With multiple proposed health care bills, the largest having over 1000 pages, and a lot of heat being generated on both sides of the debate, there are many misconceptions and odd beliefs about what national health care will eventually look like. Both sides in the debate have made assumptions about the legislation which may not entirely be borne out by reality and there is a great deal of confusion and acrimony as a result.
One example of this is the focus of some health care reform opponents on the issue of "death panels." There is a widespread belief, especially among concerned seniors, that part of the health care reform is the establishment of some sort of severe rationing program of care for the elderly or the chronically ill which will include panels of doctors who will review these cases and decide which old people and long-term care patients are worth saving and which ones require too much care and will essentially be put down like stray dogs.
The fact is that there are no specific provisions at all for death panels or any kind of end of life review or forced euthanasia in any of the health care proposals. Congressmen are not entirely stupid. If such a thing were actually in a bill their staff (who actually read the bills) would tell them about it, they would realize that supporting it would be political suicide and they would take it out of the legislation.
So where does belief in these death panels come from?
Two elements in the main health care bill (HR3200) contribute to this belief. One is the section on "end of life" counseling, which is part of a large section on making various psychiatric services more widely available. But this counseling is only counseling — providing psychiatric support for the elderly — it doesn't include any provisions for ending peoples lives, just for helping them deal with the inevitable. The other element is the extensive implementation in the bill of Comparative Effectiveness Research, which is correctly assessed by many as a form of health care rationing using boards of experts to evaluate what is cost effective and what is not. Theoretically, these CER boards could include one which rations care for the elderly in ways which might amount to deciding who is worth keeping alive and who it would save money to let die, but nothing like that is explicitly spelled out in the bill.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Clavos
Even the Libs ought to find this one balanced.
Props.
2 - Silas Kain
I don't know if ObamaCare is gonna kill old people but I find it curious that United Health Care is giving away copies of Soylent Green to their subscribers.
I'm just kidding.
3 - handyguy
I said I would, and I am doing so:
Thank you for wrting a fair, non-fire-breathing analysis.
Now if you could only convince some of your friends and allies to stop spreading this pernicious nonsense, apparently in a cynical attempt to frighten old people.
4 - roger nowosielski
Good show, Dave. I hope you will continue in this, well-balanced vein.
5 - zingzing
well done. i'm glad this was written, as it's just about the most balanced look at the issue i've seen.
6 - roger nowosielski
As I said, zing, Dave can do it if he wants to. That's why I never gave up on him.
7 - handyguy
Well, let's don't get all sickening and huggy and everything.
8 - zingzing
every now and again, he writes something fair, or something unfair that i happen to agree with. he'll be back to his usual self in no time.
9 - roger nowosielski
Why not, Handy? It's an occasion to celebrate.
10 - Silas Kain
Where's Cindy when you need her? She and I do a great duet of Cumbaya.
11 - Clavos
Wow, never thought I's see it!
Dave Nalle, darling of the left! :>)
12 - roger nowosielski
Goes to show. The old categories are crumbling. It realingnment politics.
13 - handyguy
Let me be clear: I still disagree with the last part, that says basically that rationed care leading to untimely deaths is still built into the reform plans.
But this idea is not presented in the usual, take-no-prisoners, propagandistic style.
14 - Joanne Huspek
Nice job and I'm glad to see you did your homework. However, I'm going to err on the side of safety -- I'm still watching my back. I can't trust a politician as far as I can throw one.
15 - Clavos
I can't trust a politician as far as I can throw one.
Nobody should.
16 - Dave Nalle
The problem with writing a reasonable article is that it generates all these boring, reasonable responses. What fun is that?
Now if you could only convince some of your friends and allies to stop spreading this pernicious nonsense, apparently in a cynical attempt to frighten old people.
The articles are not here, but over on the RLC website I've written several articles advising our townhall activists to take a more non-confrontational tact, emphasizing serious questions over protest, for what it's worth.
Wow, never thought I's see it!
Dave Nalle, darling of the left! :>)
If I confined myself to writing articles about gay rights and religious issues I imagine I could keep them happy all the time.
Let me be clear: I still disagree with the last part, that says basically that rationed care leading to untimely deaths is still built into the reform plans.
Well, unless they build something into the plan which explicitly prohibits rationing of care to the elderly and chronically ill, it's going to be part of the system because that's the nature of any kind of health care plan. And in fact, it would be unrealistic to expect otherwise.
Dave
17 - roger nowosielski
"The problem with writing a reasonable article is that it generates all these boring, reasonable responses. What fun is that?"
Never mind the fun. There's time to be provocative and there's time not to. I should consider it's an obligation we should all share, as Americans, to speak and write our mind, to be responsive to the times. The good of the country is at stake.
18 - Dave Nalle
The problem, Roger, is that IMO my other articles on this topic are just as objective as this one. It's just that this deals with a very specific case, while the others deal with the broader issue as a whole.
The health care bill can not be as bad as portrayed on this specific issue and yet still be unacceptable on this and other issues. I'd rather see it attacked on legitimate grounds than on misunderstandings and hysteria because attacking it on its real flaws is much more effective.
Dave
19 - Arch Conservative
Is Obamacare Really Going to Kill Old People?
That's a moot point.
The real question is.....If Obamacare is good enough for us why isn't it good enough Obama and the Democrats in Congress that want to make it law?
20 - roger nowosielski
I agree about this monstrosity that passes for healthcare reforms. My only justification for it is that perhaps, just perhaps, a more radical reform wasn't politically feasible. Consequently, I tend to look at it as only the first step in a long, protracted process. I may be wrong, but what else can I think.
As to the other matter, I'm composing a fairly constructive article right now - not provocative at all but what I think needs to be said. And it is a pain in the ass. I'll be the first to say it. Still, it's got to be done. I don't want to be contributing to causing more misunderstanding but, if possible, to unraveling it.
Don't worry. We live in interesting enough times for controversy. There'll be time and occasion to be provocative.
21 - handyguy
I agree about this monstrosity that passes for healthcare reforms.
You...do?
Yikes. That's as sweeping a caricature as anyone else has offered on here.
22 - handyguy
If the rather, um, eccentric folks who showed up at Arlen Specter's and Claire McCaskill's town halls today are representative of "The New Radicals," then they clearly haven't gotten around to reading Dave's calls for moderation. Scary and deeply unpleasant -- and, I would venture, not representative of most of the fine people in PA or MO.
And the guy who showed up, loaded pistol strapped to his leg, outside the Obama town hall today -- carrying a banner reading "It's Time to Water the Tree of Liberty!" -- and then agreed to be interviewed by Chris Matthews tonight. I encourage everyone to watch. As Bugs Bunny used to say, What a Maroon!
Arch, was that you?
23 - handyguy
Right after I posted 'Healther Skelter' on another thread, I watched Jon Stewart's outrageously brilliant and funny 'debate' on Obama's Death Panels. Best thing they have done all year.
It's one of the clips from last night's show:
Obama Death Panel Debate
24 - Silas Kain
Handy, I say the protesters who are over 55 should be handed a copy of Soylent Green as a thank you for being patriots. If you haven't seen it, research it. It's a hoot.
P.S. I wish a politician would have the guts to look at the morbidly obese protesters and say, "you want cheaper health care? Lose fucking weight!" If Obama, McCaskill or Specter did that, they'd jump 35% in the polls. Of course all the self-righteous indignators would have their knickers in a twist but deep down they'll be chuckling. Screw the death camps -- open up fat camps!
25 - Dave Nalle
If the rather, um, eccentric folks who showed up at Arlen Specter's and Claire McCaskill's town halls today are representative of "The New Radicals," then they clearly haven't gotten around to reading Dave's calls for moderation. Scary and deeply unpleasant -- and, I would venture, not representative of most of the fine people in PA or MO.
I mainly called for them to ask questions, not just shout slogans and gave some advice on what questions to ask so that they didn't sound like idiots. How many are listening is a bit of a mystery. Our RLC people are only one of maybe a dozen groups involved, and they already tend to be the most rational and articulate of the "mob".
And the guy who showed up, loaded pistol strapped to his leg, outside the Obama town hall today -- carrying a banner reading "It's Time to Water the Tree of Liberty!" -- and then agreed to be interviewed by Chris Matthews tonight. I encourage everyone to watch. As Bugs Bunny used to say, What a Maroon!
This sounds like fun. I'm going to set time aside to watch the 11pm showing.
Dave