Comments on: Will Health Care Reform Require That Older Americans Decide How to Die?

By: Vaughn

Vaughn — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 08:40:39 +0000

Back up and look at the bigger picture here. It doesn’t matter what’s in this bill. What’s not in this bill can be added to the next one. What is in this bill can be removed from the next one.

The heart of the issue — and in my opinion this is all that really matters — is that the national government must not be permitted to usurp this power over our lives.

A socialized healthcare system will place a new collar and chain around our necks and God forbid, around our children’s necks forever. Make no mistake about it. All these arguments about the meaning, intentions, and affects of the health reform bill amount to nothing more than discussion about how long the chain will be. Make it long, make it short. It doesn’t matter. It is still a chain — a chain that can and will be shortened as time passes.

“Is life so dear, or [healthcare] so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!” (Patrick Henry, 1775, Virginia Conventions)

What do we really value? Have we forgotten about being free? Not me. I am with Patrick Henry on this one. The rest of the debate is at its heart meaningless.

By: Ella Arolovich

Ella Arolovich — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 01:36:04 +0000

Frankly, the health care system in the U.S. now is SO out-of-step with the rest of the developed world (Europe, Canada)that it is almost ridiculous.
The advantages of the public payer option are so obvious that one must be severely intellectually disabled not to be able to see it.
If only the uninsured had the problem of access to decent health care in this country, it would already deserve the debate on the topic. The ugly truth is that the INSURED (and many paying as much as $30,000 annually for a family of 4 for this “privilege”) have serious problem once there is serious health problem.
That is not to mention that the U.S. health care system is remarkably unproductive:
once one has a complaint and goes to “PCP”, the PCP sends the poor soul to multiple specialists, who, in turn, send the patient for multiple testing, then they suggest THE MOST EXPENSIVE treatment possible, so they could make more $. After a surgery (usually unnecessary), they tried to get rid of the patient as soon as possible, often sending them home the same day, and providing minimum after-care – because it is time-consuming and not profitable.
Meanwhile, months of work productivity are lost and even the most insured patients end up broke.
The ugly truth is that it is not the illness that cripples the patients but the treatment.
If we could get rid of the incentive for the doctors to choose the most expensive treatment (i.e. surgery), and, instead, give them the incentive to choose the best treatment for the patient’s health, we would all win.
So I applaud the Obama administration for looking at such treatment models as the Billings, etc. and for suggesting a public payer option.
Unfortunately, with people like Merryl, this administration cannot even suggest the better existing models of health care, as the French or Danish ones – that would be too radical for many entranced by “swifboating” by insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies.
Merryl, you can always write a living will where you could specify indefinite life on ventilation and stomach tubes, if other options scare you so.
You may also continue to pay more and more to your existing insurance providers for less and less care.
With all these options being continuously available to you, reform or not, is not the life grand?

By: Randolph N. Morgan

Randolph N. Morgan — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:48:06 +0000

I could not agree more Ms. Dick, I wish these programs would move faster. I know several doctors here in Utah that are more open to these ideas. One that I know and would recommend is Dr. Vaughn Johnson in Springville I believe, I would have to double check his office location. Education is the key, we need to re-educate the populace and retrain our physicians. Mr. Young you are an inspiration, Congratulations!!

By: Colleen Dick

Colleen Dick — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:45:34 +0000

Mr. Young, YOU are the hope of the future. If more people would take responsibility for their own well-being and do as you have done, there would not be a healthcare crisis. Please give me the name of your Doctor, I will add him to my list of recommended Physicians. In the words of one of my patients, “I had no idea how good I could feel. I thought the way I used to feel was normal; bloated, sluggish, brain-fogged. You have ruined me for junk food. I can’t believe it.” All it takes is being mindful and caring enough to think it through. Building new habits isn’t easy, but once they are established, they work as automatically as the old ones. Congratulations, you deserve it!

By: Nathan Young

Nathan Young — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:40:03 +0000

First I thought I’d comment that the blog post is well thought out and appreciated. Specifically I thought I’d chime in with some comments that may be of encouragement to Ms. Dick. Several years ago I went to see a physician for a physical at my wife’s insistence, since I hadn’t been to the doctor in several years. This good doctor laid into me in a way that was totally unexpected. All my lab results were pretty good and I felt I was in good health, but the doctor insisted I was a medical nightmare waiting to happen because of my lifestyle and eating habits, as well as family history. He did not offer any medication, just recommended changes to diet and a regular exercise program.

It took a little while for all that to sink in, but I’ve made a lot of changes in my approach to life because of it I’ve lost over 40 lbs, done a lot of research on what constitutes good health and have seen my risk factors decrease dramatically. So, there are Doctors out there willing to deal in a real preventative approach, but participants need to be proactive as well.

By: Colleen Dick

Colleen Dick — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:46:24 +0000

There are movements afoot to improve medical education to include healthy lifestyle considerations. Functional medicine programs exist. (as apposed to disfunctional medicine, I guess) But, there is a lot of prejudice against them. I look for doctors who include integrative approaches to their practices and they are few and far between. I am a convert of about 7 years to this new perspective in healthcare and I wish we could move it along faster. Mr. Morgan, you are right about the availability of wonderful supplements and products, but the average person doesn’t have a clue when it comes to discerning the wheat from the chaff. They don’t know about drug-food, drug-supplement, supplement-supplement interactions. You can take a little knowledge and enthusiasm and hurt yourself. The science is developing and will eventually win out. I hope we all live long enough to see it.

By: Trevor Johnson

Trevor Johnson — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:40:34 +0000

So often Canada is mentioned when comparing proposed health care reform options with the status quo. I live in Canada so I’m experiencing it first hand. I respect the point of view that freedom and liberty should also extend into medical care. I love freedom too.

Americans might be surprised to know that whenever health care reform is proposed in Canada by provincial governments, private citizens and special interest groups know that they can throw cold water on any reform by stating that the proposed reforms will only lead to “American style health care”. Thereby entrenching the current systems and processes. Most Americans probably didn’t realize that their system is feared by Canadians.

From my point of view the single payer system is OK. It provides affordable coverage to all citizens regardless of pre-existing conditions, employment status, age or ability to pay.

What I think is misunderstood about the Canadian system is the barriers placed by provincial governments of private capital investment for medical facilities and equipment. It is the restrictions to capital investment that rations the supply, not the single payer system. Private medical clinics in Alberta are restricted by law to what services they provide. Private capital can not be invested to build new hospitals or special medical facilities. (There may be some facilities in Canada run by non-profit societies that are grand-fathered from the 1960’s before health care systems in each province were set up)

So unless the health care reform being discussed in Washington includes restrictions about who can operate hospitals or build facilities to provide specialized medical procedures, then you are most likely not going to get a Canadian style medical system.

[Posted on The Official Brigham Young University group on LinkedIn.com]

By: Randolph N. Morgan

Randolph N. Morgan — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:35:11 +0000

I have to agree Ms. Dick, I don’t think the medical profession will get involved. At least not until the education of doctors includes the use of natural products vs synthetic. It is unfortunate that treatment has more sex appeal than prevention, but that is our current system. I work with health and wellness products and there are some phenomenal products on the market if you know where to look. You have to be careful that you get high quality products, there is a lot of snake oil on the market as well.

By: Colleen Dick

Colleen Dick — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:30:29 +0000

I agree with Mr. Morgan that we need a system that focuses on the prevention of disease. But, don’t count on Medical Doctors to do that. They consider giving you blood pressure medications and statins preventative medicine. I have been a nutritionist for many years and realize that most doctors are very hesitant to suggest to patients that they might feel better if they practiced a healthy lifestyle with real food and exercise. Lifestyle issues will never be a part of this discussion. People want the freedom to do what they want and eat what they like and when they get sick, they want some else to pay for it. Go figure!

By: Seshua

Seshua — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:02:33 +0000

Rosemary, I think you must be speaking out of fear or misunderstanding because there is NOTHING in the bill that states or implies that “if you’re over a certain age, you’re too expensive to save.” Why do you say these things when anyone can look at the bill and see the pertinent sections on living wills (or anything else) and see what it says for themselves?

I’ve been hearing all the scary talk lately (death boards, mandatory abortions, euthanasia) and I’m ashamed that Americans are resorting to these kind of tactics to discourage democracy. I’ve gone over the bill and have not found any of these items in the bill. This is not informed debate; it’s a witch hunt. It’s nothing less than baseless fear mongering. I thought we, as Americans, were better than that.

I suppose if one cannot win an argument on merit then unsubstantiated fiction is the only recourse. I have not heard a single person point to a section of the bill that substantiates any of these horrifying claims. As Michael Yantachka clearly stated above, pages 425-428 discusses the physician’s responsibilities in regard to providing information on living wills. Please read it. You can find a pdf of the bill here: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.pdf