EZEKIEL EMANUEL AND THE OBAMA CARE FINAL SOLUTION
(Must Read - Sick, eugenics quotes of Emanuel)
This is the story I referenced on the other health care thread.
Oregon has taxpayer funded medical care for individuals not otherwise insured.
The fund has only limited financing available - decisions have to be made about who will receive what kinds of treatment.
Wagner had advanced lung cancer, which become resistant to previous chemotherapy, paid for by the same program.
Tarceva was expected by her doctor to extend her life for four to six months.
On the basis of pre-established criteria, it was determined that the provision of Tarceva was not “cost-effective” in the sense that the same amount of money would produce a greater aggregate improvement in the the quality of life for other patients.
On the basis of the same criteria, it was determined that the fund would pay for hospice care, or for physician-assisted suicide, an option which is legal in Oregon, in which is chosen by around 50 people a year.
If the voters of Oregon has wanted to provide unlimited life extending care to recipients of the fund, they could have voted in representatives ready to raise taxes to provide the funds to do so.
They don’t, and I doubt that many readers here would vote to be taxed to supply such care on an unlimited basis either.
This is how it works: unless we are willing to pay taxes to provide such care on a unlimited basis, we can disagree with the criteria used to perform the rationing, but it’s pretty hard to argue that rationing itself is unreasonable.
Coming soon to every community under obammacare! Except for those who have the right political connections. This would never happen to one of obamma’s kin!
Barbara was no longer a patient; she had become a "negative economic unit."Can't be stressed strongly enough where our government will take us in the health (death) care field if they are doing this in Oregon.
Didn't Kevorkian go to jail for that?
So there you have it, right from one of Obama's top health advisors, Ezekial Emanuel, bro of the WH Chief of Staff. The problem with health care today is the Hippocratic Oath and the vile notion that the physician's duty is to the patient!
Let us hope that while Congress is deforming health care, it abolishes this outrageous concept.
/sarc
=================
Quote from Emanuel, Ezekial J and Fuchs, Victor R. The Perfect Storm of Overutilization. JAMA 299: 2789-91, 2008 (June 18).
So how does this kind of thinking apply in other areas, either in Oregon or nationally under ObamaCare?
For instance the Bureau of Corrections.
If a convict doing life without parole needs health care will it be deemed “cost-effective” to give it too him? Or will it be “cost-effective” to just give him pain meds (or suicide assistance) and let him die early?
What if he's only doing a twenty year stretch?
I know this twists things a little, but if they are concerned with what is “cost-effective”, is it “cost-effective” to let someone stay on death row for twenty years of appeals before before the execution? And veering back to health care, will someone on death row be eligible for suicide assistance?
Where else will they take this “cost-effective” mind set?
The above questions are rhetorical.
When Barbara's lung cancer reappeared during the spring of 2008 her oncologist recommended aggressive treatment with Tarceva, a new chemotherapy. However, Oregon's state run health plan denied the potentially life altering drug because they did not feel it was "cost-effective." Instead, the State plan offered to pay for either hospice care or physician-assisted suicide... Oregon state officials controlled the process of healthcare decision-making -- not Barbara and her physician. Chemotherapy would cost the state $4,000 every month she remained alive; the drugs for physician-assisted suicide held a one-time expense of less than $100.But don't worry -- you still have physician choice. Quitcher bitchin.
