One More Thing...

In my last blog, A Patient’s View of HR3200 I argued against the government sending someone to discuss your medical and end of life options if you are seriously ill or injured. Since then I have had people tell me that it is one thing to discuss end of life options with a 51 year old but a totally different matter when the patient is 91. They reminded me of the burden these elderly people were to the system and that there comes a point when you should say enough tests, operations, medical treatments and to simply let nature take it course. End of Life options are appropriate not only for the sake of the elderly person but also because of the extreme expenses to both the family and the government to keep them alive.

I agree, up to a point. In fact I was a bit angered to learn that a friend’s 87 year old mother-in-law had just had a hip replacement operation. This elderly woman suffered from dementia, diabetes, extreme arthritis and a multitude of other ailments plus her family ignored her the one time she spoke out against the operation since they thought they knew best for her. Or at least most did since some family members argued to stop everything and simply let her die but these voices were drowned out by those wanting her to have the operation. Plus I am sure that the nursing home also encouraged the operation for the practical reason of wanting her to be mobile and able to go to the bathroom on her own and not to require diaper changes. Yet all of the family infighting about treatment could have been avoided if she just had a Living Will. But at this point it was too late as she wasn’t capable of making decisions.

So yes, I agree that this woman probably should not get more medical treatment and should simply be made comfortable as she dies. But this puts you on a very slippery slope. For what is the cut off point? If my 51 is too young but there is a need for end of life options for this 87 year old patient then perhaps at 80 people should be denied treatment. Except I look at my own 81 year old mother. If she were to fall I would be one of the ones arguing for a hip replacement operation. Am I being hypocritical? No. For unlike the first elderly woman, my mother is a sharp, active, intelligent older woman who neither looks nor acts her age. My mother at 81 is as active as many a 65 year old. So you can’t use age as the criteria. What might have worked for my friend’s parent certainly would be wrong for my mother.

In fact, my father was only 65 when he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. After only one chemo treatment we realized he was dying and we then wanted to make what little time was left to be as easy as possible for him. In this case we turned to Hospice to help him. If a family member is dying then Hospice is wonderful. So why does the government need to create a whole new panel and one more bureaucratic department? Wouldn’t it make more sense for them to provide government grants to this organization which is already in place and functioning quite well?

The final argument was the costs associated with health care for the elderly. Wow. How cold is that? Liberals actually worry that keeping mom and dad alive and paying for their health care will bankrupt the government. The same problem of lack of funding concerns treating uninsured people. Who is more important – the people or the government? For if the former, we can find the money. Hell, let the banks pay back their bailouts, take the majority of the stimulus money not spent and gee here’s a thought, fire the 30+ highly paid Czars (the Energy and Environment Czar is getting $172,000 for example) and let the Cabinet do its job instead. Money is not an issue. If Obama could find all these trillions for people to buy a car then he can find the money to take care of our parents. Besides, using existing groups such as Hospice would save billions in the projected salaries for new government employees.

Conservatives have made their point about the major problems with HR3200. Now is the time to start offering alternative ideas. Here are a few suggestions; some are already being discussed while others are my own ideas:

• Let the insurance companies create a co-op through which uninsured people can get health insurance. Restrict this to only US Citizens. Illegal immigrants are a tough situation and this country needs to review and revise their entire illegal immigrant policy as soon as possible. Meanwhile the expenses for treating illegal immigrants or citizens who don’t sign up for insurance should be shared by the entire country and not just the border states and those with high illegal immigrant populations.


• Provide grants to encourage and pay for anyone who wants to be a nurse, doctor, technician, nursing home aide or in any other medical professions. We will need all of these once we insure everyone but other than talking about rationing no one has thought of this.


• Use Hospice as the primary end of life care givers. Provide them with grants to expand their current business rather than the government creating a new parallel department. Offer the same grants to any other private company to insure competition.
  
• Make health insurance mandatory when you get or renew your driver’s license. When you renew your driver’s license there should be a Living Will form with the paperwork sent to you. They already ask about organ donations so why not also include Living Wills? Use Hospice or SS to handle all questions about Living Wills.


• Require all Americans including government employees and union members to be a part of whatever new plan is approved.

So come on conservatives. Instead of simply trashing HR3200 you need to start to come up with alternative suggestions. Forget calling people Nazi’s and instead present your Congressman with some great ideas that they can take back to the Senate and House. For we need a Health Care Plan that is truly by the people and not this monstrosity which is a plan by the government for the people.