Skip to comments.Oregon Health Care Board Denies Chemotherapy, Will Push Rationing Under Obamacare
Posted on 08/09/2013 11:33:53 AM PDT by Morgana
Oregon rations healthcare to Medicaid recipients. Terminal cancer patients are denied chemotherapy to extend lifeand now the Oregon rationing board wants to go deeper into the weeds.
From Hope Landsems Wall Street Journal blog:
Liberal states often preview health-care central planning before the same regulations go national, which ought to make an Oregon cost-control commission especially scary. On Thursday a state board could change Oregons Medicaid program to deny costly care to poor patients who need it most.
Like most such panels, including the Affordable Care Acts Independent Payment Advisory Board, the Oregon Health Evidence Review Commission, or HERC, claims to be merely concerned with what supposedly works and what doesnt. Their real targets are usually advanced, costly treatments. Thats why HERC, for example, proposed in May that Medicaid should not cover treatment with intent to prolong survival for cancer patients who likely have fewer than two years left to live. HERC presents an example to show their reasoning for such a decision: In no instance can it be justified to spend $100,000 in public resources to increase an individuals expected survival by three months when hundreds of thousands of Oregonians are without any form of health insurance.
Let us not forget that Oregon Medicaid happily pays for assisted suicideand indeed, has offered terminal cancer patients that option while denying life-extending treatment.
CLICK LIKE IF YOURE PRO-LIFE!
Also, Vermontwhich legalized assisted suicide recentlyas a single payer plan the state cant pay for. And guess what: Using assisted suicide and rationing are both on the table as means of paying for the program. No question: Centralized control, mixed with culture of death values make for a toxic brew.
As for the eventual push to turn Obamacare into single payer: As I wrote at length, health care rationing is central to the operation of single payer systems. Obamacarians want more!
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!
“In no instance can it be justified to spend $100,000 in public resources to increase an individuals expected survival by three months”
I can’t disagree with that.
I’d hate to be in the nursing home business under ObamaCare. Maybe they can be turned into drug treatment centers because God knows we’ll need plenty of those.
Next they will put illegal foreign invaders to the front of the line.
At the risk of being slammed, is it really so evil - or wrong at all - to withhold expensive treatment when it will only prolong life a few months? Whatever happened to the idea that when God decides it’s your time, then it’s time?
That is why we should have private insurance, private hospitals and people paying their own bills. BUT the person who said that doesn’t agree with me.
” I cant disagree with that.”
Until its you or your grandmother on the receiving end of that decision.
I agree. No one should have unlimited “free” healthcare.
Seriously, how many people would spend the money on these end-of-life expensive treatments if it were their money?
When your parents get old and sick, there comes a time when many people are asked to make that choice. It is not uncommon for many people to sign the DNR form for their own parents.
“Until its you or your grandmother on the receiving end of that decision.”
Oh no, even then. I’m not a hypocrite - you’ll find those primarily on the left.
The key is ‘public resources’, which shouldn’t be involved.
We’ve got to get away from this idea that we are being callous if we don’t spend huge sums of money to prolong life a few months; that is not “putting a dollar value on life,” it is recognizing reality.
They gave my mother in law 6 months to live 5 years ago after being diagnosed with a lung cancer. Intermittent chemo treatments have kept it under control. She still mows the lawn, washes the windows enjoys her great grandkids. Statism is a killer..
Healthcare now equals
You have cancer - no chemo
You have heart problems - no stint or bypass for you
You are pregnant and don’t want to be - yes we will pay to murder your child
You are gay and have HIV - you are special and deserve special treatment we will do everything we can for you no matter what the cost
You got HIV from a blood transfusion but are not homosexual - how did you vote in the last election ?
Pretty soon hospitals will be little more than a local health clinic where you see nurses who dispense aspirins
because they will be using the insurance money to pay for more bureaucratic jobs for their people whose sole job is to decide if you can get anything more than an aspirin and God help you should you have to spend any time at all in that clinic because those bureaucrats will be deciding if you eat and drink too.
Basically leftists lie about wanting healthcare for all since they always ration healthcare to the sick.
Yours is an emotional response to a logical statement, which is the common friction between the Conservative argument and the Liberal response.
It’s the decision makers who are the problem. Try this on for size. You’re a 65 year old out of work living on SS and your coronary artery plugs. Without treatment you’re dead in three months. Should the “state” approve your stent?
Certainly irrefutable logic is there, however consider this:
With a regime willing to use whatever government agencies, such as DHS, IRS, FBI, NSA, CIA, etc. to silence it's critics, it is a just a short jump to denying medical care to manipulate, coerce, or kill their political enemies;
Prior to 0bamacare, citizens and their doctors decided on their course of treatment, not a bureaucrat. And remeber, it was only a couple of months ago that Sebelius, the devil's (0bama) handmaiden, was more than happy to stand before a national audience and deny a little girl a chance at a lif saving transplant, while uttering the callous words "some live and some die". Do you think she, or any other member of the regime, give a rat's ass about you or your family?
Until it’s your grandmother and all she wants to do is live long enough to see her grandchild get married, or get to hold her newborn great grandchild one time.
The problem here is that there’s been a commitment made, one that a lot of people have helped finance over the years and have an expectation that the commitment will be kept.
The original commitment may have been dumb, unworkable, unsustainable etc. But how do we get out of it given the fact that just about everyone niow benefitting from it contributed to it as the govt ordered them to?
“In no instance can it be justified to spend $100,000 in public resources to increase an individuals expected survival by three months
Sorry, if I am being forced to pay for “insurance” you better prolong my life.
Then again, you should have a choice. The government program which kills you when you are no longer viable or the private program.
On another note, I’d expect that once Obamacare’s rationing and deathpanels go into place we’ll see a corresponding drop in life expectency. Oh wait, they’ll just do with that what they did with the U3 unemployment numbers, or by excluding food and energy costs from inflation figures in order to maintain that all important upward slope ...
“if I am being forced to pay for insurance you better prolong my life”
It’s not insurance, it’s a tax. IMO, an unconstitutional tax, Justice Roberts’ opinion nonwithstanding.
It is Marxism-—the State being god and determining Life and Death of an individual. They have no “Right” to practice medicine. NONE in the USA.
It is intrinsically evil-—and to allow government to “kill” innocent people because of a “few” people’s warped ideas of “reality” (no one knows how “long” a person has to “live”)——doctors have been wrong millions of times and to pretend to be god——is unconstitutional.
Yes, socialized medicine is always evil (and unconstitutional). We are becoming a Marxist State and it won’t be long before people who “think” wrong are on the “to die” list.
It is why all socialism rots the soul-—and is unconstitutional. Government should NOT be in the medical field-—government (in the USA) is ONLY for protecting Individual Rights and the most important is “Life”.
But we have been post-Constitutinal for decades-—we need to take back our Constitution from the Stalinists.
That drop in life expectancy is the real key to fixing the SocSec and Medicare funding “problem”. Nobody will admit to it, but that’s the truth.
Each year cut off le is a HUGE improvement.
When the millenials b!tch about granny getting offed, the fedgov will toss out some student loan relief coupons.
You can NEVER give the State power of Life and Death over an individual. It is why it is unconstitutional for the State to practice “medicine”.
All Socialism rots the soul-—and destroys freedom. They need to be out of insurance/medicine/free markets, etc.
This is the Slippery Slope of controlling Life-—and our government is ONLY for the protection of Individual Rights from God-—and the first is Life. This ability to “kill” people is unconstitutional and Marxism.
“expected survival by three months”
“Expected” by who, based on what???
Doctors have a high rate of failure at predicting life expectency, and bean counters are notoriously motived by worst case estimates.
They can be used to care for crippled 60 year olds who could have been treated with a knee or hip replacement but will be restricted to wheelchairs and walkers under Obamacare.
I disagree with spending any public resources on it at all.
“Expected by who, based on what???”
Typically, that would be either the average life extension observed during the stage 3 trials of the drug or procedure, or that observed during post-trial use. It is just the average - some will live longer, some not as long.
Here we go! Long term cancer patients- old OR young? -being denied care? Next will be critical burn patients,the critically injured, anyone requiring long term care or maintenance to live, all of the elderly( after all they are all terminal) until only the healthy(valuable) are worth medical care.
Congress and Senate and all old government types exempt, of course.
May I remind you that people for whom everything is being done STILL die every day. How presumptuous of us to assume that medicine can-or does-defy the will of God. If that were true people like Christopher Reeve-for whom money was no object re. healthcare- would never die.
Once we allow government to decide WHO should live another month or year or two, they will decide who should live at all, based on our value to the government.
Since I’m 7 years passed chemo, I’d say the 3 month average is BS.
My point is that these expectancy estimates are the Doc’s best guess, based upon your specific circumstances.
Your guess about stage 3 trials or post trial use, suggesting 3 more months of life, is pure nonsense.
Really? My family is composed of traditional Catholics, very pro-life, but we don't want any heroic life-extending measures for a terminal illness. God gives us a certain limited time on earth. I have a feeling the ones who want the equivalent of an executive's salary every few months in health care are afraid of dying and what comes after or believe there is no after.
“Your guess about stage 3 trials or post trial use”
It wasn’t a guess, it was an answer.
I’m glad to hear you have done well after chemo. Surely you understand that the 3 month hypothetical this guy was talking about was just that - an example of someone whose life would have been expected to be extended by 3 months after getting the appropriate chemo for that type of cancer. I’m guessing that this hypothetical cancer is not the type you had.
When my father had his first fight with cancer, his life expectancy was normal, after chemo cleared it up. When he had his second fight with cancer 12 years later, the expectancy was that his life would be extended by 2 years after he completed the chemo regimin. He lasted one.
“My family is composed of traditional Catholics, very pro-life, but we don’t want any heroic life-extending measures for a terminal illness.”
Granted, but at least thats you or your family making that decision for yourselves. Not the government.
I agree; different issue.
The problem with these hypothetical “examples” is that they are used to numb people to the idea of death panels.
As though there is some cost/benefit analysis that would be objectively and scientifically applied.
The truth is you won’t have to worry about being denied the treatment, because the diagnostic testing won’t even be authorized.
OR Soylent Green Waiting Stations
Suppose it isn’t three months? I find it hard to believe that if a person is that far along with cancer that chemo is even a choice. The problem is it involves the governments interaction in what should be a decision between patient and doctor. How long a person’s life may be extended is unknown is most cases.You don’t have to be on Medicare and Supplemental insurance to not live long after chemo treatment.
Does Oregon pay for sex change operations?
“claims to be merely concerned with what supposedly works and what doesnt”
these are always no more than statistical averages
which means no matter how many persons for whom
a certain medical procedure may not be effective
or as effective, that is NEVER everyone, never every
case, and the blaket rationing of care based on such
statistics ALWAYS means that care will be denied
even to those, however many, whom it would have
the justification that such rationing is “cost
effective” is not good enough, and particularly
not good enough when it is being made by
I knew three people who had terminal cancer, once survived three years, one survived two years and one nine months, in all instances I am glad they fought tooth and nail to remain alive as long as possible, to see kids graduate, to see siblings get married, etc.
I don’t understand the concept of just rolling over and dying: whatever happened to “I refuse to @#$$#ing die!”
I don’t even go to weddings, graduations, etc. Attended a wedding once when I was 8.
A lot of people with pre-existing conditions enthusiastically support Obamacare because they think the government will pay for the expensive treatment of their ailments. They have yet to realize that they are prime candidates for the Death Panels. And not just the elderly, either. A premature infant could be denied an incubator under this law. A child could be denied a much-needed transplant. Any chronic condition would not be considered cost-effective by the Obamacare bureaucrats. They will be as competent as the Post Office, and as compassionate as the IRS.
One thing that does not get talked about with Obamacare is that it is NOT insurance.
If you cannot pay the amount the government decides that the IRS will take from you, then you will be placed into your states welfare roles. And if you get sick, and require care, the state will pay...
...THEN THE STATE WILL GO AFTER ALL YOUR ASSETS TO COVER THE COSTS. AND YOU OR GRANDMA WILL LOSE YOUR HOUSE OR OTHER BELONGINGS.
There is no good side to Obama care and making sure people were covered more than they are now is not what it does.
OBAMACARE MAKES SURE THAT THE MEDICAL-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX HAS INCOME FROM TAKING HOMES AND ASSETS FROM PEOPLE.
DO NOT FORGET THIS
Note from CNS News
People whose household income is too small to qualify for the subsidy will be put on Medicaid. People whose household income exceeds 400 percent of the FPL will get no subsidy at all.
According to the IRS, which responded to a CNSNews.com inquiry on the issue, a household earning an annual income that is just $1 more than 400 percent of the FPL is ineligible for an Obamacare subsidy, period.
As explained by both the IRSwhich wrote the regulation governing the Obamacare subsidyand the Congressional Research Service, which published a July 31 report on the matter (Health Insurance Premium Credits in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), the Obamacare insurance-premium subsidy essentially works as a cap on the percentage of annual income an eligible person is required to pay in health-insurance premiums.
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies
Then there is the question....... is the panel God directed?
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.