1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Obamacare = DEPOPULATION

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by LadyEagle, Aug 5, 2009.

  1. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    bumped for answers to my questions on this thread....
     
  2. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    I agree with you Tiny, we recently had a family in our Church where the kids struggled with pulling the plug. She never woke up from surgery and had no brain activity. That was tough for me since no one cared to know how she felt. I was concerned about my member, some of the kids obviously wanted their inheritance and others wanted to keep her hooked to the machines.

    Her medical insurance ended up making the decision by sending her to a Hospice where she lasted about 3 days.

    After my father went through brain surgery he had to learn to do everything again. He lived by the philosophy that a man is his mind. He sat us all down and told us that he refused to go through that again. Under no circumstance are we to put him through that surgery for any reason. When the tumor resurfaced, it helped us all be at peace with our decision not to let them operate even though the doctor gave decent odds.

    My mother relayed what my dad had told us and we each stood by her side.

    Death is inevitable and a road we all will travel. It is good to let others know what you want so they are not left to make those decisions.
     
  3. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, I think it's a good thing (see my previous post). However, the counseling is not mandatory, what the bill says is government will pay for it every 5 years if you decide to use the benefit.

    The discussion you have is with your doctor. The benefit simply allows Medicaid to pay for it. See the FAQ on the site you posted http://blumenauer.house.gov/images/stories/documents/myth vs fact.pdf

    Again LE, it is not mandatory. It is a benefit that is completely optional and I say a good resource if you have a terminal condition. Don't leave your loved ones with those decisions, trust me, they are hard to make.

    Currently, the executives at your insurer makes this same decision. The difference is their decision is profit driven. Do you recall during the election when Obama grandmother with cancer broke her hip? It was the insurance company who refused to pay for her hip replacement since she was dieing.

    Insurance companies have also canceled peoples policies when they get sick and most policies have maximums which you will easily hit if you come down with a serious condition.

    Lastly, most seniors are on Medicare so Government is already making these decisions. Nothing changes for them.

    The spin and fear mongering is two fold, like in your comments, you keep calling the counseling mandatory and you say it is with a bureaucrat. The truth is the benefit is optional and it is with your doctor (see the faq on the page you presented).

    I was wrong, this appears to be a new line of fear mongering. Morphine or "The Button" is given to many terminal patients and no one is talking about killing anyone. Like today, if your insurer decides that your 97 YO grandmother doesn't deserve a pacemaker, no one gives her a lethal cocktail. She simply lives out her days without the pacemaker.

    Now if you listen to Obama, one thing he makes clear is that the pacemaker is generally cheaper than continually having grandma show up in the emergency room. The change he is encouraging is giving grandma the pacemaker instead of the insurance companies who say she isn't worth the money.
     
  4. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    Obama campaigned on the public option. American went to the polls and decided they wanted what he was offering. Democracy is being hampered because the minority feels they can stop the majority.

    Democracy also depends on a two way discussions/debate. It is okay to feel passionate and to ask questions. No one is faulting anyone for that. It is not okay to not allow others to ask questions and to not let the congressman answer the question that was asked. It is generally good to hear what someone has to say before you accuse them of false statements. That is why some are calling it a mob mentality. They are having a one sided conversation and not letting others to state their position. They are also interrupting people who are speaking and talking over others who also have concerns.

    One thing I've learned, good always triumphs over evil in the end. We saw this evil side rear itself during the election and we won. We are seeing it again and if the Lord says the same we will get us a public option and everyone, including the terminal at the pool of Bethesda will have access to affordable health care. That is my prayer.
     
  5. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    LB, obviously you have not read the bill, you just believed what the Congressman wrote about the bill on his web site - a supporter of the bill. Read the bill for yourself and you will see the word "optional" is not in the bill. It is mandatory ever 5 years or sooner.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:



     
  6. windcatcher

    windcatcher New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think I'm mistaken in saying that I'm sure that it is already law that admission into a hospital or any change in doctors or specialist automatically triggers 'end of life' questions regarding 'living wills' and whether or not a person has designated a person to have power of attorney over health care decisions in the event the patient is unable to make decisions for himself. "Do not resusitate" is a common order on the charts of presumed terminally ill patients who have made this determination and had it placed in their medical file. ...................
    However...... please note the difference in language between "living will" .... which can actually include the individual's desire that all heroic efforts be made to sustain or revive life..... and "end of life" counseling. Oregon already allows persons to choose to end their life 'painlessly' in the event no improvement in health can be expected or the person is terminally ill.
    BIG DIFFERENCE between "living will" and "end of life"..... not only in terminology but also in meaning ....... and attitudes, goals, and values behind the meaning. In the former... it is considered proper to present all options without coercion...... In the latter, the intent is to emphasize the saving of caretaker time and medical expense to prolong life and the result is that human life is reduced in value like a commondity of worth to society: What can be more depressing... to the elderly, who may be experiencing successive changes and alterations in health ... but are still viable and have value.... above mere money..... but who may be depressed by the loss of friends and companions due to age.

    There is nothing redemptive about this program which is being considered. It is evil pure and simple..... and wholly unchristian and against God.
     
  7. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    I read what you put in the OP but I see it different from you. I understand and agree with the end of life part of the legislation. Again, if my dad hadn't of told us what to do, it would have torn us apart inside not to put him through more surgery. But it was his wishes not to go through it again so we were all at peace with what he said.

    Thanks for the link to one of the proposals, I've been looking to read one through.
     
  8. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    The link is no longer a proposal - it passed the House. I wanted to try and find the amendment where they narrowed down the drug classifications (I saw them do that on CSPAN, even after a doctor Congressman (R) rose to the floor and said medicine is not a one-size-fits-all and narrowing down the drugs would restrict treatment. DEMS voted for narrowing down the drug choices.

    windcatcher is right, whenever someone is admitted to a hospital, they are asked if they have a living will or durable power of attorney. People decide if they are DNR, DNI, or NO CODE, NO COR, etc. End of life discussions are held every day between physicians and patients. Any responsible (and I believe most are) physician holds these sessions with terminally ill and dying patients and their families and they even can bill for the time and get paid for it already (Medicare, etc). That's why they dictate the TIME SPENT ON DISCHARGE PLANNING: 30 minutes, or whatever.

    Also, people counsel with their pastors or spiritual advisors. So now this is encroaching on what you liberals like to call a wall separating church and state. Death is a spiritual as well as physical matter. So now are liberals willing to blur the "so-called wall" between church and state to pass this end of life counseling? I ask you, LB, because you have (if I remember correctly) always maintained there is a wall between church and state...

    This is not an area that needs mandates from the government. Period.
     
    #28 LadyEagle, Aug 7, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 7, 2009
  9. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    But see, that's the point. Your dad (sorry you lost him, BTW), your dad told you what to do. It wasn't the government. Some orders read CMO - COMFORT MEASURES ONLY. Despite what Obama thinks, medical professionals and families are handling this every day without federal government interference, mandates, or oversight.

    When people are dying, say they are on life support, if there is no living will, the physicians will counsel the family about pulling the plug. There is no need for the government to step in. EVER. And there is no need for EOL counseling. People and doctors already make those decisions thousands of times a day in this country, all without Obama's help.
     
  10. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    Here is the section on advanced life consultations. One thing is painfully clear, the discussion is with your doctor and not a government bureaucrat so I hope we can consider that debunked on this board.

    Also, I read it a couple of times and don't see where it says this is mandatory. It appears to be as I said, another great benefit covered by the plan. Can you show me where is says this is mandatory?

    Now keep in mind, I'm in favor of end of life counseling and believe one should not leave these decisions to their loved ones. Trust me when I say that is NOT what you want to do.

     
  11. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    Here is the section on payment.

     
  12. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    LeBuick did you even read what you cut and pasted?

    It says nothing intelligible.

    Your posting of that gibberish is a good example of the non-thinking, mindless, blind defense of "the one" that we see going on.

    Stepford voters?
     
  13. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    LeBuick...who do you think pays the doctors?

    If the doctors are not being "cost-effective," (that is, they are spending too much on their patients)...are you telling me you don't think the government will say something to them?

    Here...in their own words:

    An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.

    Please tell me you see the potential problem. Government will get to decide, and tell the patient, "Oh...we're in a recession. You have prostate cancer, and statistics say that even with a full recovery, you'll only live seven more years. Of course, this is based on statistics, not your life. And since you only have seven more years, and the cost of treatment, divided by your life expectancy, is over the limit...

    ...well, here's some other end-of-life options."

    See, currently, there's an appeal process with an insurer, and as a last-case scenario...you could find a way to pay for it. Under this system, the answer is "no." Go home and die. No appeals.


    Now...it should be entertaining watching you find a way to defend this. It is, after all, an infallible plan, because Democrats created it. It's better than Scripture, right?
     
  14. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not meaning to be picky, but aren't you supposed to capitalize the names of deities?

    oh, you mean Barack isn't? nevermind...
     
  15. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    Did you see LE accused me of not reading it while she made like she was an expert and can speak without error as to exactly what the legislation says or will do? Well, here is the legislation, it repeatedly says counseling is with your practitioner (I understand that) and no where says this benefit is MANDATORY. You would recognize mandatory if you saw it, right?

    As for the gibberish, it reads like any other law or legislation put forth by either side from the history of the nation. After 200+ years there are still legal fights over how to interpret our foudational document, the constitution. This is why lawyers make the big bucks. There is nothing unique about how this reads. However, anyone who admits they can't read it but can speak with certainty regarding what hidden in the details is a lier and as much a deceiver as the devil.
     
  16. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    LeBuick, this is what you posted:

    (2) PAYMENT- Section 1848(j)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(j)(3)) is amended by inserting `(2)(FF),' after `(2)(EE),'.

    (3) FREQUENCY LIMITATION- Section 1862(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)) is amended--

    (A) in paragraph (1)--

    (i) in subparagraph (N), by striking `and' at the end;

    (ii) in subparagraph (O) by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting `, and'; and

    (iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

    `(P) in the case of advance care planning consultations (as defined in section 1861(hhh)(1)), which are performed more frequently than is covered under such section;'; and

    (B) in paragraph (7), by striking `or (K)' and inserting `(K), or (P)'.

    (4) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to consultations furnished on or after January 1, 2011.

    This says nothing intelligible and contributes nothing to the discussion.

    You would do well to start reading things before posting them.
     
  17. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well then why do you speak with such certainty in defense of the bill?

    You are admitting that you do not know what is hidden in the details.

    BTW - what we know about the bill should be enough to turn your hair white without even thinking about what is lurking in the details.
     
  18. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    I don't see a problem and here is why. This section deals with COUNSELING with your practitioner. It has nothing to do with what care the government will or will not pay for. And as for paying for counseling, there are provisions for a person who has prostate cancer and needs more end of life counseling than the once in 5 years. That is why put in red this part;

    This says if you have a life threatening condition, you can have more counseling than the once every 5 years. And it is your doctor who decides and not the government.

    Now if you read this section more closely, it says nothing about the care government will or will not pay for with the exception of counseling. This section is about you and your DOCTOR deciding in advance what end of life care YOU want. Your quote, "An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title" is simply saying you can discuss these things with your doctor in advanced so you can seek out available benefits and make your own decisions on what YOU or YOUR family wants to pay for. This in no way adds or removes one benefit available to you now and is currently decisions often made by the insurance executives.

    As I explained, we were glad our father told us his final wishes before he got the second tumor that ultimately took him home. He told us not to hook him to life support, no more brain surgery, he simply wanted to go home and be with the Lord. 7 years later we were at peace with the decisions we had to make because we knew they were what HE wanted.

    That is what this section is about. It is about you and your doctor deciding in advance what extremes YOU want used to sustain your life. Don't leave the decision of pulling the plug to your loved ones, make that decision for them in advanced so they can be at peace when the plug gets pulled. Trust me RBell, this is a good thing.

    Read it, it really isn't gibberish if you read it with an open mind and anyone who has done spiritual counseling will tell you this is what you want people to do. There is no worse feeling than being at the hospital with a family divided over pulling the plug or not. When Sis Wilson reached this point, I was at peace when I said to the family, "she and I had discussed this in my office and she was adamant that she didn't want to be hooked to machines". The family looked at me through their teary eyes and said, "we know, she told us also".
     
  19. LeBuick

    LeBuick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, I am confident that I understand what it says. I think this is a good thing. It is your side that is advocating there is a secret sinister plot buried below the surface of the written words. I'm asking you to read it. There is nothing to hide and nothing to defend. It seem pretty strait forward and what any responsible person would want to me.

    This is the problem, your hair is turning white because of things this bill doesn't say. Since that is the case, it is you who is turning your hair white and not this bill. You are scaring yourself.
     
    #39 LeBuick, Aug 8, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 8, 2009
  20. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    But just a couple of posts ago you were saying "thats why we pay lawyers the big bucks" - because the bills are difficult if not impossible to read.

    Even the congress that we have elected to write and vote on these bills tell us that they can't possibly be expected to read them with two lawyers.

    The truth is you have no idea of what is in the bill - and you don't care.
     
Loading...