TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › The Death Book for Veterans
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Death Book for Veterans - Page 2

post #31 of 34
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsknowme View Post
** First - A sidenote - this hoopla about the "Death Book" is being stoked by Jim Towney who has his OWN book that he wants the VA to purchase & use instead of "Your Life,Your Choices! Shoud we say "Conflict of Interest" here **
Actually, that is something that everyone SHOULD be thinking about.
What the disabled people whom I know (*typically stroke-victims and other acquired brain injury victims, because my daughter has the same condition, so those are the types that we meet) DO worry about are exactly those tough questions on line 21. I have a friend who had a stroke at age 52 & now his mother changes his diapers - his fecal incontinence makes him afraid to have any company. His mother is in her 70s and he has decided that no extraordinary measures are to be taken if he worsens - he is willing to starve to death before he becomes such a great burden and he does not want to be put into an assisted living home. He is a proponent of assisted suicide, as is my friend from childhood who is a postpolio survivor (she is in a wheelchair).
IMO, their outlook on this is not because they feel less than human, but rather, they know the true pain and agony and hopelessness of illness, and they accept the old adage that "sometimes death comes as a friend".
I read page 21, and it isn't bad at all.
IMO, the "right wingers" are supporting some very naughty scare-tactics and those who are the most worried should do themselves a favor & consider other views:
http://www.rihlp.org/pubs/Your_life_your_choices.pdf

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200908260049
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08...y5265155.shtml http://www.examiner.com/x-5738-Polit...ly-favors-life


I have never even heard of this Jim Towney guy.

Bottom line for me, I do NOT want the flipping government in my business, my medical business. Period.

When the govt making a darn "coding error" and sends out a letter to tell 1200 people they are going to croak, that is just unacceptable to me.
post #32 of 34
I don't like the idea of any insurer, government or private, having any influence over people's end-of-life decisions. Too much conflict of interest there because obviously it costs a lot more to treat people so that they live longer rather than not treat them.

For that reason, I don't like the idea of any insurer, government or private, being the direct payer for a professional's services in end-of-life decisionmaking. It gives them a subtle influence over the professional in question, who the patient should be able to trust without reservation. I'm not saying doctors would be intentionally getting people to kill themselves off to help square up the bottom line, but I do think they'd be targeted with propoganda to that effect, and it's already known that the scrips doctors write are influenced by which drugs the pharmaceutical companies sell them on. It might be a small percentage, but across that many people a small percentage would add up fast, and anyway, one person rolling over and dying who would otherwise have chosen to live is too much, even if we don't know which person it is.

If the government wants to cover this, here's what they should do: Make it a cash payout, available at suitably long intervals, to the insured person for the going rate to talk it over with a lawyer or other expert, so that they go into that office, or have the lawyer/etc. come to them, as an absolute equal to anyone else who's paying cash to get exactly what they want down in black and white. Yes, then they might use it for something else, and some of them will, but that's their choice and then they don't get to have their wishes guaranteed. I don't see any other way to make sure that the insurer is not anywhere in the professional relationship between the patient and their end-of-life wishes adviser.
post #33 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebrillblaiddes View Post
I don't like the idea of any insurer, government or private, having any influence over people's end-of-life decisions. Too much conflict of interest there because obviously it costs a lot more to treat people so that they live longer rather than not treat them.

For that reason, I don't like the idea of any insurer, government or private, being the direct payer for a professional's services in end-of-life decisionmaking. It gives them a subtle influence over the professional in question, who the patient should be able to trust without reservation. I'm not saying doctors would be intentionally getting people to kill themselves off to help square up the bottom line, but I do think they'd be targeted with propoganda to that effect, and it's already known that the scrips doctors write are influenced by which drugs the pharmaceutical companies sell them on. It might be a small percentage, but across that many people a small percentage would add up fast, and anyway, one person rolling over and dying who would otherwise have chosen to live is too much, even if we don't know which person it is.

If the government wants to cover this, here's what they should do: Make it a cash payout, available at suitably long intervals, to the insured person for the going rate to talk it over with a lawyer or other expert, so that they go into that office, or have the lawyer/etc. come to them, as an absolute equal to anyone else who's paying cash to get exactly what they want down in black and white. Yes, then they might use it for something else, and some of them will, but that's their choice and then they don't get to have their wishes guaranteed. I don't see any other way to make sure that the insurer is not anywhere in the professional relationship between the patient and their end-of-life wishes adviser.
My opinion is that end of life decisions should be made when you are still healthy and young enough to be able to think clearly and rationally about it. It should be made by nobody but yourself, with no input from anybody. You should think what you would honestly want for yourself when the time comes, then head to the lawyers to put it all into writing. Then you should make all your family and loved ones and health care providers aware of what you're wishes are. It shouldn't be up to the doctor, up to the government, or up to anyone but YOU.

That said, people are making much ado about this one little clause. It's not making it mandatory that you have end of life counseling with your doctor, it's just making it so the doctor will get paid if YOU decide you want to consult with him. Nobody is advocating euthanasia as far as I can determine, but if you don't want to be kept alive with feeding tubes and what not, people need to know. It shouldn't come down to the family having to make a decision like that, or worse yet the government.
post #34 of 34
Thread Starter 
It is not, "just ado over one little clause" there is way more to it than that.

I have outlined my misgivings multiple times, I am not going to do it anymore.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › The Death Book for Veterans