It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
‘‘(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the
7 term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a con8
sultation between the individual and a practitioner de9
scribed in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning,
10 if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has
11 not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such
12 consultation shall include the following:
13 ‘‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of ad14
vance care planning, including key questions and
15 considerations, important steps, and suggested peo16
ple to talk to.
....
‘‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the
5 continuum of end-of-life services and supports avail6
able, including palliative care and hospice, and bene7
fits for such services and supports that are available
8 under this title.
9 ‘‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of
10 orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar
11 orders, which shall include—
‘‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement
6 for explanations under clause (i) to consultations
7 furnished in a State—
8 ‘‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been
9 addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining
10 treatment to constitute a set of medical orders
11 respected across all care settings; and
12 ‘‘(II) that has in effect a program for or13
ders for life sustaining treatment described in
14 clause (iii).
15 ‘‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining
16 treatment for a States described in this clause is a
17 program that—
18 ‘‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized
19 and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
20 ‘‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such
21 orders to physicians and other health profes22
sionals that (acting within the scope of the pro23
fessional’s authority under State law) may sign
24 orders for life sustaining treatment;
VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00427 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC
July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.)
F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.XML
f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml (444390|2)
428
1 ‘‘(III) provides training for health care
2 professionals across the continuum of care
3 about the goals and use of orders for life sus4
taining treatment; and
5 ‘‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stake6
holders includes representatives from emergency
7 medical services, emergency department physi8
cians or nurses, state long-term care associa9
tion, state medical association, state surveyors,
10 agency responsible for senior services, state de11
partment of health, state hospital association,
12 home health association, state bar association,
13 and state hospice association.
Originally posted by SevenThunders
reply to post by HunkaHunka
Keep up the demonrat talking points. At least some brain cells will get agitated.
Fortunately, as regards to the actual truth, I happen to have downloaded the proposed bill and it's riddled with death care advisories and bureaucrats deciding who gets to live and who gets to die.
So here are some quotes. First it clearly shows the death care goons are mandated to visit grandma every 5 years.
‘‘(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the
7 term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a con8
sultation between the individual and a practitioner de9
scribed in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning,
10 if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has
11 not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such
12 consultation shall include the following:
13 ‘‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of ad14
vance care planning, including key questions and
15 considerations, important steps, and suggested peo16
ple to talk to.
....
‘‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the
5 continuum of end-of-life services and supports avail6
able, including palliative care and hospice, and bene7
fits for such services and supports that are available
8 under this title.
9 ‘‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of
10 orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar
11 orders, which shall include—
Here's the part where the bureacrats decide if you grandma gets to live to die,
‘‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement
6 for explanations under clause (i) to consultations
7 furnished in a State—
8 ‘‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been
9 addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining
10 treatment to constitute a set of medical orders
11 respected across all care settings; and
12 ‘‘(II) that has in effect a program for or13
ders for life sustaining treatment described in
14 clause (iii).
15 ‘‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining
16 treatment for a States described in this clause is a
17 program that—
18 ‘‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized
19 and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
20 ‘‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such
21 orders to physicians and other health profes22
sionals that (acting within the scope of the pro23
fessional’s authority under State law) may sign
24 orders for life sustaining treatment;
VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00427 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC
July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.)
F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.XML
f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml (444390|2)
428
1 ‘‘(III) provides training for health care
2 professionals across the continuum of care
3 about the goals and use of orders for life sus4
taining treatment; and
5 ‘‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stake6
holders includes representatives from emergency
7 medical services, emergency department physi8
cians or nurses, state long-term care associa9
tion, state medical association, state surveyors,
10 agency responsible for senior services, state de11
partment of health, state hospital association,
12 home health association, state bar association,
13 and state hospice association.
Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by HunkaHunka
A question is politco an Obama outlet or a true middle of the road paper?
I have also read the thousand page bill and there are parts of it that are downright scary, like how the HHS secretary will apoint a board to review costly procedures.( Not Verbatim)
Also how they will have access to your bank accounts to collect fees that are due.
While it does mention you can keep your health insurance through your employer a goverment option would in effect either kill competion; by putting in low cost plans that insurance compaines couldnt compete with in effect driving everyone onto the goverment option which would drive other insurers out of buisness giving the goverment a monoply on your health insurance. Or fix the price of all health care needs which would in turn enforce insurance companies to also set there prices the same way in order to stay in buisness..... ( Similar with what the Oil Cartels Due.)
But the true kicker here that makes me really fear this things is this... Congress, the prez, and federal employess due not have to take this... If it is so good as they are saying it is, Why dont they take this option?????? That makes the whole thing suspect.....
Now I believe in a a free market I do not believe the government has the right to involve its self in private buinsess affairs. (yes to include the bank bailouts, even though it appears to be working) I belive the government should regulate things Thats there job, they shouldnt be in the buisness of running a buisness.
Whatcha think?
In her latest posting, Palin says there are many disturbing details in the bill. But she says people must stick to discussion of the issues "and not get sidetracked by tactics that can be accused of leading to intimidation or harassment."
AND, this is different from the FOR-PROFIT Health Insurance Companies denying needed medical care and dropping patients rather than paying claims.....this is different how, again???
Originally posted by Valhall
reply to post by HunkaHunka
Palin is an evil person. I have issues with a lot of things going on with the current administration, and the current Congress...but Palin - I have more issues with her.
Succinctly voiced...she's an idiot.
I thought we were no longer allowed to call a political figure an evil idiot anymore...I thought that was against the new terms and conditions? I thought we had to intellectually make a point.
Originally posted by Valhall
reply to post by HunkaHunka
Palin is an evil person. I have issues with a lot of things going on with the current administration, and the current Congress...but Palin - I have more issues with her.
Succinctly voiced...she's an idiot.
And cut down on mal-practice lawsuits that drive costs up.
We need to stop these deals drug companies make with doctors that entice them to prescribe drugs and services that are not needed, but may further complicate a situation making it more expensive and pushing the insurance companies to deny due to costs.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by poedxsoldiervet
poedx, OK...I'll bite.
I hear it's 1,000 pages long. Can you provide a page number that references the "death panel"???
It will help us out, and cut to the chase.
Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by weedwhacker
I like how people argue against the insurance companies denying health coverage by saying "How is this different" in reference to the government doing THE SAME THING. The whole damn point is to make it different, to make health care more affordable. If the government is going to do the same damned thing that the insurance companies are then we're trading one evil for the same evil in a different package.
Ridiculous reasoning skills.
With this kind of logic, no wonder this country is so screwed.
[edit on 10-8-2009 by projectvxn]
Originally posted by Strictsum
How is it a good thing if the Republicans get discredited and destroyed ? If you think this country has been bad with a 2 party system, imagine a 1 party system.