Why do you oppose transplants?
Two basic reasons that aren't even morally-involved (many people oppose have 'right or wrong' view or something of that nature - I don't. Ethically - I have no problems with transplants in certain cases . . so maybe saying 'period' is too drastic)
1) It deters more significant advances in the healing and curing side of the medical-end of the whole issue. I honestly believe that it has become an acceptable choice or alternative to scientists/doctors and patients making a further push into actually preventing and curing said ailments.
2) It has created a vast black-market system in some areas for those who have a significant amount of money *or* those who don't have enough - which brings harm to the innocent which overall defeats the purpose of the donation-system.
Now - per the OP - coining this as a 'death panel' issue is misleading by far. The reality is: organ donation is EXPENSIVE and to purport that the state not only *can* but *must* pay for each and every case is extreme. It is not the state's fault that one is suffering an ailment - they cannot be blamed for the loss-of life or reduced value of life.
The 'death panel' issue centered around *people* (one or more) actually making decisions concerning individual patients on an individual basis - case by case - to determine the course of future action - and end of life planning.
An overall budget-cut is NOT remotely the same . . . to suggest so (as is done in the linked blog) is more ridiculous than the larger 'death panel' issue altogether.
While they're sitting around blaming the state government - and accusing people of being selfish. Why aren't they pointing fingers at the hospital itself? Could it have swallowed the cost of *two* patients seeing as how the program was cut from 99 to 97?
Why aren't they to blame? Why aren't they at fault? They're the ones actually letting money interfere with saving a life - violating their oath, are they not? (ok - so I don't think so either but if one's willing to blame the state government then they might as well go all-out and blame the hospital, too).
Further misleading is the author's assumption that the two which have died would have lived long enough to receive a transplant.
Why were they dropped? What number did they rank on the list? #1 = next in line? or #99 and #98?
Did a donation come through - and go to someone else on the list rather than them?
The link provides none of that information - therefor making it impossible to actually decide what could have been done to save them (if anything).
The Arizona budget that previously provided transplants to people in need was $1.4 million. As there were 99 people on the waiting list for transplants at the time the cuts went into effect, the net result is that the State of Arizona valued each of these lives at something less than $14,000 a person.
This is all we have cost wise to debate. What does this tell us? nothing, really - was the $1.4 million a yearly budget? is $1.4 million actualy spent every cycle ON transplants? If there were only 99 people on the list why would $1.4 million (yes - that's $14,000 ish per person IF this is paid out every year and IF that goes to exactly 99 people EVERY year) - so - is that HIGH or is that LOW? Where is all that cost going? How much is waste, excess - where could they have actually reduced cost *to* the government in this?
What if - within a year - only 20 people receive a transplant - does the government still GIVE them 1.4Million?
If yes - where does the extra go if it's not applied to transplant surgeries and recovery costs, etc?
If no (and they pay out ONLY the cost per patient - and *no more* than $1.4 million total throughout the course of a year for the program) then WHY is there even a problem? They couldn't reduce the cost of the procedure at all to make the newly adjusted budget work for everyone (which is how much? The article doesn't tell us this).
so - this case is smoke. It is nothing but someone ignoring facts and details for the sake of blaming the government rather than the many other people who are also just as 'guilty'