can arbitrarily be withdrawn at whim. Denying folks water and food is murder.
By the way, this is a pro-Life forum.
The NAZIs began with terminating the patients they thought were a drain on society and then expanded that program to gypsies, Jews, and further expanded it to troublemakers and those who refused to go along with the program.
The Weather Underground figured they would need to kill 25 million Americans who would refuse to be “re-educated”.
Under ObamaCare, voting for the wrong party might eventually be interpreted as a sign of dementia...
Why any retiree or anyone nearing retirement would vote for Obama is beyond comprehension.
Shut up, scumbag.
To offer government healthcare, then to use that system to kill patients negates any justification for it in the first place.
At this point, religions need to enter the situation as “no kill” caregivers, who, while not offering technological dehumanization, either, will only tolerate natural death.
The only thing the government has to do is to offer people a choice. It does not want to do this, because now it has an effective monopoly over life and death. And it invariably chooses death.
Hmmm. At the other end of the default process, we could dehydrate the more educated members of the political sturgeon class.
Dementia patient don’t actually require much “medical care” — they just need plain old care from nurses’ aides and plain old caregivers. So, the whole premise is buncomb.
Communist nations have been known to lock up political prisoners in insane asylums. It discredits their beliefs and permits them to be tortured with electric and chemical shock treatment, sleep deprivation, psychotropic drugs, and locking them up together with the criminally insane.
So hospitals should be required to provide food and water to dieing people free of charge. Many sufferers of dementia would also require food and water via IV. Who pays?
What about antibiotics?
When do you cut off the deadbeat losers without insurance or money?
If you don’t have money or insurance, you should die. Who is willing to pay for the deadbeats?
Its not the government’s decision to make. PERIOD.
This movement is starting. I'm involved in it. But we have one heck of an uphill battle ahead of us.
At some point, when you no longer pay into the system, you too will be a “deadbeat loser.”
Hope for your sake dehydration is as much fun as the death peddlers are trying to convince us it is.
Who do you propose pay for these people?
Before the government usurped this role, families, churches and communities took care of them. After this government and culture collapses, families, churches and communities will once again care of them.
"The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members."
You individually don't measure up, judging by the drivel you're posting on this thread.
already happened here. terry schivo.
The only reason for killing a person by torture is to 'comfort' the doctor doing it. He can have the illusion the death is 'natural'. It's not - there's nothing 'natural' about being starved to death.
Doctors need to man up.
If doctors are going to kill patients they ought to have to balls to do it right - take them down to the basement and shoot them - it's less painful for the patient and a whole lot more dignified...
Doesn’t sound like the Court of Protection does much protection .... sorta like a death panel, but that term might be too accurate.
So all people do, or at least should receive the medical care they require, and it should be provided for by the government, families, churches, communities ...
Do you really believe that all people in the United States actually get the medical treatment they need? Are you kidding?
These two articles just prove that Sarah Palin didn’t know what she was talking about when she said that Obamauncare would have death panels. (sarc off)
Not necessarily true. I know a number of doctors who routinely have to sign off on cases because they refuse to participate in the family's wishes to kill a patient. Too few physicians stand up against this growing euthanasia movement, but heirs are just as much a force in the growth of this movement as the physicians themselves. Don't underestimate the childrens' desire that the estate survive their parents' illness as a driving force in these cases.
It was clearly the primary motive for the husband in the killing of Terri Schiavo.
Until the demented person is his parent, child or other person he loves.
well that and he wanted to run off with his new women and he was still married to Terri.
Did you ever notice that almost all legislation that outlaws physician assisted suicide also indemnifies from prosecution those physicians who kill their patients by withdrawal of nutrition and hydration and terminal sedation? Ever wonder at that? Then read on...
AMEN, Dr. Kopp!
“The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members.”
Don't kid yourself - 'the poor' vote democrat - same with drug addicts, alcoholics, street bums etc. They will get care - that's what 'ObamaCare' is all about - helping the folks who never did anything for our country but take, take and take some more. Dems want them to live long and healthy voting lives...
The people ObamaCare plans on 'offing' are old white people - the one's who have supported all these 'care' programs all these years - the responsible one - the one's with money... and with nice homes that can be taxed out of existence.
Trust me, ghetto dwellers, illegal immigrants, their families, the homeless, etc will be taken care of just fine... Gays are democrats too - they'll be fine. Gays have more health care dollars spent on them than any other group (per person). No expense will be spared - they vote dem and donate money. That will continue.
Again, the ONLY large group dems want to deny care to are white and elderly - and conservative. Think - the greatest generation - think - grandmothers...
According to planned (non) parenthood, prior to their birth.
Seriously we are not talking huge expensive intervention...that might be a debate for another day. All we are talking is food and water. I would hate to meet the person who would deny a dying man a drink of water. That would have to be one mean miserable SOB.
Trust me, ghetto dwellers, illegal immigrants, their families, the homeless, etc will be taken care of just fine... Gays are democrats too - they’ll be fine. Gays have more health care dollars spent on them than any other group (per person). No expense will be spared - they vote dem and donate money. That will continue.
Yes, that is, until they run out of OPM.
Or a radical libertarian. But probably both.
Primum non nocere.
What about about antibiotics that would cure a serious infection?
Obamacare - healthcare is a right, but life is not
Hippocratic Oath: Classical Version
I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:
To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this artif they desire to learn itwithout fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.
I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.
I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.
Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.
What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.
If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.
Hippocratic Oath: Modern Version
I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:
I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.
I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.
I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.
I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.
I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.
I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.
I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.
If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.
Written in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, and used in many medical schools today.
Coming soon to a hospital bed near you.
I’ve seen it happening here already.
Raanan Gillon must immediately be determined to be insanly demented and refused all hydration.
“But it may also be within my power to take a life;”
Does that mean on purpose?