Sarah Palin thinks so.
The family of Terri Schindler Schiavo think so.
Read the follow from the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation and see if you agree that the disabled may find themselves denied access to health care once cost-cutting becomes necessary.
"Was President Obama Subtly Promoting Euthanasia . . .?
Who is going to decide whether or not “you're better off” with or without the surgery? What about “additional tests” or “extra care”? Will it be your physician or will it be President Obama?
Recently, during a nationally televised event at the White House, President Obama said that families need better information so they don't unthinkingly approve, “additional tests or additional drugs that the evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve care.” He added: “Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller.”
Do we need any more evidence how this President and his administration feel about the equality and dignity of human life? It seems to be becoming more and more clear that if the quality of your life has reached the point where – by the judgment of a government official – your condition will no longer improve, the Obama health care plan will no longer allow any means of help. However, even more alarming is the real possibility of an Obama health care system that would seemingly put into practice an aggressive agenda to either hasten death or, worse yet, impose death on our cognitively disabled, chronically sick and frail."
I fear for my daughter Christina who has Down syndrome. I fear for her under Obamacare, once I am gone, some death panel will decide that her life is not of sufficient 'quality' to merit medical treatment. Tomorrow I will join pro-life activists Rev Pat Mahoney and Chris Slattery on Martha's Vineyard to tell President Obama about my concerns for my daughter.
I will update you on news coverage here.
7 comments:
ditto on the scare!
All those people who laugh at the idea of "death panels" are the ones who scare me. Talk about head in the sand.
Here are some real life cases if you need some, ala NHS.
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-35015/Hospital-refused-treat-Downs-children.html
As someone who lives in a country (the UK) with government-supplied health care, I can tell you that the system we have is specifically designed to ensure that those who cannot afford health care insurance are not denied access to services.
My son has Down's syndrome and has multiple health visitors, portage workers, speech and language therapists, and physical therapists, not to mention heart scans, hearing tests, and learning assessments, all supplied free of charge and regardless of our income. Had he needed it, he would also have been able to have an operation to fix any problems associated with his heart or any other organs, again free of charge regardless of our income.
In comparison, on the subject of health care insurance reform, the US National Down Syndrome Congress states (http://www.ndsccenter.org/resources/position6.php):
"People with Down syndrome have been and continue to be discriminated against with regard to access to health insurance, solely on the basis of the diagnosis of Down syndrome and without consideration of their individual health status or health histories.
For those people with Down syndrome who do have congential or other health conditions requiring medical intervention, insurance companies have denied them access because of their preexisting conditions."
Illinois, my experience of healthcare in the UK as a a six month resident was positively scary. I hope your experience is more typical. but my instincts lead me to doubt it.
IL, it's hard to have a discussion about healthcare b/c every attempt comes down to a proud UK'er taking it personally. This doesn't happen with the Canadian's I have encountered.
In the US we have many horror stories. A lot of them have to do with private insurance policies, but still more have to with medicare.
The truth is, while there may be hitches, with private insurance there is a much higher appeals success - not so much with medicare (our public version).
And yes, all universal healthcare systems start out with a charter to provide what is best for everyone. But when you allow the govt to decide what is best for everyone, then you are in trouble (and may not even realize it).
PS, IL -
I forgot to comment something. Every reform proposed involves the removal of the pre-existing condition exlusions as well as mecial underwriting. This problem has several prongs -it will affect a lot of people, and naturally it will affect all people with congenital issues. I hope that goes through - that issue is not a partisan one.
But the reforms proposed beyond that are excessive and agenda-laden. The rancor you see has a lot to do with the agendas being thrust upon us.
The NHS is far from perfect, no doubt about that, and the example cited above is alarming - I hadn't seen that, but my experince is completely different. I'm don't take the health care debate personally but my experience and the position of the NDSC contradicts Sarah Palin's comments so I wanted to provide some balance.
Post a Comment