If you listen to the Republicans (OR Chris Matthews, for that matter), you’d think that Obama is using Health Care Reform to develop a not-so-stealth government program that dictates when, how, and how long we should all live and die. The Obama Bill is just another cover for the liberals’ social engineering goals and objectives.
One of the most scary provisions in “Obamacare” is the one that suggests that health insurance cover patients who wish to have an “end-of-life consultation” with their physician. GOP Representative Virgina Foxx (R-NC) on the Floor of the House of Representatives, states that the current Bill would "put seniors in a position of being put to death by their government."
See also, the SEIU.org page for more on the Foxx nonsense.
I’ll keep this short. Foxx is a wing-nut and this is TOTAL FABRICATION. It has been debunked, not only by the facts, but by several reputable news organizations.
Media Matters Fact Check
The Democratic Legislation Actually Provides Professional Guidance For Seniors' Difficult Decisions - NOT To Encourage Euthanasia
Like other Republicans before her, Rep. Foxx is basing her statement on a clause in the House bill guaranteeing seniors free counseling to help them with complex decisions.
"Advance Care Planning Consultation" Would Provide Seniors With Professional Advice On Will Preparation, Power Of Attorney, And Other Complicated Issues. PolitiFact.com reported: "Indeed, Sec. 1233 of the bill, labeled 'Advance Care Planning Consultation' details how the bill would, for the first time, require Medicare to cover the cost of end-of-life counseling sessions. According to the bill, 'such consultation shall include the following: An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to; an explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses; an explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.'" [PolitiFact.com, 7/16/09]
It is no accident that the Right Wing is using Scare Tactics to try to kill Health Care Reform.
In Religion Dispatches, Ann Neuman writes,
Although the leap from aid in dying to "euthanasia" or even "assisted suicide" is patently false, and entirely misleading, everyone from Fox News to the New York Post, are scaring the elderly with threats of denied service and coerced assisted suicide. As they muster their forces against health care reform, Republicans culture warriors and conservative media outlets stir fear of “deadly doctors” and "government-encouraged euthanasia".
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/1707/how_end_of_life_issues_are_being_used_to_thwart_health_care_reformForbes also takes on this argument in specific terms and outlines the history and context of these provisions as well as what the bill really says.
The end-of-life language originates from a different bill, called the Advance Planning and Compassionate Care Act, introduced earlier this year by Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Susan Collins, R-Maine. In addition to the consultation, which Medicare will pay for every five years, the bill also says that patients will be informed about the benefits of hospice and palliative care. Hospices are facility or home-based services for terminally ill patients to receive pain medicine and other comforts before they die.
The proposed legislation says that patients should be instructed on how to write an advanced health care directive. It defines standard categories of care that can be included in such a document as nutrition, hydration, antibiotics and resuscitation in the event of a lack of pulse. It also would create a tracking system to see if doctors are promoting advanced care directives and following them. Sen. Rockefeller's office released a statement Friday saying the measure has bipartisan support as well as the backing of groups like the AARP.
Forbes Magazine, 07/24/2009
So, rational discussion and facts, or scare tactics and sound-bites? Take your pick.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
m. a.h
Tom Cordle
Vinnie da Auditor
h_lance
misfit-writer
Eric Lightborn
Salon.com
Comments
egads, they are now running ads supporting this nonsense.
if seniors had to negotiate an obstacle course annually after 65, it would be visibly fair, efficient, and save the nation big bucks. not surprising the republicans are leading the discussion, although you seem to imply they are against it...?
THEY DIDN'T EVEN LIVE ANY LONGER!!!
In fact they died a little bit sooner, even though they were not a sick to begin with.
This proposed legislation will inject a modicum of sanity into an insane situation.
See my post, "Should doctors kill? Part 3."
thanks - that is useful data. It infuriates me how reality gets so twisted into talking points, which obscure or ignore the facts.
rob - no, I'm not surprised at this leap, but that folks like Chris Matthews are starting to buy into the rhetoric makes me nuts.
Everyone should have a living will, in my opinion, and talk about what choices they would want for their health care and end of life alternatives. It would not be fair for my husband and family to have to make those decisions without ever having discussed options.
[No, I'm not sick or dying, but you do know that I live in constant fear of being hit by the proverbial bus - j/k but still, one never knows what can happen - so this is not just for OLD people.]
Emma - I detect a bit of snark, no?
-Unabashed supporter of "Death Care!"
By scaring people like this, they put doctors and patients on opposite sides of the fence and inject a new layer of mistrust. Not only does this serve health care reform poorly, it increases the potential for human suffering.
A living will is not a set of instructions on how to kill a person. It is a guideline explaining how the patient wants to go. It is sad that anyone would be so immoral as to subvert such an important process.