Dr. Emanuel is part of a school of thought that redefines a physician’s duty, insisting that it includes working for the greater good of society instead of focusing only on a patient’s needs.
Whoa! Hello Obamunism! The greater good of society?! Doctors are supposed to heal the ills of society??
"Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality of care are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change."
True reform, he argues, must include redefining doctors' ethical obligations
In numerous writings, Dr. Emanuel chastises physicians for thinking only about their own patient's needs.
Dr. Emanuel believes doctors should serve two masters, the patient and society, and that medical students should be trained "to provide socially sustainable, cost-effective care."
Dr. Emanuel argues that to make such decisions, the focus cannot be only on the worth of the individual.
Dr. Emanuel concedes that his plan appears to discriminate against older people
------------------------------------------------
What part about rationing, death panels, socialism and Obamunism are people not seeing here?
Also, let's not forget that The Health Commissioner is going to dole out health care based on your income and IRS filings.
"Well, I could cure you, but I need to think about how much it will cost for the rest of society. Be patriotic and take one for the team. How many healthcare stamps did you receive from Washington this year? Only 5? Oh, I'm sorry. This procedure costs around 50. Your income is too high.
ReplyDeleteHere's a pamphlet that goes over your other options."
"But I don't want to die!"
"Security! We have another 1514! Hold him down while I inject him with more Kool-aid."
Yep Dr. Emanuel, you are right, this will reduce healthcare costs... because you are GIVING PEOPLE LESS CARE.
ReplyDeleteWhere in the Constitution is the Federal Gov. given the right to make medical decisions for patients?
That all sounds not so great, but Emanuel is talking about government provided care, not private care, correct? We already have a finite amount of public care available to those who can't afford their own insurance, so why would we not want to "ration" if you like, our publicly available aid in the most beneficial way?
ReplyDeleteAgain, to be clear, I'm totally against universal healthcare. I don't think it's the gov't job to keep us healthy. But we DO provide assistance to some of those who need it. I also believe that any "health care reform" that's going to come out of the current debate will be nothing more than increased funds to medicare and medicaid. Assuming that, how should we dole out those resources? First come first serve until we run out of money? Or should we have a system that determines how to produce the most health benefits from that finite amount of funding?
I want my private insurance, and I want a level of care corresponding to my ability to pay, but I also don't want my taxes being spent giving kidneys to 90 year olds.
You are totally right.
ReplyDeleteAnd what you and (Dr. Emanuel) are saying is exactly why people don't like the public option.
Supporters of the public option (like Obama) need to be honest and say "Yes, this involves rationing to reduce costs. Yes, poorer Americans will receive more free care than wealth Americans."
These are the issues with a public option and a health care bill that is designed to force employers to abandon private plans and incentivize citizens to move to the public plan (or penalize the private option)
It's Obama's goal to eliminate private insurance. He has stated that numerous times.
ReplyDeleteIt won't just be needy people using the public option, it will be all of us. We will all have rationed healthcare.
Obama Care makes it impossible for the private companies to remain in business. They won't disappear overnight, but they will after a few years.
YouTube - Obama IN HIS OWN WORDS
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk