• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

60,000 patients put on death pathway without being told...

Moot said:
I think it does matter whether it's true or not, in fact that is the point that seems to escape you because you want to believe so badly that article is true, when it doesnt appear that is.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter what the UK is doing, I couldn't possibly care less. They've got all kinds of ****ed up **** going on over there. What we're talking about is the prospect of this occuring in America.

Moot said:
Nor do I believe Maggie took the article at face value. What I think she said and I'm ad libing, was that keeping the terminally ill alive with false hope, enormous suffering, useless and painful surguries, or to die an undignified death with tubes coming out every oriface, not to mention the financial burden that destroys entire families....was more cruel and inhumane than letting a person die a natural and peaceful death with hospice care and/or in the comfort of their own home surrounded by their family.
Click to expand...
If the family or the person decides it's time, then it's time. For some doctor to off someone against their will to save society money is ridiculous.


Moot said:
It's difficult to tell if you have an biased agenda or just blind to fact and reason by letting your emotions get the best of you.

Btw, it costs taxpayers $55 billion a year to keep the terminally ill alive. Personally, I think that money would be better spent helping to keep those that are not terminally ill, alive and healthy to go on and live productive lives.....
Click to expand...
These people are taxpayers. They paid into medicaid their entire working lives, and now that the government has mismanaged their funds, and lobbies have made our medical system unbelievably expensive, our government is just going to tell these people to **** off?

Moot said:
"Every medical study ever conducted has concluded that 100 percent of all Americans will eventually die." I hope that isn't news to you, RabidAlpaca.
Click to expand...
That's the logic of psychopaths. "It doesn't bother me if we kill that guy off, we're all going to die eventually, right?" Of course everyone is going to die, that doesn't mean we should start killing people to save money.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
I never said to "treat" a dying man, I said to not off them to save cash if he doesn't want to be offed. I'm not suggesting we start forking out huge expensive surgeries for someone who's more than likely going to die. A breathing machine, some medication, and a cot are not that expensive.
Click to expand...

Damn, it's no wonder that you and I can't see eye to eye on this issue. If you consider "a breathing machine, some medication, and a cot" living, then you haven't seen much in the way of critically ill patients. Jesus H. Christ.
 
lizzie said:
Damn, it's no wonder that you and I can't see eye to eye on this issue. If you consider "a breathing machine, some medication, and a cot" living, then you haven't seen much in the way of critically ill patients. Jesus H. Christ.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what it is. We'd be offing people who don't want to die to save money. Plain and simple.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
That is EXACTLY what you have been saying from the beginning. You think people should be euthanized against their will because it's more "humane" and cost effective.
Click to expand...

It is inhumane not to tell people that they are dying when their health has deteriorated to the point of no return. I am watching that happen with a friend as we speak. She has been taking chemotherapy treatments for the last eight months. If she now weighs (at 5'8") 90 pounds I would be surprised. She is on oxygen, faithfully going to her chemotherapy treatments every two weeks. Have the doctors leveled with them? No, they haven't. The closest they've come is to say, "Well, she'll be on chemotherapy the rest of her life." She has incurable terminal cancer. Her morphine is being increased weekly...her quality of life has deteriorated to non-existent...she is on oxygen at home...and still the doctors aggressively "treat" her terminal disease. I think this is inhumane. If you don't, then I'd venture to say that you haven't experienced that scenario up close and personal.

Doctors should be encouraged to, at some point, tell their patients the truth. And to make their inevitable journey as comfortable as possible. For the most part, doctors aren't doing that. Shameful.

Moot said:
Nor do I believe Maggie took the article at face value. What I think she said and I'm ad libing, was that keeping the terminally ill alive with false hope, enormous suffering, useless and painful surguries, or to die an undignified death with tubes coming out every oriface, not to mention the financial burden that destroys entire families....was more cruel and inhumane than letting a person die a natural and peaceful death with hospice care and/or in the comfort of their own home surrounded by their family.

Btw, it costs taxpayers $55 billion a year to keep the terminally ill alive. Personally, I think that money would be better spent helping to keep those that are not terminally ill, alive and healthy to go on and live productive lives.....

Taxpayer Cost of Keeping the Terminally Ill Alive

"Every medical study ever conducted has concluded that 100 percent of all Americans will eventually die." I hope that isn't news to you, RabidAlpaca.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this.
 
Last time I checked, we're ALL terminal. One sec, let me double check, to make sure...



Yep. We're ALL going to die, someday. By that measure, Drs. should inject us all with poisons now, so as to save society money, and ourselves heartache.




That we would ALLOW people to die, or ASSIST them to die, is one thing.

Doing so without either their knowledge, OR their consent, is murder, plain and simple. There are no gray areas on this, no two ways about. If my actions cause a person to die as a direct result, and they happened without that person's knowledge or express consent, it is, and always will be, murder. This is actually one of the most cut and dry topics I've posted in in a while. If a person who has been paying into a healthcare system ALL THEIR LIVES, wants to keep on keeping on, despite an apparent hopeless, inevitable outcome, that is their DECISION TO DO SO. They EARNED IT. You have a problem with this bankrupting said healthcare system, I would SUGGEST we look at changing the SYSTEM, NOT by murdering all of the more expensive patients of that system. Got me?
 
MaggieD said:
It is inhumane not to tell people that they are dying when their health has deteriorated to the point of no return. I am watching that happen with a friend as we speak. She has been taking chemotherapy treatments for the last eight months. If she now weighs (at 5'8") 90 pounds I would be surprised. She is on oxygen, faithfully going to her chemotherapy treatments every two weeks. Have the doctors leveled with them? No, they haven't. The closest they've come is to say, "Well, she'll be on chemotherapy the rest of her life." She has incurable terminal cancer. Her morphine is being increased weekly...her quality of life has deteriorated to non-existent...she is on oxygen at home...and still the doctors aggressively "treat" her terminal disease. I think this is inhumane. If you don't, then I'd venture to say that you haven't experienced that scenario up close and personal.

Doctors should be encouraged to, at some point, tell their patients the truth. And to make their inevitable journey as comfortable as possible. For the most part, doctors aren't doing that. Shameful.
Click to expand...

If your friend wants to keep living, that's her and her family's decision. The doctor is clearly wrong here, he should level with his patient. Why you would think it's not ok to lie or mislead the patient, but think that it's ok for a doctor to decide to kill a patient without telling them or the family is absolutely beyond me.

If someone wants to continue to live through suffering, that is their decision, not yours.
 
KevinKohler said:
That we would ALLOW people to die, or ASSIST them to die, is one thing.

Doing so without either their knowledge, OR their consent, is murder, plain and simple. There are no gray areas on this, no two ways about. If my actions cause a person to die as a direct result, and they happened without that person's knowledge or express consent, it is, and always will be, murder. This is actually one of the most cut and dry topics I've posted in in a while. If a person who has been paying into a healthcare system ALL THEIR LIVES, wants to keep on keeping on, despite an apparent hopeless, inevitable outcome, that is their DECISION TO DO SO. They EARNED IT. You have a problem with this bankrupting said healthcare system, I would SUGGEST we look at changing the SYSTEM, NOT by murdering all of the more expensive patients of that system. Got me?
Click to expand...

Thank God that's not the way it works.
 
This brings to mind a conservative hot key phrase....DEATH PANELS. Anyone remember that little number?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
If your friend wants to keep living, that's her and her family's decision. The doctor is clearly wrong here, he should level with his patient. Why you would think it's not ok to lie or mislead the patient, but think that it's ok for a doctor to decide to kill a patient without telling them or the family is absolutely beyond me.

If someone wants to continue to live through suffering, that is their decision, not yours.
Click to expand...

Please quote where I say that it's OK for a doctor to decide to kill a patient.
 
KevinKohler said:
This brings to mind a conservative hot key phrase....DEATH PANELS. Anyone remember that little number?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I remember. Lies, Lies and more Lies. That wasn't a conservative hot-key phrase -- that was bull****.
 
MaggieD said:
Please quote where I say that it's OK for a doctor to decide to kill a patient.
Click to expand...
NP, it ran like this:
LowDown said:
60,000 patients put on death pathway without being told but minister still says controversial end-of-life plan is 'fantastic' | Mail Online



The "care pathway" is where they sedate patients and then withdraw life sustaining care, basically killing them off.

Put the government in charge of health care and then see what happens when the government gets short of money.

The BHS basically pays a bounty for every patient finished off this way. 130,000 patients are killed this way yearly, apparently almost half of them without consent.

The British Health Minister calls the pathway "a great step forward."
Click to expand...
MaggieD said:
It is a great step forward, in my opinion. When someone has a terminal disease and is in the last stages, it is absolutely foolish to keep spending tens of thousands -- hundreds of thousands -- prolonging the inevitable. It is horribly difficult on the person as well as on their families. There is only one reason for doctors to treat clearly-terminal illnesses: they make more money keeping you interminably alive than by letting you die a peaceful death.

As for paying them a bounty. That's just pejorative bull****.
Click to expand...
RabidAlpaca said:
That's not their decision to make, these people aren't dogs. That's the patient's and the family's decision to make. You really want a doctor to diagnose you as terminal, then put a pillow over your head? Or would you like to maybe get a second opinion or choose how you want to spend your last days?
Click to expand...
MaggieD said:
It is exceedingly difficult for family to make that decision. Most families? They can't do it. Actually? Loving pet owners are sometimes kinder to their dogs than they are to their mothers.
Click to expand...

I asked you if you really wanted a doctor to diagnose you as terminal, then put a pillow over your head. You replied with: "It is exceedingly difficult for family to make that decision. Most families? They can't do it."

The entire theme of the thread has been whether or not we should be putting old people down to save money. So you're now saying we shouldn't be doing that?
 
MaggieD said:
Yeah, I remember. Lies, Lies and more Lies. That wasn't a conservative hot-key phrase -- that was bull****.
Click to expand...

There are 27 pages to this thread...and I'm lazy. I'm pretty sure that somewhere in there, you have explained how this system really works, as I'll grant the early arguments that the source used in the OP is terrible.

Mind explaining how it's done, and THEN I'll judge it?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
NP, it ran like this:

I asked you if you really wanted a doctor to diagnose you as terminal, then put a pillow over your head. You replied with: "It is exceedingly difficult for family to make that decision. Most families? They can't do it."

The entire theme of the thread has been whether or not we should be putting old people down to save money. So you're now saying we shouldn't be doing that?
Click to expand...

Doctors should have the motivation (and the ethics) to tell patients and their families the truth after a period of time. Patients and their families usually don't ask the tough questions. Honestly? They don't want to know. They shouldn't have to ask. Doctors should be honest. We should demand they be honest. And the focus should be, not on treating a terminally-ill patient, but on helping them make their final journey.

We're getting there. More and more, doctors are telling patients that "It's time to get hospice set up for your mom." Medicare addresses this issue quite well, actually. Medicare will pay for hospice care once a doctor has diagnosed someone as "terminal" -- meaning they probably have six months or less to live. At that point, all "curative treatment" is withheld and the patient is kept as comfortable as possible until the end. This is the USA "Care Pathway." It's just not used often enough and in the patient's best interest.

The patient should be told. If the patient isn't lucid, then the next-of-kin or healthcare power of attorney should be told. And it should not be a choice without going through the court system.

Your hyperbole has made this discussion very difficult. Pillows over one's head...putting them down...ridiculous.
 
MaggieD said:
Doctors should have the motivation (and the ethics) to tell patients and their families the truth after a period of time. Patients and their families usually don't ask the tough questions. Honestly? They don't want to know. They shouldn't have to ask. Doctors should be honest. We should demand they be honest. And the focus should be, not on treating a terminally-ill patient, but on helping them make their final journey.

We're getting there. More and more, doctors are telling patients that "It's time to get hospice set up for your mom." Medicare addresses this issue quite well, actually. Medicare will pay for hospice care once a doctor has diagnosed someone as "terminal" -- meaning they probably have six months or less to live. At that point, all "curative treatment" is withheld and the patient is kept as comfortable as possible until the end. This is the USA "Care Pathway." It's just not used often enough and in the patient's best interest.

The patient should be told. If the patient isn't lucid, then the next-of-kin or healthcare power of attorney should be told. And it should not be a choice without going through the court system.

Your hyperbole has made this discussion very difficult. Pillows over one's head...putting them down...ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I don't think anybody in this entire thread has suggested we continue providing expensive surgeries to terminal patients. There are however an unbelievably high number of people here who think we shouldn't even be providing hospice care and should be putting them down because hospice care will "bankrupt medicare and the country". If you're saying that's not what you believe, then I believe you.
 
MaggieD;1061311058]Doctors should have the motivation (and the ethics) to tell patients and their families the truth after a period of time. Patients and their families usually don't ask the tough questions. Honestly? They don't want to know. They shouldn't have to ask. Doctors should be honest. We should demand they be honest. And the focus should be, not on treating a terminally-ill patient, but on helping them make their final journey.
Click to expand...
Couple things here. I highlighted a few words, because I feel it's important to go into some nit picky. When you say should, I am assuming, then, that you would have that they be REQUIRED to do so...in this case, be up front and honest about a patient's chances. I'm not sure, but I think they already are legally required to be upfront and honest on those things. I also highlighted truth, because that's a very dangerous word. You say truth as if it's an end all be all, but it's not. Doctors are not masters of the universe, they can't even all agree with each other. If a patient, or a patient's next of kin, wants to cling to life, to a ray of hope that YOU, or SOMEONE else, doesn't believe is even there, some doctor's perception of the "truth" of the situation SHOULD have absolutely NO bearing on that choice. One doctor telling a patient they are going to die SHOULD not be the final word. That's why we have the ability to seek second opinions. And third opinions. And fourth. And so on. That's the beauty of our healthcare, in this country. Some doc tells me a I got three months to live, I am FREE to seek out another one, maybe the best in the field, to try for a better diagnosis.
We're getting there. More and more, doctors are telling patients that "It's time to get hospice set up for your mom." Medicare addresses this issue quite well, actually. Medicare will pay for hospice care once a doctor has diagnosed someone as "terminal" -- meaning they probably have six months or less to live. At that point, all "curative treatment" is withheld and the patient is kept as comfortable as possible until the end. This is the USA "Care Pathway." It's just not used often enough and in the patient's best interest.
Click to expand...
All curative treatment should only be with held by the CHOICE of the patient. Period. Doctor's orders be damned.

The patient should be told. If the patient isn't lucid, then the next-of-kin or healthcare power of attorney should be told. And it should not be a choice without going through the court system.

Your hyperbole has made this discussion very difficult. Pillows over one's head...putting them down...ridiculous.
Click to expand...
He is using the exact hyperbole that is often bandied about in abortion topics.
 
Manc Skipper said:
As someone who has implemented the LCP with patients and carers, let me inject some reality to the thread.

What is the Liverpool Care Pathway? - Health News - NHS Choices

The Mail is a toxic rag with a toxic agenda.
Click to expand...
You disparage 'The Mail", yet quoted from your article...

Care minister Norman Lamb is quoted as saying: "It is clear that everyone wants their loved ones' final hours of life to be as pain free and dignified as possible, and the Liverpool Care Pathway is an important part of achieving this aim."

"However, as we have seen, there have been too many cases where patients were put on the pathway without a proper explanation or their families being involved. This is simply unacceptable."
 
My mother went in the hospital for another round of recurrent heart failure. Short of breath, nauseated, weak etc. The doctors after a week of testing and making her sicker couldn't help and sent her to Hospice. She was so weak she couldn't sit up or feed herself, more less use the bathroom. The doctor there said it would drag on for another 2 weeks with her getting worse till she died. Nobody who ever lived loved her more than me or wanted to see her recover but seeing her suffer more was becoming unbearable. One of the head nurses said I'm going to give her a shot of morphine and valium to ease her symptoms and asked my mom and I did we approve? I thought she would not be unconscious that long or that the meds were going to facilitate the end, but they did. By time I realized what they were doing I knew it was merciful and I couldn't have consciously done it myself. She didn't suffer near what she could have. Was there a chance of any recovery? I'd say very little and for a very short time before the misery restarted over again. Her heart was done. She was so weak at home that for 4 1/2 years she rarely left the house and laid on the couch most the time. The last few months her appetite was completely fading with her being ill. The medication they gave her at Hospice kept her unconscious and unaware of the death process, which if she had been lucid would've been hell. It was enough.
 
grip said:
My mother went in the hospital for another round of recurrent heart failure. Short of breath, nauseated, weak etc. The doctors after a week of testing and making her sicker couldn't help and sent her to Hospice. She was so weak she couldn't sit up or feed herself, more less use the bathroom. The doctor there said it would drag on for another 2 weeks with her getting worse till she died. Nobody who ever lived loved her more than me or wanted to see her recover but seeing her suffer more was becoming unbearable. One of the head nurses said I'm going to give her a shot of morphine and valium to ease her symptoms and asked my mom and I did we approve? I thought she would not be unconscious that long or that the meds were going to facilitate the end, but they did. By time I realized what they were doing I knew it was merciful and I couldn't have consciously done it myself. She didn't suffer near what she could have. Was there a chance of any recovery? I'd say very little and for a very short time before the misery restarted over again. Her heart was done. She was so weak at home that for 4 1/2 years she rarely left the house and laid on the couch most the time. The last few months her appetite was completely fading with her being ill. The medication they gave her at Hospice kept her unconscious and unaware of the death process, which if she had been lucid would've been hell. It was enough.
Click to expand...

And how would you feel if you both decided you wanted to continue treatment, and you were told no?
 
KevinKohler said:
Couple things here. I highlighted a few words, because I feel it's important to go into some nit picky. When you say should, I am assuming, then, that you would have that they be REQUIRED to do so...in this case, be up front and honest about a patient's chances. I'm not sure, but I think they already are legally required to be upfront and honest on those things. I also highlighted truth, because that's a very dangerous word. You say truth as if it's an end all be all, but it's not. Doctors are not masters of the universe, they can't even all agree with each other. If a patient, or a patient's next of kin, wants to cling to life, to a ray of hope that YOU, or SOMEONE else, doesn't believe is even there, some doctor's perception of the "truth" of the situation SHOULD have absolutely NO bearing on that choice. One doctor telling a patient they are going to die SHOULD not be the final word. That's why we have the ability to seek second opinions. And third opinions. And fourth. And so on. That's the beauty of our healthcare, in this country. Some doc tells me a I got three months to live, I am FREE to seek out another one, maybe the best in the field, to try for a better diagnosis.
All curative treatment should only be with held by the CHOICE of the patient. Period. Doctor's orders be damned.

He is using the exact hyperbole that is often bandied about in abortion topics.
Click to expand...

Many doctors subscribe to "Don't Ask Don't Tell." I disagree that curative treatment should only be withheld by the choice of the patient (or his/her family). When one is terminal, there is no curative treatment. That is the hard truth that must be told.

Now some nitpicking of my own -- because, even in this very serious subject, it made me smile. Lordy! "I should be free to . . . try for a better diagnosis." I'm sure you meant outcome. Ha!

And, yes, I agree with your observation -- just like abortion.
 
KevinKohler said:
And how would you feel if you both decided you wanted to continue treatment, and you were told no?
Click to expand...

That's what we were already told. She didn't want to go to Hospice or give up the doctors said the insurance (Humana) would not pay for further Hospital stay or treatment. So what's your point?
 
MaggieD said:
Many doctors subscribe to "Don't Ask Don't Tell." I disagree that curative treatment should only be withheld by the choice of the patient (or his/her family). When one is terminal, there is no curative treatment. That is the hard truth that must be told.
Click to expand...
By more than one doctor. I harp on this because, I am PERSONALLY the product of second and third opinions. Had my parents accepted the word of the first doc they saw, I can only imagine how completely differently, and likely very negatively, my life would have turned out. But instead, they REFUSED to accept that "truth" from the first couple of doctors, and finally found one willing to try the unconventional. What you are suggesting is that we take that right away, or to some extent, limit it. And I'll fight you every step of the way on it.
Now some nitpicking of my own -- because, even in this very serious subject, it made me smile. Lordy! "I should be free to . . . try for a better diagnosis." I'm sure you meant outcome. Ha!
Click to expand...
True enough, lol. Though I meant diagnosis. Diagnosis =/= outcome. Which is why getting a second and third and so one opinion is so important.
And, yes, I agree with your observation -- just like abortion.
Click to expand...
Which is why I don't frequent those threads. Only so many times a person can read baby killing.
Click to expand...
 
grip said:
That's what we were already told. She didn't want to go to Hospice or give up the doctors said the insurance (Humana) would not pay for further Hospital stay or treatment. So what's your point?
Click to expand...

OK, that's a different story...I am thinking completely in terms of social health insurance, as in, medicare/medicaid. A health care system that is funded by tax dollars.
 
Moot said:
I don't believe she said that, but I agree with you if in fact the LCP is not informing the patients or their families before putting them in LCP. But it does seem that only The Daily Telegraph have been making these claims.....



But the doctors, nurses, researchers and the families of the LCP patients seem to tell a different story.....



The Daily Telegraph is know for it's outrageous and sensationalized claims and editorials, is it not? Because it seems a bit of stretch that 60,000 patients and families didn't know that they or their loved ones were put in LCP without their knowledge, especially if the families were there by their bedsides and free to ask the doctors and nurses questions. Of course, it is possible that it might happened to a handul of patients and their families, but to say it's a cronic problem or policy then I'm somewhat skeptical...especially when considering the source of the allegations, Rupert Murdoch's, The Daily Telegraph.
Click to expand...

The Daily Telegraph is not part of Rupert Murdoch's empire. It is owned by the Barclay brothers.. not related to the bank.

The Daily Telegraph is however a conservative leaning paper which means it and its readers are pretty much against the NHS which explains its stories and attitude towards the NHS.
 
PeteEU said:
The Daily Telegraph is not part of Rupert Murdoch's empire. It is owned by the Barclay brothers.. not related to the bank.

The Daily Telegraph is however a conservative leaning paper which means it and its readers are pretty much against the NHS which explains its stories and attitude towards the NHS.
Click to expand...

To some extent you can harp about the LEAN a particular piece of news takes. Yes, you can project something in a good or bad light.


Are you, however, suggesting there are outright lies in the OP? Because last I checked, a lie, once printed, is libel, and that's illegal. At least, it is in the US.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
That's not their decision to make, these people aren't dogs. That's the patient's and the family's decision to make. You really want a doctor to diagnose you as terminal, then put a pillow over your head? Or would you like to maybe get a second opinion or choose how you want to spend your last days?
Click to expand...

If the government is paying the bill, why isn't it their decision to make? You can't have someone else pay your bills and still expect to retain full authority over every decision about your life. Don't like it? Don't have socialized medicine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom