Listened to a program today on Universal Healthcare..........

[mark500]

So Rich, are you going to make the decision not to treat the elderly man with melanoma or the elderly paraplegic--against the family wishes? I suppose we should just trust the bean counters and doctors to make those subjective decisions? Go ahead turn off the ventilator against the family wishes. Save some money. You might find some bricks thrown through the front window of your house afterward.

You will give up your right to sue as you know it today under universal health care. There is no way feds are going to pay out big bucks into the current circus-like medical tort system. Under universal health care, trial lawyers would not exist as we know them.
That is not a bad thing. You cannot personally sue any federal employee now for malpractice, only the federal government as an entity. And the feds don't pay out like juries. You will probably have to go through a legal process or arbitration. That may be an improvement over the current hideous tort system.

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

So Rich, are you going to make the decision not to treat the elderly man with melanoma or the elderly paraplegic--against the family wishes?

Me? Never. Not my call (though sometimes families can't make up their mind either and you always err on the side of continuing aggressive care). But who "should" get the next kidney available for transplant? Who "should" take the last available ICU bed or ventilator when the unit is filled? Finite resources, or we break the bank.

 

[Cut-Throat]

So Rich, are you going to make the decision not to treat the elderly man with melanoma or the elderly paraplegic--against the family wishes? I suppose we should just trust the bean counters and doctors to make those subjective decisions?

How about when a terminally ill person of sane mind goes to a doctor named say Kevorkian, with end of life wishes to ease pain, we don't throw the doctor in jail?

That would be good for starters!