• 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!

Obama Health-Care Reform Act Ruled Unconstitutional(edited)

Boo Radley said:
Well, it is about payment. you can't have something done you can't pay for. We won't do it here either. treating someone already dead is usually frowned on by insurance companies. Few argue it is something we should eb doing.
Click to expand...

Stay in denial, Boo, keep looking for that utopia that the govt. has never created.
 
Boo Radley said:
No one, and I'm not God. But you don't have to be God to know a consistent vegatative state is dead. We can all make all kinds of declarations, but the fact is this child is in a vegatative state. no one is arguing they can change her situation, so once again, your side has missed the point all together.
Click to expand...

Liberals like you seem to be all about choice when it comes to issues like abortion but want to deny that choice for the parents of this child. you are a hypocrit.
 
Conservative said:
Liberals like you seem to be all about choice when it comes to issues like abortion but want to deny that choice for the parents of this child. you are a hypocrit.
Click to expand...

Choice? Once your dead there is no choice. God if you will, or whatever happened to her, already made the choice.
 
Boo Radley said:
None on my private insurance either. Private insurance really sucks!!!!
Click to expand...

get a different insurer

of course, if you're on medicare you can't

because medicare insures ONLY those most in need of care

LOL!

just like medicaid
 
The Prof said:
get a different insurer

of course, if you're on medicare you can't

because medicare insures ONLY those most in need of care

LOL!

just like medicaid
Click to expand...

Can't. It's linked to my place of employment and I can't afford it on my own. Private insurance sucks!!!!!

:coffeepap
 
The Prof said:
get a different insurer

of course, if you're on medicare you can't

because medicare insures ONLY those most in need of care

LOL!

just like medicaid
Click to expand...

you're saying a person can't have any coverage other than medicare?
 
Boo Radley said:
No one, and I'm not God. But you don't have to be God to know a consistent vegatative state is dead. We can all make all kinds of declarations, but the fact is this child is in a vegatative state. no one is arguing they can change her situation, so once again, your side has missed the point all together.
Click to expand...

The parents aren't asking for anyone to spend any money of their child. They just want to take their son home to die naturally around his loved ones. The father said the hospital won't allow that and insist on taking his tube out on their schedule. They even have guards watching him to make sure the parents don't take him out of the hospital.

Sounds pretty draconian to me.
 
Boo Radley said:
Can't. It's linked to my place of employment and I can't afford it on my own.
Click to expand...

why, you poor thing

LOL!

get a different employer

try to be a man
 
Gill said:
The parents aren't asking for anyone to spend any money of their child. They just want to take their son home to die naturally around his loved ones. The father said the hospital won't allow that and insist on taking his tube out on their schedule. They even have guards watching him to make sure the parents don't take him out of the hospital.

Sounds pretty draconian to me.
Click to expand...

That's not in the article presented to me. But that is also a different issue.
 
Boo Radley said:
That's not in the article presented to me. But that is also a different issue.
Click to expand...

No, it is THE issue. The Canadian healtcare system won't allow these grieving parents take their child home to die in peace.
 
Gill said:
No, it is THE issue. The Canadian healtcare system won't allow these grieving parents take their child home to die in peace.
Click to expand...

Are we in canada?

That said, I'd still need to see more on this for them. I would disagree with not allowing them to go home. But there may be more to it than you know, like she might not survive the move.
 
Boo Radley said:
Are we in canada?

That said, I'd still need to see more on this for them. I would disagree with not allowing them to go home. But there may be more to it than you know, like she might not survive the move.
Click to expand...

What difference would that make ?? The hospital planned on killing him anyway.
 
Gill said:
What difference would that make ?? The hospital planned on killing him anyway.
Click to expand...

I've seen more now. The child can go home. The child won't make it. Will stop breathing before getting there. The parents want a surgery, an expenditrue that will not save the life, as the child is already dead, but likley allow the child to make it home. This is not unreasonable for the hospital to say no. The child can leave. The surgery is pointless.
 
Boo Radley said:
I've seen more now. The child can go home. The child won't make it. Will stop breathing before getting there. The parents want a surgery, an expenditrue that will not save the life, as the child is already dead, but likley allow the child to make it home. This is not unreasonable for the hospital to say no. The child can leave. The surgery is pointless.
Click to expand...

The surgery is a tracheotomy so the baby can breath well enough to get home to die. I hardly believe that a tracheotomy could be very expensive.
 
Gill said:
The surgery is a tracheotomy so the baby can breath well enough to get home to die. I hardly believe that a tracheotomy could be very expensive.
Click to expand...

Likely 2-3 thousand dollars. Maybe more. But the child is for all intents and purposes already dead.
 
Gill said:
more likely a few hundred dollars.
Click to expand...

I think your wrong:

Charge for 1 hour of OR time was $750. This number includes hospital resources such as rental of OR space, lighting and energy, and personnel to run, stock, and clean the OR space. Anesthesiology fees were quoted at $525 for 1 hour of physician time and $288 for anesthetic and intravenous drugs and anesthesia-related equipment for 1 hour, for a total of $813. Billing for the anesthesiologist often began on interview of the patient in the preoperative holding area. Surgical supplies and instrument fees for a tracheostomy done in the OR were $130 per case. The total cost per tracheostomy done in the OR, assuming 1 hour of surgical time, was $1693.

Safety of pediatric bedside tracheostomy in the intensive care unit
 
Boo Radley said:
I think your wrong:

Charge for 1 hour of OR time was $750. This number includes hospital resources such as rental of OR space, lighting and energy, and personnel to run, stock, and clean the OR space. Anesthesiology fees were quoted at $525 for 1 hour of physician time and $288 for anesthetic and intravenous drugs and anesthesia-related equipment for 1 hour, for a total of $813. Billing for the anesthesiologist often began on interview of the patient in the preoperative holding area. Surgical supplies and instrument fees for a tracheostomy done in the OR were $130 per case. The total cost per tracheostomy done in the OR, assuming 1 hour of surgical time, was $1693.

Safety of pediatric bedside tracheostomy in the intensive care unit
Click to expand...

Trachs don't require an operating room. A bedside operation is simpler and cheaper... and likely all that's needed in this case.

Interventions: Tracheostomy.

Main Outcome Measures: The initial 48-hour postoperative period was examined to compare complication rates between groups.

Results: Overall, the 2 groups had similar complication rates (chi^sup 2^=0.12; P=.73). The operating room group had 3 complications (10%) related to bleeding, infection, and pneumothorax. The bedside group had 2 complications (7%), both involving pneumothorax. Each operating room tracheostomy incurred charges totaling $1693 vs $235 for each bedside tracheostomy.
Click to expand...
 
Gill said:
Trachs don't require an operating room. A bedside operation is simpler and cheaper... and likely all that's needed in this case.
Click to expand...

Maybe. You may be right. Perhaps we need more infiormation. Perhaps some can pay it for them.
 
BTW, isn't this bedside:

Mean patient charges for the procedure performed in the intensive care unit by a surgeon, nurse, and respiratory therapist were $997 (95% confidence interval, $975 to $1018) compared with $2642 (95% confidence interval, $2513 to $2772) for standard tracheostomy (P<.001). This represented a savings of $1645 (95% confidence interval, $1492 to $1798) per tracheostomy.

Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. A safe, co... [Arch Surg. 1996] - PubMed result

Is this where you got your information?

http://archotol.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/127/8/950.pdf

If so, I found this statement in the text:

Hospital charges, rather than true costs, were measured in this study.

Not sure what that means, but might explin the differences.
 
wow

they're counting the costs

of a boy that a person who can't spell vegetable has offhandedly, with the 60-second submission of a cavalier click, declared dead

how heartless can a human be?

about as wrapped up in oneself as a person who would say to a granny who is shorted by soc sec her half million, just put your special needs kid in the village

cuz it's all ;)

beyond sickening, it's psychopathic

notice how none around here but one will touch it

just like a hundred other threads ALL ABOUT BOO

barf
 
ricksfolly said:
there is no logic in politics, only Lobbyists, partisan pressure, and secret deals with big money interests
Click to expand...

lobbyists, you say?

today:

Caught between their boss’ anti-lobbyist rhetoric and the reality of governing, President Barack Obama’s aides often steer meetings with lobbyists to a complex just off the White House grounds — and several of the lobbyists involved say they believe the choice of venue is no accident.

It allows the Obama administration to keep these lobbyist meetings shielded from public view — and out of Secret Service logs kept on visitors to the White House and later released to the public.

The White House scoffs at the notion of an ulterior motive for scheduling meetings in what are, after all, meeting rooms. But at least four lobbyists who’ve been to the conference rooms just off Lafayette Square tell POLITICO they had the distinct impression they were being shunted off to Jackson Place — and off the books — so their visits wouldn’t later be made public.
Click to expand...

Lobbyists: White House sends meetings off-site to hide them - Chris Frates - POLITICO.com
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Boo Radley said:
Not sure what you mean about get anything. I see politicians like anyone else. They have a job, some are diliegent, some not so much, some lazy, some not so much, some corrupt, a couple less so. But, we ahve a system. We go through a process. And we can overthrow every election cycle. Taht's the way it works.
Click to expand...

The last election the GOP got voted in saying they would repeal Obamacare so I should expect this to happen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom