Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Crabtownboy, Oct 19, 2009.
Creative thinking .....................
Florida hospitals are making plans of their own...
"Florida health officials are drawing up guidelines that recommend barring patients with incurable cancer, end-stage multiple sclerosis and other conditions from being admitted to hospitals if the state is overwhelmed by flu cases.
The plan, which would guide Florida hospitals on how to ration scarce medical care during a severe flu outbreak, also calls for doctors to remove patients with a poor prognosis from ventilators to treat those with better chances of survival."
" It says those decisions are not to be made based on patients’ perceived social worth or social role, but the plan calls for different rules for some populations.
The list of conditions that disqualify hospital admission would be applied to most people only in the two most severe levels of a pandemic. However, they would be applied in the first level of a pandemic for people transferred to hospitals from “other institutional facilities” such as nursing homes and mental-health centers."
Sounds like Obama-care: ration the care and let the old and less desirable people die.
Let's say you have a 250 bed hospital, they are filled and you corridors filling up fast. There are 128 people are ill and need to be admitted and no matter where you put them you have room only for 35 additional people. All other hospitals are having the same problem. How would you determine who is to be admitted? Because of my age, even though I am healthy, I do not rationally believe I should be one of the 35 admitted. Of course emotionally I feel differently, but rationally ..............................
This is more than deciding who should be admitted.
"...also calls for doctors to remove patients with a poor prognosis from ventilators..."
It is also making decisions for admission based on nothing more than age and supposed value to society... "different rules for some populations."
Why is the life of an older person less important or valued than the life of a younger person?
Why is the life of someone currently residing in a mental health institution less valued than any other life?
Why aren't emergency contingencies being established to attempt to deal with all of those in need of health care? Such as converting gymnasiums into emergency health care centers?
You did not answer the question. How would you decide on who is admitted in a worst case scenario that I laid out in the previous post? Would you suggest by lottery?
My solution would be to prepare for the flu patients that they are expecting rather than coming up with a plan that amounts to nothing more than throwing the sick out into the streets.
You are side stepping the question. If H1N1 is anything like the pandemic of 1918 no amount of planning will be of any use. Medical facilities will be totally overwhelmed. So how would you decide who is admitted to the hospital, clinic or other facility set up for such purposes?
This isn't 1918. Medical science has improved.
Since the health agency knows what is coming it is something that can be planned for.
There are plenty of unemployed with adequate skills to care for these expected patients.
There is plenty of medical equipment warehoused by manufacturers, remanufactures and leasing companies.
Cost should not be consideration since many of the expected patients will have insurance and the Federal government has shown no restraint in spending money that we don't have so why would this be any different?
Why are you so pessimistic?
Right now, our hospitals are not overwhelmed because all but the most severe cases are sent home to recover. There is no need to panic about a lack of hospital care, because the hospital is not needed UNLESS the person suffers a secondary complication, like pneumonia or dehydration. Most of us don't want to pay the exorbitant health care cost of hospitalization if we can possibly help it, even if we have insurance to help, so I would think only two types of people would want to stay at the hospitals: those who truly are deathly ill with H1N1 complications, or people who aren't paying for their healthcare out of their own pocket.
Check out CDC guidelines... http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/sick.htm
If you are asking the question of
"How many will die of this flu?"
No one knows.
If someone who has the worst case anyone has ever seen has it, and God wants that person to live, that person will.
If someone has the lightest case of the same flu, and God decides it is time to call that person home, that person will be gone.
If you are asking who WE will determine who lives or who dies, from the flu or any other disease or ailment.
We don't have that determination. Or the ability.
No, the question had to do with who will be admitted to the hospital if H1N1 becomes such a pandemic that there are more sick people needing to be admitted to the hospital than there are beds.
This question came about because of the guidelines in Florida and these guidelines being used to make a snide remark about Obama who has nothing to do with the Florida guidelines.
So far no answer on the real question.
I have given you the answer more than once.
Rather than plan on who will be denied care - plan to care for those who need it.
They are planning on a bunch of flu patients - why not plan on treating them in addition to the other patients?'
Why is this such a difficult concept for you?
No really ... you have danced around the question, but refused to address the question directly. I have noticed this is a typical tactic of Obama haters when the answer is obviously one they do not want to address directly. So, drop the question. It is obvious you refuse to be honest.
Your question is like asking "have you stopped beating your wife?"
I notice that the false dichotomy is a frequent debate method of yours.
I am apologize that my thinking is not small enough to suit you.
Which would you choose: prepare to care for an anticipated increased number of flu patients or start throwing existing patients into the street?
More smoke blowing and now answers .... more dodging.
The question is a legitimate one in the real world ... how do you determine who is admitted to the hospital when the resources are overrun and not everyone needing to be admitted can be admitted? Simple question. Hard choices.
So, what criteria would you use? You rephrased my question so provide an answer. Do not dance, answer the question.
But of course, we would consult CTB...because he is so much wiser than all of us...
I find it quite amusing that your opening posts references "creative thinking" but you are incapable of considering any where it comes to caring for an "anticipated" increase in patients due to the flu.
This is not going to be an unexpected increase. They know that it is coming. There are resources to deal with it.
Why are you so against planning ahead?
Where is your creative thinking?
In my opinion not to prepare for the increase in patients would amount to nothing short of criminal neglect.
If these guys can't do the job they should be replaced now.
I presented a hypothetical question primarily because you made a snide comment about Obama. Since you are not honest enough to answer the question, why don't we just drop the issue? OK?
I have answered it repeatedly.
The answer just isn't small enough to suit you.
And it also doesn't fit with the current lib paradigm of creating a crisis where one doesn't exist in order to grab power.