Brit doctors: don't treat people who make bad choices or get old

[monster]

What's the problem?

I don't believe -for example- alcoholics who refuse to give up drinking should be given a liver transplant at all if there are others in more need of the liver, even if they pay for the treatment themselves.

But they're not being refused treatment altogether -just treatment on the NHS. How would you feel about your taxes being increased so every alky in the gutter can receive a liver transplant on medicare?

The elderly are more tricky, but there are many procedures which can result in more pain and suffering that would be caused by not having them. If people refuse to take the advice of their doctor about when to stop treatment, they should do it on their own dollar.

It's no different from your insurance company dictating which procedures it will pay for, which doctors you can see.....

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by monster

It's no different from your insurance company dictating which procedures it will pay for, which doctors you can see.....

No different? Can we make that a bumper sticker?

Universal health care: no different from current insurance coverage

Actually I believe that only occasionally are there cases where people are flatly denied coverage by their insurer, and when they do, it's big news. Somebody died of it recently.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

No different? Can we make that a bumper sticker?

Universal health care: no different from current insurance coverage

Sure you can. It's not what i said, but if it makes you feel good, go right ahead.

Actually I believe that only occasionally are there cases where people are flatly denied coverage by their insurer, and when they do, it's big news. Somebody died of it recently.

Oh please. Are you trying to tell me that everyone with health insurance can get the latest most expensive fertility treatment from the provider of their choice? Even 80yo great-grannies?

You've just reminded me why I've never bothered to join in these "discussions". The American health insurance blinkers and obsession with the evil socialism rife in Europe make it pointless and impossible. You'd be bereft without Nationalised Healthcare to fear and mock. Natiionalised healthcare will never work here because no-one will ever give it a chance. So let's just forget it and carry on.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Actually I believe that only occasionally are there cases where people are flatly denied coverage by their insurer, and when they do, it's big news. Somebody died of it recently.

Remember how Briana was getting chemo, and needing anti-nausea medication? Insurer got all stingy and would only pay for one (IIRC) dose when she needed more.

Ok, not "flatly denied" but I imagine this situation is similar to what happens in Britain; a 92-year-old with emphysema is given medication to manage it, rather than a lung transplant, but they are not "flatly denied" treatment.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

Remember how Briana was getting chemo, and needing anti-nausea medication? Insurer got all stingy and would only pay for one (IIRC) dose when she needed more.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

My friends, I would do anything to get you care if you are denied it.

Refresh my memory, Undertoad. Did you fall all over yourself to pay for the extra medicine Briana needed?

Or is your offer only good when you can make a cheap political point?
__________________

Just because a medical treatment can be offered, it doesn't always mean it should be offered. What we have in our current system are business entities, whose principal interest is the bottom line, deciding when to withhold treatment. In the examples you state here, you have doctors deciding when to withhold treatment. Oh, the horror. Doctors making healthcare decisions. Like no more livers for an alcoholic. Give me a break.

[Flint]

As coincidence would have it, I just recieved an invitation to this ethical seminar:

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
As a touchstone for unpacking the ethical concept of "the reality principle" this seminar considers the December 2007 refusal of Cigna to cover under its benefit schedule a liver transplant for 17 year old, Natalie Sarkisyan, and the circumstances of her death. The content of the seminar focuses on the concept of "realism as an ethical obligation," as well as a suggested ethical framework for setting limits and the socially constructed philosophical concept that grounds "the reality principle."

Now brace yourselves, I suspect that Undertoad is about to unleash a scathing criticism of the American healthcare system, and offer his personal assistance to the poor, beleaguered citizens of the USA. After all, this is about helping people, definitely not just making cheap political points.

[Stormieweather]

I'm at work, don't have time to write much...but here is an ancedote about our (Florida) health care system. Years ago, when I was poor and a single mother, I contacted the Health Department to make an appointment to obtain birth control. I was offered a date/time about 5 months down the road. When I protested and asked what they suggested I use in the meantime, the clerk blithely told me.."well, just have a baby! We have excellent infant services".

Naturally, I made other arrangements. Ignorant twits.

Stormie

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Stormieweather

Naturally, I made other arrangements. Ignorant twits.

Check - make that Twit - singular. I am sure that the organization as a whole doesn't agree with that one idiots opinion.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Stormieweather

twits.

Was that a typo?